Validity of ICU Clinician's Appraisal of Proportionality in CPR
NCT ID: NCT07026773
Last Updated: 2025-06-18
Study Results
Results pending
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
Recruitment Status
RECRUITING
Total Enrollment
1000 participants
Study Classification
OBSERVATIONAL
Study Start Date
2025-05-18
Study Completion Date
2026-12-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The VICAP-CPR study investigates whether doctors and nurses working in Intensive Care can determine neurological outcome and future quality of life after six months in patients treated for cardiac arrest outside the hospital based on clinical assessment in the first 24 hours after admission to Intensive Care. To conduct this study, the results of the questionnaire offered to Intensive Care doctors and nurses regarding the estimation of long-term neurological outcome and quality of life will be compared with the neurological outcome and quality of life as recorded in the STEPCARE study (NCT 05564754). The aim of the international STEPCARE study is to determine the best combination of post-resuscitation care to favourably influence survival and neurological outcome in patients treated for cardiac arrest outside hospital.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Chest Compression and Cerebral Oxygenation During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
NCT03062306
Providing Sufficient Cerebral Oxygenation During CPR
COMPLETED
Outcomes and Risk Factors of CPR in PICU
NCT06300710
Cardio Respiratory Arrest
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Perception of Inappropriate CPR: a Multicenter International Cross-sectional Survey
NCT02356029
Cardiopulmonary Arrest
COMPLETED
Cerebral Oximetry and NIRS in Cardiac Arrest Patients
NCT03769740
Cardiac Death
Cardiac Arrest
Emergencies
UNKNOWN
Non-invasive Neurological Evaluation During CPR
NCT02684955
Cardiac Arrest
COMPLETED
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
In the guidelines 2021 of the European Resuscitation Council it is acknowledged that apart from criteria related to the cardiac arrest circumstances, additional criteria can be used to support resuscitation decisions. For instance, the presence of severe chronic comorbidities or a very poor quality of life prior to cardiac arrest are allowed to support decisions to stop or not start resuscitation in unwitnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with an initial non-shockable rhythm. In current clinical practice, these factors are often not taken into account and patients with severe underlying comorbidities and poor general condition are also resuscitated. In intensive care, a wait-and-see approach is then usually adopted until additional information is gathered about the patient's likely prognosis based on repetitive clinical neurological examination, electrophysiological tests such as electro-encephalography and somatosensory evoked potentials, biomarker analysis and cerebral imaging (multimodal neuroprognostication).
At the ICU level, both physicians and nurses can have valuable insights into what the likely prognosis is of the OHCA patients they are treating. In subgroups with a poor prognosis (e.g. non-shockable unwitnessed arrest in older patient) the added value of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication is potentially very limited or absent. The implication for intensive care could be that policy decisions could perhaps be made earlier in several situations. Exploring the prognostic value of the clinical perception of ICU physicians and ICU nurses regarding appropriateness of CPR and their prognostication of neurological outcome and quality of life relative to multimodal ICU neuroprognostication might help to refine the ethical guidance towards resuscitation decision making and towards ICU management after ROSC in general.
The study aims are:
1. To assess whether and to what extent the following factors are associated with ICU clinician's perception regarding appropriateness of CPR: perceived presence of frailty, poor quality of life and severe comorbidities, as well as objective factors related to the OHCA (shockable rhythm, bystander CPR, witnessed arrest) and clinician characteristics (age, gender, years of experience and professional background).
2. To assess the concordance between clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR (i.e. whether or not at least 2 clinicians perceive CPR as inappropriate) and multimodal ICU neuroprognostication as performed in STEPCARE. The STEPCARE trial is an international, investigator-initiated, randomised trial on three different aspects of standard care after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In a 2x2x2 factorial design the effect of continuous sedation vs. minimal sedation, fever management with a device vs. without a device and a higher blood pressure target vs. a lower blood pressure target are compared. The primary outcome of the trial will be survival at 180 days with secondary outcomes including neurological function and health-related quality of life.
3. To investigate the prognostic value of clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR, the clinician's prognostication (functional outcome and quality of life after 6 months) and the added prognostic value of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication with regard to the long-term composite outcome (alive with a good functional outcome and good quality of life as defined in STEPCARE) above and beyond the prognostic value of clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR and the clinician's prognostication within subgroups of initial non-shockable/shockable rhythm.
