Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study is designed to assess the acceptability and usability of a new Endotracheal Tube (ET) holding device for an orally intubated patient.
This is a multiple site prospective assessment of the study product in ICU settings. The study is comprised of each intubated subject wearing one study product until the device either needs to be changed or is no longer required by the subject. The study product is designed to hold a standard or subglottic ET tube and help reduce the potential for occlusion (blockage) of the tube.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| New oral endotracheal tube holder | Experimental | Single Study Product Arm |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New oral endotracheal tube holder | Device | The single arm study product is designed to hold a standard or subglottic ET tube. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Acceptability With Study Product | The overall acceptability relating to general experience with the study product during use will be rated with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1=Very Unacceptable to 5=Very Acceptable | At product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product) |
| Usability of Study Product | The usability of the study product at application and at removal. | At application and product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product) |
Not provided
Not provided
INCLUSION CRITERIA
EXCLUSION CRITERIA
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Laura Vander Werff, MD | Legacy Mount Hood Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
| Brian Young, MD | 1. Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center 2. Legacy Good Samaritan Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
| Arash Afshinnik, MD | Community Regional Medical Center | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community Regional Medical Center | Fresno | California | 93701 | United States | ||
| Legacy Mount Hood Medical Center |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 26983051 | Background | Buckley JC, Brown AP, Shin JS, Rogers KM, Hoftman NN. A Comparison of the Haider Tube-Guard(R) Endotracheal Tube Holder Versus Adhesive Tape to Determine if This Novel Device Can Reduce Endotracheal Tube Movement and Prevent Unplanned Extubation. Anesth Analg. 2016 May;122(5):1439-43. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001222. | |
| Background | Mohammed, H & Hassan, M. (2015). Endotracheal tube securements: Effectiveness of three techniques among orally intubated patients. Egyptian Journal of Chest Diseases and Tuberculosis 64:183-196 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder | Single Study Product Arm New oral endotracheal tube holder: The single arm study product is designed to hold a standard or subglottic ET tube. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
Enrolled patients found eligible per Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder | Single Study Product Arm New oral endotracheal tube holder: The single arm study product is designed to hold a standard or subglottic ET tube. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Overall Acceptability With Study Product | The overall acceptability relating to general experience with the study product during use will be rated with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1=Very Unacceptable to 5=Very Acceptable | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | At product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product) |
|
|
maximum 29 days of patient wearing product
Adverse Events were determined via standardized study investigator assessment forms. All Adverse Events are reported irrespective of relation to study product.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder | Single Study Product Arm New oral endotracheal tube holder: The single arm study product is designed to hold a standard or subglottic ET tube. |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Death | Infections and infestations | Systematic Assessment | Patient passed due to sepsis progression--not related to device |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skin lesion | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Skin lesion on patient's skin, below nose, but above upper outer lip. Lesion could be due to a herpetic lesion or an underlying skin condition not previously identified/documented. Investigator indicated AE was probably not related to study device. |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Director Global Clinical Affairs | Hollister Incorporated | 8476802837 | stacy.haddad@hollister.com |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Apr 14, 2017 | Apr 5, 2019 | Prot_SAP_000.pdf |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Gresham |
| Oregon |
| 97030 |
| United States |
| Legacy Good Samaritan Medical Center | Portland | Oregon | 97210 | United States |
| Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center | Portland | Oregon | 97227 | United States |
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race and Ethnicity Not Collected | Race and Ethnicity were not collected from any participant. | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
|
|
| Primary | Usability of Study Product | The usability of the study product at application and at removal. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | At application and product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product) |
|
|
|
| 1 |
| 30 |
| 3 |
| 30 |
| 1 |
| 30 |
|
| Oral Bleeding | General disorders | Systematic Assessment | Patient constantly was biting for over 24 hours after product placement before oral bleeding occurred. Oral bleeding was exacerbated significantly by the heparin drip and other anticoagulation he was on while in the ICU. |
|
| Loose teeth | General disorders | Systematic Assessment | Loose teeth due to prolonged biting, probably NOT related to study device. |
|
|
The only disclosure restriction on the PI is that the sponsor can review results communications prior to public release and can embargo communications regarding trial results for a period that is less than or equal to 18 months from the time submitted to the sponsor for review. The sponsor cannot require changes to the communication and cannot extend the embargo.
| Difficult to apply |
|
| Very difficult to apply |
|
| Not Applicable |
|
| Ease of removal |
|