Characterization of adverse events in injured patients at risk of hemorrhagic shock: a secondary analysis of three harmonized prehospital randomized clinical trials.

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open Pub Date : 2024-06-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1136/tsaco-2024-001465
John M Lorence, Jack K Donohue, Nidhi Iyanna, Francis X Guyette, Elizabeth Gimbel, Joshua B Brown, Brian J Daley, Brian J Eastridge, Richard S Miller, Raminder Nirula, Brian G Harbrecht, Jeffrey A Claridge, Herb A Phelan, Gary Vercruysse, Terence O'Keeffe, Bellal Joseph, Matthew D Neal, Jason L Sperry
{"title":"Characterization of adverse events in injured patients at risk of hemorrhagic shock: a secondary analysis of three harmonized prehospital randomized clinical trials.","authors":"John M Lorence, Jack K Donohue, Nidhi Iyanna, Francis X Guyette, Elizabeth Gimbel, Joshua B Brown, Brian J Daley, Brian J Eastridge, Richard S Miller, Raminder Nirula, Brian G Harbrecht, Jeffrey A Claridge, Herb A Phelan, Gary Vercruysse, Terence O'Keeffe, Bellal Joseph, Matthew D Neal, Jason L Sperry","doi":"10.1136/tsaco-2024-001465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The reporting of adverse events (AEs) is required and well defined in the execution of clinical trials, but is poorly characterized particularly in prehospital trials focusing on traumatic injury. In the setting of prehospital traumatic injury trials, no literature currently exists analyzing the clinical implications of AEs and their associations with mortality and morbidity. We sought to analyze AEs from three prehospital hemorrhagic shock trials and characterize their time course, incidence, severity, associated clinical outcomes, and relatedness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a secondary analysis of three prehospital randomized clinical trials. We analyzed AEs at both the patient level as well as the individual AE level. We categorized patients who had no AEs, a single documented AE and those with multiple events (>1 AE). We characterized AE timing, severity, relatedness and attributable mortality outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 1490 patients from the three harmonized clinical trials, with 299 (20.1%) individual patients having at least a single AE documented with 529 AEs documented overall as a proportion of patients had multiple events. Over 44% of patients had a death-related misclassified AE. Patients with at least a single documented AE had a significantly higher 28-day mortality (log-rank χ<sup>2</sup>=81.27, p<0.001) compared with those without an AE documented. Patients with a single AE had a significant higher mortality than those with multiple AEs, potentially due to survival bias (log-rank χ<sup>2</sup>=11.80, p=0.006). When relatedness of each individual AE was characterized, over 97% of AEs were classified as 'definitely not related' or 'probably not related' to the intervention.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AEs in hemorrhagic shock trials are common, occur early and are associated with mortality and survival bias. The potential for inaccurate reporting exists, and education and training remain essential for appropriate treatment arm comparison. The current results have important relevance to injury-related clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Trial registration numbers: </strong>NCT01818427, NCT02086500 and NCT03477006.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>II.</p>","PeriodicalId":23307,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","volume":"9 1","pages":"e001465"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11202790/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2024-001465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The reporting of adverse events (AEs) is required and well defined in the execution of clinical trials, but is poorly characterized particularly in prehospital trials focusing on traumatic injury. In the setting of prehospital traumatic injury trials, no literature currently exists analyzing the clinical implications of AEs and their associations with mortality and morbidity. We sought to analyze AEs from three prehospital hemorrhagic shock trials and characterize their time course, incidence, severity, associated clinical outcomes, and relatedness.

Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of three prehospital randomized clinical trials. We analyzed AEs at both the patient level as well as the individual AE level. We categorized patients who had no AEs, a single documented AE and those with multiple events (>1 AE). We characterized AE timing, severity, relatedness and attributable mortality outcomes.

Results: We included 1490 patients from the three harmonized clinical trials, with 299 (20.1%) individual patients having at least a single AE documented with 529 AEs documented overall as a proportion of patients had multiple events. Over 44% of patients had a death-related misclassified AE. Patients with at least a single documented AE had a significantly higher 28-day mortality (log-rank χ2=81.27, p<0.001) compared with those without an AE documented. Patients with a single AE had a significant higher mortality than those with multiple AEs, potentially due to survival bias (log-rank χ2=11.80, p=0.006). When relatedness of each individual AE was characterized, over 97% of AEs were classified as 'definitely not related' or 'probably not related' to the intervention.

Conclusions: AEs in hemorrhagic shock trials are common, occur early and are associated with mortality and survival bias. The potential for inaccurate reporting exists, and education and training remain essential for appropriate treatment arm comparison. The current results have important relevance to injury-related clinical trials.

Trial registration numbers: NCT01818427, NCT02086500 and NCT03477006.

Level of evidence: II.

有失血性休克风险的伤员不良事件的特征:对三项统一院前随机临床试验的二次分析。
背景:不良事件(AEs)的报告在临床试验的执行过程中是必须的,也是有明确规定的,但在以创伤为重点的院前试验中却鲜有报道。在院前创伤试验中,目前还没有文献分析 AEs 的临床影响及其与死亡率和发病率的关系。我们试图分析三项院前失血性休克试验中的 AEs,并描述其时间过程、发生率、严重程度、相关临床结果和关联性:我们对三项院前随机临床试验进行了二次分析。我们从患者层面和单个 AE 层面对 AE 进行了分析。我们对无 AE、有记录的单个 AE 和有多个事件(>1 AE)的患者进行了分类。我们描述了AE发生的时间、严重程度、相关性和可归因的死亡率结果:我们纳入了来自三项统一临床试验的 1490 例患者,其中 299 例(20.1%)患者至少记录了一次 AE,总计记录了 529 次 AE,有一定比例的患者发生了多次 AE。超过 44% 的患者发生了与死亡相关的误分类 AE。至少有一次AE记录的患者28天死亡率明显较高(log-rank χ2=81.27,P2=11.80,P=0.006)。在对每个AE的相关性进行定性时,超过97%的AE被归类为与干预 "绝对无关 "或 "可能无关":结论:失血性休克试验中的AE很常见,发生较早,与死亡率和存活率偏差有关。报告不准确的可能性是存在的,教育和培训对于适当的治疗组比较仍然至关重要。目前的结果对与损伤相关的临床试验具有重要意义:试验登记号:NCT01818427、NCT02086500 和 NCT03477006:证据等级:II。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信