Is Oregon study still on (prehospital cardiac drugs)?

mycrofft

mycrofft

Still crazy but elsewhere
Messages
11,322
Reaction score
48
Points
48
Look up resuscitation outcomes consortium, that is what OHSU is taking part in.
 
Did that. It's three year study, no report yet. No apparent news articles either, like "Study Halted".
 
You're looking for the ALPs study, and I don't know about OR, but it is still being run by the ROC at least as of a couple of months ago.
 
I read three articles. I was curious if it had been cancelled yet. We have members working up there.
 
EpiEMS said:
Why's that?
Click to expand...

Full disclosure I haven't seen anything that shows the actual protocol for the study. But it's a placebo study, if it were just Amio/Lido no problem, but I'm surprised an IRB let it go through with a placebo arm. :censored::censored::censored::censored: the IRB's here throw a fit over minor :censored::censored::censored::censored: when a placebo is involved...I can't imagine the strokes I would cause if I tried to put forth a placebo trial involving cardiac arrest patients.
 
I visit up there and I'm getting another tag for my medical alert that says no placebos.
 
Dwindlin said:
Full disclosure I haven't seen anything that shows the actual protocol for the study. But it's a placebo study, if it were just Amio/Lido no problem, but I'm surprised an IRB let it go through with a placebo arm. :censored::censored::censored::censored: the IRB's here throw a fit over minor :censored::censored::censored::censored: when a placebo is involved...I can't imagine the strokes I would cause if I tried to put forth a placebo trial involving cardiac arrest patients.
Click to expand...

I was gonna say. But then again, most of the ACLS drugs really do show no benefit, at least, so says Rogue Medic (and the ACLS guidelines, frankly).
 
EpiEMS said:
I was gonna say. But then again, most of the ACLS drugs really do show no benefit, at least, so says Rogue Medic (and the ACLS guidelines, frankly).
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree with you, but IRBs (in my experience anyways) are hyper-sensitive to ethical/libility issues. Valid or not, giving a placebo to a victim of cardiac arrest could open a HUGE can of worms from an ethical/liability stand point.
 
Dwindlin said:
Absolutely agree with you, but IRBs (in my experience anyways) are hyper-sensitive to ethical/libility issues. Valid or not, giving a placebo to a victim of cardiac arrest could open a HUGE can of worms from an ethical/liability stand point.
Click to expand...

True, but then you can also raise the question of the ethics of pushing drugs that have actually shown a decrease in successful outcomes.

It all comes down to perception...
 
The concept to understand is clinical equipoise. It's, like, humungous when it comes to ACLS. Given the available data, it is UNETHICAL to use almost any drug in cardiac arrest outside of a clinical trial at this point.
 
kindofafireguy said:
True, but then you can also raise the question of the ethics of pushing drugs that have actually shown a decrease in successful outcomes.

It all comes down to perception...
Click to expand...

medicsb said:
The concept to understand is clinical equipoise. It's, like, humungous when it comes to ACLS. Given the available data, it is UNETHICAL to use almost any drug in cardiac arrest outside of a clinical trial at this point.
Click to expand...

Apparently you all work with more receptive IRBs than I do. . .
 
medicsb said:
The concept to understand is clinical equipoise. It's, like, humungous when it comes to ACLS. Given the available data, it is UNETHICAL to use almost any drug in cardiac arrest outside of a clinical trial at this point.
Click to expand...

Hear, hear!
 
medicsb said:
The concept to understand is clinical equipoise. It's, like, humungous when it comes to ACLS. Given the available data, it is UNETHICAL to use almost any drug in cardiac arrest outside of a clinical trial at this point.
Click to expand...

ALPS is still going strong. Our service (up in Canada) is about to start enrolling patients any day now, and several neighbouring services are on board as well.

As for ethical or legal approval, I think the uncertainty here points to the real problem: we don't have ANY evidence to show our standard of care (amio/lidocaine) has ANY survival benefit. Is the problem with a placebo, or IRBs, or that we can't show that what we do is helpful?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top