View clinical trials related to Cerebral Hemorrhage.
Filter by:Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is the most common neuromonitoring modality used in neurocritical care units (NCCU) around the world. Uncertainties remain around intracranial pressure monitoring both in traumatic and non-traumatic brain injury, and variation in clinical practice of intracranial pressure monitoring exists between neurocritical care units. The objectives of the study will explore intracranial pressure monitoring variation in practice to prioritise uncertainties in the clinical management of critical care patients with acute brain injury and support further collaborative hypotheses-based prospective studies.
The clinical evidence shows that patients with a first episode of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) are increasingly old and with greater comorbidity with a recognized impact over mortality. The prediction of the outcome of ICH is not only crucial in the emergin attention to identify those patients with favorable criteria that can benefit from possible treatments; but also after hospital discharge, in primary care where the prediction should facilitate the organization and management of a wide variety of resources: familiar, health and social welfare. Even though there are different scales that predict mortality, these are not sufficiently useful in choosing a treatment or do not provide sufficient data to the family to decide. Due to the characteristics of the population with ICH described in these works, it seems useful to propose a prognostic index (ICHCat) to identify the variables associated to its incidence and mortality and that, in addition, to make adjustments in the comparisons of the survival between different series of patients or different treatment modalities in primary care.
This study evaluates the validity of an intravascular continuous glucose monitoring microdialysis probe, and compares the values to routinely inserted cerebral glucose microdialysis to evaluate the hypothesised relationship between intracranial and intravascular glucose levels.
Patients who experience lung injury are often placed on a ventilator to help them heal; however, if the ventilator volume settings are too high, it can cause additional lung injury. It is proven that using lower ventilator volume settings improves outcomes. In patients with acute brain injury, it is proven that maintaining a normal partial pressure of carbon dioxide in the arterial blood improves outcomes. Mechanical ventilator settings with higher volumes and higher breathing rates are sometimes required to maintain a normal partial pressure of carbon dioxide. These 2 goals of mechanical ventilation, using lower volumes to prevent additional lung injury but maintaining a normal partial pressure of carbon dioxide, are both important for patients with acute brain injury. The investigators have designed a computerized ventilator protocol in iCentra that matches the current standard of care for mechanical ventilation of patients with acute brain injury by targeting a normal partial pressure of carbon dioxide with the lowest ventilator volume required. This is a quality improvement study with the purpose of observing and measuring the effects of implementation of a standard of care mechanical ventilation protocol for patients with acute brain injury in the iCentra electronic medical record system at Intermountain Medical Center. We hypothesize that implementation of a standardized neuro lung protective ventilation protocol will be feasible, will achieve a target normal partial pressure of carbon dioxide, will decrease tidal volumes toward the target 6 mL/kg predicted body weight, and will improve outcomes.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrate a substantial benefit from oral anticoagulant drugs for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). However, these RCTs excluded patients with prior intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH). Therefore, guidelines are unable to recommend whether oral anticoagulant drugs, in particular non-vitamin K antagonist (called direct OAC) - can be used for patients with AF after an intracerebral haemorrhage. Roughly 30% of adults with ICH have AF but in 2017 it remains unclear whether they should start oral anticoagulant drugs, be treated with left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) or avoid anticoagulation and LAAC.
Continued uncertainty exists over benefits of early intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering in acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), related to the non-significant primary outcomes, patient selection, and discordant results of INTERACT2 and ATACH-II. We designed INTERACT3 to determine the effectiveness of a goal-directed care bundle of active management (intensive BP lowering, glycemic control, treatment of pyrexia and reversal of anticoagulation) vs. usual care in ICH. INTERACT3 is a large-scale pragmatic clinical trial to provide reliable evidence over the effectiveness of a widely applicable goal-directed care bundle in acute ICH.
This study evaluates safety and efficacy of analgesia-first minimal sedation as an early antihypertensive treatment for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. The analgesia-first minimal sedation strategy relies on the remifentanil-mediated alleviation of pain-induced stress response and the antisympathetic activity of dexmedetomidine to restore the elevated blood pressure to normal level in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. This strategy allows rapid stabilization of blood pressure, and its use as a pre-treatment for patients on mechanical ventilation prior to painful procedures reduces blood pressure variability and thereby results in etiologic treatment. It is more effective in blood pressure control than conventional symptomatic antihypertensive treatment, reduces the incidence of early hematoma expansion and improves prognosis, ,lowers healthcare workers workload, increases patient adherence, and improves healthcare worker satisfaction.
The study evaluates the effects of antithrombotic drugs (anticoagulant drugs or antiplatelet drugs) for prevention of ischaemic events in patients With recent intracerebral haemorrhage.
Intracerebral hemorrhage [ICH] is the most feared sub-type of stroke, associated with a high mortality rate up to 50% and thus leaving large proportions of patients in functionally dependent states. In recent years randomized trials have failed to provide an effective intervention to improve functional outcome in ICH. Therefore, evidence regarding acute therapeutic interventions as well as secondary treatment approaches is still limited. The present monocentric longitudinal study on spontaneous ICH patients is based on a prospective institutional stroke registry including all hemorrhagic stroke patients treated at a German University Hospital, Department of Neurology, over a 10 year time frame (2006-2015). The main aim of this investigation, besides analyses of epidemiological aspects, will be (i) to identify possible treatment targets influencing functional outcome, and (ii) to evaluate existing therapeutic strategies in ICH care.
A Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) is a questionnaire that asks patients for their views on their own health or the impact of healthcare they have received on their health and quality of life (RCN, 2011). The benefit of PROMS is that they gather information from the patient's perspective, which offers great potential to improve the quality and outcomes of health services (Department of Health 2011). There is a PROM (the PROMIS-10 Global Health) and a number of extra questions that are recommended for use in people who have had a stroke by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, but the best way of delivering these questions for stroke survivors is unknown. At present, the NHS in England, Scotland and Wales are required to offer every stroke survivors a 6 month post stroke follow-up appointment. Currently, the information collected at the 6 month review is not from the patient's perspective and the best method of collecting this information has not been established. The Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP) which is led by the Royal College of Physicians in London promote the 6 month follow-up assessment. SSNAP recognise that currently 4 different methods of 6 month follow-up appointment occur. The current methods in use are face-to-face assessment, telephone interview, online questionnaire or postal questionnaire. The aim of this research is to understand if there is a difference between these 4 methods of delivering these questions in people who have had a stroke. As part of the 6 month review this research study will assess the response rate for 15 Patient Reported Health Status questions across the 4 recognised methods of delivery; - Face-to-Face - Telephone - Online - Post To conduct this research study a sample of 808 stroke survivors will be asked to take part in the research. From these 808 people, 202 participants will be randomly assigned to each method of administration (Face-to-Face Interview, Telephone Interview, Postal Questionnaire and Online Questionnaire). The questionnaires received by the research team will not record any personally identifiable information. The data will then be utilised by the researchers for statistical analysis in order to identify, which method of the 4 methods of administration, under investigation, is the most acceptable for stroke survivors. The conclusions of this research will inform the roll-out of the most appropriate method of delivering the 6 month stroke follow-up review for stroke survivors.