NCT00772460

Brief Summary

Two patient warming systems will be compared with 40 patients each in a convective warming group (BairHugger, Arizant) and in a conductive warming group (HotDog, Augustine Biomedical). The patients will undergo small to medium trauma surgery and will be warmed with the randomized device - the hypothesis is, that the area under the standardized core temperature / time curve is significantly greater in the conductive warming group. Secondary outcome is the mean skin temperature / time area under the curve.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
80

participants targeted

Target at below P25 for phase_3

Timeline
Completed

Started Oct 2008

Shorter than P25 for phase_3

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

October 1, 2008

Completed
13 days until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

October 14, 2008

Completed
1 day until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

October 15, 2008

Completed
8 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

June 1, 2009

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

June 1, 2009

Completed
Last Updated

September 21, 2009

Status Verified

September 1, 2009

Enrollment Period

8 months

First QC Date

October 14, 2008

Last Update Submit

September 18, 2009

Conditions

Keywords

patient warmingconvective warmingconductive warmingintraoperative normothermiaaccidental hypothermiaintraoperative hypothermia

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Area under the standardized "core temperature * time" curve

    intraoperatively

Secondary Outcomes (1)

  • Area under "mean skin temperature * time" curve

    intraoperatively

Study Arms (2)

Forced Air

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Warming with forced air (BairHugger)

Device: Patient Warming with conductive / convective warming

Conductive Warming

EXPERIMENTAL

Warming with the conductive device (HotDog)

Device: Patient Warming with conductive / convective warming

Interventions

Warming device set to maximum (43 °C)

Conductive WarmingForced Air

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 90 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • The patients must have normal weight (20-30 BMI), the duration of surgery should last between 3 - 4 hours.

You may not qualify if:

  • Severe peripheral artery disease in the warmed extremity

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Medical University of Vienna

Vienna, Vienna, 1090, Austria

Location

Related Publications (1)

  • Brandt S, Oguz R, Huttner H, Waglechner G, Chiari A, Greif R, Kurz A, Kimberger O. Resistive-polymer versus forced-air warming: comparable efficacy in orthopedic patients. Anesth Analg. 2010 Mar 1;110(3):834-8. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181cb3f5f. Epub 2009 Dec 30.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Hypothermia

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Body Temperature ChangesSigns and SymptomsPathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Study Officials

  • Oliver Kimberger, M.D.

    Medical University of Vienna

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 3
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
PARTICIPANT
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

October 14, 2008

First Posted

October 15, 2008

Study Start

October 1, 2008

Primary Completion

June 1, 2009

Study Completion

June 1, 2009

Last Updated

September 21, 2009

Record last verified: 2009-09

Locations