The evolution of mean arterial pressure in critically ill patients on vasopressors before and during a trial comparing a specific mean arterial pressure target to usual care.
Arterial pressure
Control groups
Critical care
Research design
Vasoconstrictor agents
Journal
BMC anesthesiology
ISSN: 1471-2253
Titre abrégé: BMC Anesthesiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968535
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 01 2022
03 01 2022
Historique:
received:
19
08
2021
accepted:
19
11
2021
entrez:
4
1
2022
pubmed:
5
1
2022
medline:
24
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In randomized clinical controlled trials, the choice of usual care as the comparator may be associated with better clinician uptake of the study protocol and lead to more generalizable results. However, if care processes evolve to resemble the intervention during the course of a trial, differences between the intervention group and usual care control group may narrow. We evaluated the effect on mean arterial pressure of an unblinded trial comparing a lower mean arterial pressure target to reduce vasopressor exposure, vs. a clinician-selected mean arterial pressure target, in critically ill patients at least 65 years old. For this multicenter observational study using data collected both prospectively and retrospectively, patients were recruited from five of the seven trial sites. We compared the mean arterial pressure of patients receiving vasopressors, who met or would have met trial eligibility criteria, from two periods: [1] at least 1 month before the trial started, and [2] during the trial period and randomized to usual care, or not enrolled in the trial. We included 200 patients treated before and 229 after trial initiation. There were no differences in age (mean 74.5 vs. 75.2 years; p = 0.28), baseline Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (median 26 vs. 26; p = 0.47) or history of chronic hypertension (n = 126 [63.0%] vs. n = 153 [66.8%]; p = 0.41). Mean of the mean arterial pressure was similar between the two periods (72.5 vs. 72.4 mmHg; p = 0.76). The initiation of a trial of a prescribed lower mean arterial pressure target, compared to a usual clinician-selected target, was not associated with a change in mean arterial pressure, reflecting stability in the net effect of usual clinician practices over time. Comparing prior and concurrent control groups may alleviate concerns regarding drift in usual practices over the course of a trial or permit quantification of any change.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
In randomized clinical controlled trials, the choice of usual care as the comparator may be associated with better clinician uptake of the study protocol and lead to more generalizable results. However, if care processes evolve to resemble the intervention during the course of a trial, differences between the intervention group and usual care control group may narrow. We evaluated the effect on mean arterial pressure of an unblinded trial comparing a lower mean arterial pressure target to reduce vasopressor exposure, vs. a clinician-selected mean arterial pressure target, in critically ill patients at least 65 years old.
METHODS
For this multicenter observational study using data collected both prospectively and retrospectively, patients were recruited from five of the seven trial sites. We compared the mean arterial pressure of patients receiving vasopressors, who met or would have met trial eligibility criteria, from two periods: [1] at least 1 month before the trial started, and [2] during the trial period and randomized to usual care, or not enrolled in the trial.
RESULTS
We included 200 patients treated before and 229 after trial initiation. There were no differences in age (mean 74.5 vs. 75.2 years; p = 0.28), baseline Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (median 26 vs. 26; p = 0.47) or history of chronic hypertension (n = 126 [63.0%] vs. n = 153 [66.8%]; p = 0.41). Mean of the mean arterial pressure was similar between the two periods (72.5 vs. 72.4 mmHg; p = 0.76).
CONCLUSIONS
The initiation of a trial of a prescribed lower mean arterial pressure target, compared to a usual clinician-selected target, was not associated with a change in mean arterial pressure, reflecting stability in the net effect of usual clinician practices over time. Comparing prior and concurrent control groups may alleviate concerns regarding drift in usual practices over the course of a trial or permit quantification of any change.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34979938
doi: 10.1186/s12871-021-01529-w
pii: 10.1186/s12871-021-01529-w
pmc: PMC8722048
doi:
Substances chimiques
Vasoconstrictor Agents
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Crit Care Med. 2004 Mar;32(3):852-7
pubmed: 15090973
N Engl J Med. 2000 May 4;342(18):1301-8
pubmed: 10793162
Hastings Cent Rep. 2015 Jan-Feb;45(1):30-40
pubmed: 25530316
N Engl J Med. 2017 Dec 28;377(26):2604
pubmed: 29281568
Curr Opin Crit Care. 2019 Oct;25(5):498-504
pubmed: 31335382
Intensive Care Med. 2016 Sep;42(9):1387-97
pubmed: 26873833
Crit Care Med. 2009 Jan;37(1 Suppl):S80-90
pubmed: 19104230
Support Care Cancer. 2019 May;27(5):1591-1600
pubmed: 30788625
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 20;12(1):e0167840
pubmed: 28107357
N Engl J Med. 1999 Feb 11;340(6):409-17
pubmed: 9971864
CMAJ Open. 2013 Oct 22;1(4):E127-33
pubmed: 25077114
Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2007 Oct 1;4(7):577-82
pubmed: 17878473
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2017 Apr;70(2):144-156
pubmed: 28367284
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 14;10(11):e037947
pubmed: 33191251
JAMA. 2020 Mar 10;323(10):938-949
pubmed: 32049269
Epidemiology. 1996 Sep;7(5):561
pubmed: 8862998
Anesth Analg. 2010 Aug;111(2):444-50
pubmed: 19820238
Crit Care Med. 1985 Oct;13(10):818-29
pubmed: 3928249