Statistical analysis Associations between the perception of ICU physicians and ICU nurses regarding appropriateness of CPR, on the one hand, and the ICU clinician's perceived presence of frailty, severe comorbidities, quality of life, as well as objective factors related to the OHCA (shockable rhythm, bystander CPR, witnessed arrest) and clinician characteristics (age, gender, years of experience and professional background), on the other hand, will be estimated (in terms of conditional odds ratios) using a generalised linear mixed effects model (with 'logit' link and a random intercept for center and for patient) to allow statistical inference (estimation of corresponding standard errors and confidence intervals) that correctly accounts for the multilevel structure of the data (i.e. clinicians clustered within patients, patients clustered within centers).
Subsequently, the concordance between clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR (A) and the result of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication (Y) will be assessed by estimating the following predictive metrics with Y being the outcome and A being the predictor:
* Positive Predictive Value (PPV)
* Negative Predictive Value (NPV)
* Sensitivity
* Specificity
* Area Under the Receiver-Operator Curve (AUC) The PPV expresses the percentage of poor multimodal ICU neuroprognostications among cases where at least two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate, while the NPV expresses the percentage of good multimodal ICU neuroprognostications among cases where less than two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate. Results of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication will be imputed as 'good' or 'poor' whenever, respectively, patients were discharged alive or died before the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could be conducted or completed. This enables calculation of the PPV and NPV in the population of patients originally included in the study and gives prospective insight into the extent to which clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR in these patients is prognostic for the results of their multimodal ICU neuroprognostication. The sensitivity expresses the percentage of cases where at least two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate among poor multimodal ICU neuroprognostications, while the specificity expresses the percentage of cases where less than two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate among good multimodal ICU neuroprognostications. The latter two metrics will be calculated only in patients still hospitalized by the time the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could be completed. This gives retrospective insight into the extent to which good or poor multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could already be anticipated by clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR. Ideally, the multilevel nature of the data will be accounted for when estimating these metrics and their respective confidence intervals.
Subsequently, the prognostic value of clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR and the clinician's prognostication with respect to the primary composite endpoint (alive with a good functional outcome and good quality of life as defined in STEPCARE) will be assessed in terms of the PPV, NPV and AUC. Additionally, the added or incremental prognostic value of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication above and beyond that of ICU clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR and the clinician's prognostication will be assessed in terms of increase in AUC. More specifically, two logistic regression model will be fitted: a logistic regression model for the primary outcome with clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR, the clinician's prognostication as only predictor (model 1), and a logistic regression model for the primary outcome with clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR, the clinician's prognostication and the result of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication (and their interaction) as predictors (model 2). The AUCs of these models will be reported, as well as their respective PPV and NPV. AUC of model 2 minus AUC of model 1 will be estimated and used as a metric to quantify the added prognostic value. These analyses will be conducted for the entire study population, as well as in separate subgroups of patients with shockable versus non-shockable initial rhythms. For this analysis, whenever patients were discharged alive or died before the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could be conducted or completed, results of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication will be imputed in such a way that their coding is identical to that of the corresponding clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR to reflect the fact that, in such cases, multimodal ICU neuroprognostication can by definition not have any added prognostic value. Ideally, the multilevel nature of the data will be accounted for when estimating these metrics and their respective confidence intervals.
The study will collect additional data apart from the STEPCARE study (NCT 05564754):
ICU doctors and nurses treating the patient in the first 24 hours after ICU admission are requested to complete a short (less than 3 minutes) survey, ideally as soon as possible since we are interested in the predictive value of clinical appraisal of the ICU doctor and ICU nurse.
The survey comprises questions regarding clinician characteristics, perception regarding frailty, quality of life, comorbidities, appropriateness of CPR and prognostication of the outcome 6 months after OHCA.
At the ICU level, both physicians and nurses can have valuable insights into what the likely prognosis is of the OHCA patients they are treating. In subgroups with a poor prognosis (e.g. non-shockable unwitnessed arrest in older patient) the added value of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication is potentially very limited or absent. The implication for intensive care could be that policy decisions could perhaps be made earlier in several situations. Exploring the prognostic value of the clinical perception of ICU physicians and ICU nurses regarding appropriateness of CPR and their prognostication of neurological outcome and quality of life relative to multimodal ICU neuroprognostication might help to refine the ethical guidance towards resuscitation decision making and towards ICU management after ROSC in general.
The study aims are:
1. To assess whether and to what extent the following factors are associated with ICU clinician's perception regarding appropriateness of CPR: perceived presence of frailty, poor quality of life and severe comorbidities, as well as objective factors related to the OHCA (shockable rhythm, bystander CPR, witnessed arrest) and clinician characteristics (age, gender, years of experience and professional background).
