In the context of a multicentre, pilot trial in 100 elderly (>/= 65 years) critically ill adults comparing two strategies to identify weaning candidates ('once daily' vs. 'at least twice daily' screening) in 8 ICUs across Canada, we propose to assess feasibility metrics that reflect our ability to consent, enroll and recruit elderly and very elderly invasively ventilated patients and evaluate adherence to the study protocols in preparation for launching a large scale screening RCT.
- Primary Research Question (i) Can we recruit invasively ventilated elderly (age >/= 65 years) critically ill adults into a weaning trial comparing alternative screening strategies?
- Secondary Research Questions (ii) Can clinicians adhere to the assigned screening protocols in both study arms?
- Tertiary Research Questions
(ii) What are the proportions of enrolled elderly and very elderly trial participants? (iii) Are the proportions of consents obtained and declined for trial participation similar between eligible elderly and very elderly trial participants? (iv) What are the rates and reasons for trial exclusion based between eligible elderly and very elderly patients? (v) What effect, in preliminary estimates, do the alternative screening strategies have on clinically important outcomes[e.g., time to first Spontaneous Breathing Trial (SBT) and first successful SBT, time to first extubation and successful extubation, total duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, ICU and hospital mortality, use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) following extubation, complications (self-extubation, tracheostomy, reintubation, proportion requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation) and adverse events] between elderly and very elderly trial participants.
- Quaternary Research Questions
(i) Can we assess and quantify current practices related to sedation, analgesia an delirium management and mobilization before conducting 'once daily' or 'at least twice daily screening' assessments of weaning readiness with the goal of quantifying factors that may lead to performance bias in the future, planned, large scale weaning trial.
(ii) Can we identify barriers (clinician and institutional) to recruitment into this study? (iii) Can we classify trial participants as requiring (i) simple, (ii) difficult or (iii) prolonged weaning using the 'Task Force on Weaning' definitions.
Hypotheses
We hypothesize that we will achieve our feasibility metrics, specifically, that:
- We will recruit at least 2 elderly critically ill patients, on average, per month per ICU.
- Compliance rates will be at least 80% in both study arms and contamination in the once daily screening arm will be < 10%.
- We expect that we will enroll similar proportions of elderly than very elderly trial participants.
- We anticipate that the proportion of consents obtained will be similar between eligible elderly and very elderly participants, the rate of declined consents will be higher in very elderly trial participants.
- We anticipate that rates of exclusion will be greater for very elderly trial participants due to increased prevalence of comorbid illnesses and treatment limitations.
- We expect that preliminary estimates of the impact of the alternative screening strategies on clinically important outcomes will be similar between elderly and very elderly trial participants.
- Practices in sedation, analgesia, delirium and mobilization will be recorded at least 80% of the time.
- We will identify potentially modifiable clinician and institutional barriers to recruitment.
- Proportions of critically ill adults requiring simple, difficult or prolonged weaning in Canadian ICUs will be similar to those reported in the world literature.