From feasibility study to randomised control trial: the evolution of a novel neuraxial procedure device

IF 1.4 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ian N Gaston, Alexander G Samworth, Emery H. McCrory, J. Bavaro, Mahesh Vaidyanathan
{"title":"From feasibility study to randomised control trial: the evolution of a novel neuraxial procedure device","authors":"Ian N Gaston, Alexander G Samworth, Emery H. McCrory, J. Bavaro, Mahesh Vaidyanathan","doi":"10.1136/bmjinnov-2023-001090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Neuraxial procedures are performed by many specialties among a wide variety of patients. Palpation is the standard practice to locate a target insertion site. Procedural difficulty may prompt the use of alternative modalities. In a 2020 feasibility study, a neuraxial imaging device called VerTouch was shown to be reliable and easy to learn. In this study, we compared VerTouch to palpation and ultrasound (US). Methods An investigator-initiated prospective, randomised study was conducted on a labour and delivery ward at a large tertiary care hospital. Participants were randomised to either palpation, US or the VerTouch device. The primary endpoint was the total number of redirections. Secondary endpoints included the number of reinsertions and the total procedure time. Results 95 patients were enrolled and 81 completed the study. The VerTouch group required fewer redirections (0.72 vs 2.35 and 2.81, p=0.041) and reinsertions (0.11 vs 0.50 and 0.96, p=0.017) without prolonging the overall procedure time (8.66 mins vs 7.88 and 9.81, p=0.121) when compared to palpation and US, respectively. Conclusion This study supports the potential for VerTouch to improve procedural success for patients who might otherwise require radiology referral and for providers who may lack the resources or training to accommodate US guidance. The results also demonstrate the potential value in clinician involvement in the development of technology from the point of inception through implementation into clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":53454,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Innovations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Innovations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjinnov-2023-001090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Neuraxial procedures are performed by many specialties among a wide variety of patients. Palpation is the standard practice to locate a target insertion site. Procedural difficulty may prompt the use of alternative modalities. In a 2020 feasibility study, a neuraxial imaging device called VerTouch was shown to be reliable and easy to learn. In this study, we compared VerTouch to palpation and ultrasound (US). Methods An investigator-initiated prospective, randomised study was conducted on a labour and delivery ward at a large tertiary care hospital. Participants were randomised to either palpation, US or the VerTouch device. The primary endpoint was the total number of redirections. Secondary endpoints included the number of reinsertions and the total procedure time. Results 95 patients were enrolled and 81 completed the study. The VerTouch group required fewer redirections (0.72 vs 2.35 and 2.81, p=0.041) and reinsertions (0.11 vs 0.50 and 0.96, p=0.017) without prolonging the overall procedure time (8.66 mins vs 7.88 and 9.81, p=0.121) when compared to palpation and US, respectively. Conclusion This study supports the potential for VerTouch to improve procedural success for patients who might otherwise require radiology referral and for providers who may lack the resources or training to accommodate US guidance. The results also demonstrate the potential value in clinician involvement in the development of technology from the point of inception through implementation into clinical practice.
从可行性研究到随机对照试验:一种新型轴突手术装置的发展
导言轴突手术是由许多专业在各种各样的病人中进行的。触诊是定位目标插入部位的标准做法。程序上的困难可能促使使用其他方式。在2020年的可行性研究中,一种名为VerTouch的轴向成像设备被证明是可靠且易于学习的。在这项研究中,我们将VerTouch与触诊和超声(US)进行了比较。方法对某大型三级医院产房进行前瞻性随机研究。参与者被随机分配到触诊、US或VerTouch设备。主要终点是重定向的总次数。次要终点包括重新插入的次数和总手术时间。结果95例患者入组,81例完成研究。与触诊和US相比,VerTouch组需要更少的重定向(0.72 vs 2.35和2.81,p=0.041)和重新插入(0.11 vs 0.50和0.96,p=0.017),而不延长整个手术时间(8.66分钟vs 7.88和9.81,p=0.121)。结论:本研究支持VerTouch提高手术成功率的潜力,对于那些可能需要放射科转诊的患者,以及可能缺乏资源或培训以适应美国指导的提供者。研究结果也证明了临床医生从技术开发开始到临床实践的潜在价值。
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
BMJ Innovations
BMJ Innovations Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Healthcare is undergoing a revolution and novel medical technologies are being developed to treat patients in better and faster ways. Mobile revolution has put a handheld computer in pockets of billions and we are ushering in an era of mHealth. In developed and developing world alike healthcare costs are a concern and frugal innovations are being promoted for bringing down the costs of healthcare. BMJ Innovations aims to promote innovative research which creates new, cost-effective medical devices, technologies, processes and systems that improve patient care, with particular focus on the needs of patients, physicians, and the health care industry as a whole and act as a platform to catalyse and seed more innovations. Submissions to BMJ Innovations will be considered from all clinical areas of medicine along with business and process innovations that make healthcare accessible and affordable. Submissions from groups of investigators engaged in international collaborations are especially encouraged. The broad areas of innovations that this journal aims to chronicle include but are not limited to: Medical devices, mHealth and wearable health technologies, Assistive technologies, Diagnostics, Health IT, systems and process innovation.
×
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