2. To assess the concordance between clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR (i.e. whether or not at least 2 clinicians perceive CPR as inappropriate) and multimodal ICU neuroprognostication as performed in STEPCARE. The STEPCARE trial is an international, investigator-initiated, randomised trial on three different aspects of standard care after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In a 2x2x2 factorial design the effect of continuous sedation vs. minimal sedation, fever management with a device vs. without a device and a higher blood pressure target vs. a lower blood pressure target are compared. The primary outcome of the trial will be survival at 180 days with secondary outcomes including neurological function and health-related quality of life.
3. To investigate the prognostic value of clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR, the clinician's prognostication (functional outcome and quality of life after 6 months) and the added prognostic value of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication with regard to the long-term composite outcome (alive with a good functional outcome and good quality of life as defined in STEPCARE) above and beyond the prognostic value of clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR and the clinician's prognostication within subgroups of initial non-shockable/shockable rhythm.
Statistical analysis Associations between the perception of ICU physicians and ICU nurses regarding appropriateness of CPR, on the one hand, and the ICU clinician's perceived presence of frailty, severe comorbidities, quality of life, as well as objective factors related to the OHCA (shockable rhythm, bystander CPR, witnessed arrest) and clinician characteristics (age, gender, years of experience and professional background), on the other hand, will be estimated (in terms of conditional odds ratios) using a generalised linear mixed effects model (with 'logit' link and a random intercept for center and for patient) to allow statistical inference (estimation of corresponding standard errors and confidence intervals) that correctly accounts for the multilevel structure of the data (i.e. clinicians clustered within patients, patients clustered within centers).
Subsequently, the concordance between clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR (A) and the result of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication (Y) will be assessed by estimating the following predictive metrics with Y being the outcome and A being the predictor:
* Positive Predictive Value (PPV)
* Negative Predictive Value (NPV)
* Sensitivity
* Specificity
* Area Under the Receiver-Operator Curve (AUC) The PPV expresses the percentage of poor multimodal ICU neuroprognostications among cases where at least two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate, while the NPV expresses the percentage of good multimodal ICU neuroprognostications among cases where less than two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate. Results of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication will be imputed as 'good' or 'poor' whenever, respectively, patients were discharged alive or died before the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could be conducted or completed. This enables calculation of the PPV and NPV in the population of patients originally included in the study and gives prospective insight into the extent to which clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR in these patients is prognostic for the results of their multimodal ICU neuroprognostication. The sensitivity expresses the percentage of cases where at least two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate among poor multimodal ICU neuroprognostications, while the specificity expresses the percentage of cases where less than two clinicians perceive CPR to have been inappropriate among good multimodal ICU neuroprognostications. The latter two metrics will be calculated only in patients still hospitalized by the time the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could be completed. This gives retrospective insight into the extent to which good or poor multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could already be anticipated by clinicians' combined perception of inappropriateness of CPR. Ideally, the multilevel nature of the data will be accounted for when estimating these metrics and their respective confidence intervals.
Subsequently, the prognostic value of clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR and the clinician's prognostication with respect to the primary composite endpoint (alive with a good functional outcome and good quality of life as defined in STEPCARE) will be assessed in terms of the PPV, NPV and AUC. Additionally, the added or incremental prognostic value of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication above and beyond that of ICU clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR and the clinician's prognostication will be assessed in terms of increase in AUC. More specifically, two logistic regression model will be fitted: a logistic regression model for the primary outcome with clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR, the clinician's prognostication as only predictor (model 1), and a logistic regression model for the primary outcome with clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR, the clinician's prognostication and the result of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication (and their interaction) as predictors (model 2). The AUCs of these models will be reported, as well as their respective PPV and NPV. AUC of model 2 minus AUC of model 1 will be estimated and used as a metric to quantify the added prognostic value. These analyses will be conducted for the entire study population, as well as in separate subgroups of patients with shockable versus non-shockable initial rhythms. For this analysis, whenever patients were discharged alive or died before the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication could be conducted or completed, results of the multimodal ICU neuroprognostication will be imputed in such a way that their coding is identical to that of the corresponding clinicians' combined perception of inappropriate CPR to reflect the fact that, in such cases, multimodal ICU neuroprognostication can by definition not have any added prognostic value. Ideally, the multilevel nature of the data will be accounted for when estimating these metrics and their respective confidence intervals.
The study will collect additional data apart from the STEPCARE study (NCT 05564754):
ICU doctors and nurses treating the patient in the first 24 hours after ICU admission are requested to complete a short (less than 3 minutes) survey, ideally as soon as possible since we are interested in the predictive value of clinical appraisal of the ICU doctor and ICU nurse.
The survey comprises questions regarding clinician characteristics, perception regarding frailty, quality of life, comorbidities, appropriateness of CPR and prognostication of the outcome 6 months after OHCA.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Cardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Observational Model Type
COHORT
Study Time Perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Nurses and doctors working in Intensive Care Units
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Doctors and nurses working in the Intensive Care Unit treating patients included in the STEPCARE study (NCT 05564754)
Exclusion Criteria
* Doctors and nurses who do not have a direct treatment relationship with a patient included in the STEPCARE study
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University Hospital, Ghent
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Responsibility Role
SPONSOR
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Medical University Innsbruck
Innsbruck, , Austria
Site Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg
Genk, , Belgium
Site Status
RECRUITING
Ghent University Hospital
Ghent, , Belgium
Site Status
RECRUITING
Helsinki University Central Hospital
Helsinki, , Finland
Site Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Universitätsklinikum Lübeck
Lübeck, , Germany
Site Status
RECRUITING
Policlinico San Martino
Genova, , Italy
Site Status
RECRUITING
Wakefield Hospital
Wellington, , New Zealand
Site Status
RECRUITING
King Abdulaziz Medical City
Riyadh, , Saudi Arabia
Site Status
RECRUITING
Zürich University Hospital
Zurich, , Switzerland
Site Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Austria
Belgium
Finland
Germany
Italy
New Zealand
Saudi Arabia
Switzerland
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
https://stepcare.org
Information regarding STEPCARE study
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ONZ-2025-0119
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Standard CPR Versus Chest Compressions Only
NCT04569812
COMPLETED
NA
Predictors for Survival and Good Neurological Outcome in E-CPR and Non CPR Treated Patients
NCT04198792
RECRUITING
Optimal Training Frequency for Attainment and Maintenance of High-quality CPR on a High-fidelity Manikin
NCT02998307
COMPLETED
NA
Evaluation of the Quality of Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) in Cardiac Arrest Patients
NCT00951704
COMPLETED
Compression Only CPR Versus Standard CPR in Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - A Randomized Survival Study
NCT03981107
RECRUITING
NA
Proteomics to Identify Prognostic Markers After CPR and to Estimate Neurological Outcome
NCT02247947
COMPLETED
Three Different Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Training Methods
NCT01361919
COMPLETED
NA
Quantitative Measurement of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) During In Hospital Cardiac Arrest
NCT00628693
COMPLETED
Proteomic Profiling to Reveal Novel Prognostic Markers for Neurological Outcome Following Resuscitation
NCT01960699
COMPLETED
Compression Is Life In Cardiac Arrest - Quality Study (CILICA-QS)
NCT03140202
UNKNOWN
NA
Continuous Chest Compressions vs AHA Standard CPR of 30:2
NCT01372748
COMPLETED
PHASE4
Comparison of the Quality of CPR by Lay Rescuers With and Without Feedback Devices
NCT02000505
UNKNOWN
NA
PEEP vs. ZEEP in Out-of-Hospital-Cardiac-Arrest
NCT06836830
RECRUITING
NA
Head-up Position and High Quality Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in OHCA
NCT03996616
COMPLETED
NA
Assessing CPR Quality During In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
NCT00228293
TERMINATED
PHASE2/PHASE3
Survey of Attitudes and Factors Associated With CPR in an Older Population
NCT00665288
COMPLETED
Prehospital Cerebral Oxygenation During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)
NCT01806844
COMPLETED
Flowchart-Assisted Resuscitation. Standard CPR vs. Chest Compressions Only: What Happened to the Quality?
NCT02438527
COMPLETED
NA
Monitoring and Optimization of Cerebral Perfusion Pressure in Post-cardiac Arrest Patients: a Pilot Study
NCT06601842
RECRUITING
NA
Monitoring After Cardiac Arrest: Electroencephalogram and Cerebral Oximetry in Predicting Outcome
NCT06460480
COMPLETED
Characterizing the cerebrovAscular Physiology of Optimal Mean Arterial Pressure Targeted Resuscitation
NCT03609333
COMPLETED
NA
Circulation Improving Resuscitation Care (CIRC)
NCT00597207
COMPLETED
NA
Comparison of Scores for Early Brain Damage Assessment at Intensive Care Unit Admission After Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest
NCT04167891
COMPLETED
Neuroprotective Effect of Remote Ischemic Post-conditioning in Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest
NCT06473207
RECRUITING
NA
Pilot Study Comparing Ventilation Modes During CPR With Mechanical Compression Device.
NCT03347175
COMPLETED
NA