Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 12:55 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-03 @ 5:58 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT04915261
Status:
RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2025-12-15
First Post:
2021-05-31
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
A Randomized Trial of Lenient Versus Strict Arm Instruction Post Cardiac Device Surgery
Sponsor:
Ottawa Heart Institute Research Corporation
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
A Randomized Trial of Lenient Versus Strict Arm Instruction Post Cardiac Device Surgery - LENIENT
Status:
RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2025-12
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
LENIENT
Brief Summary:
The purpose and objectives of this study is to investigate whether reducing the existing arm restrictions on patients who receive Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIED) will result in an improved patient experience post operatively and reduce complication rates. There are multiple and varied arm restriction instructions given to patients receiving CIED's with limited universally accepted protocols or advice on restrictions for patients following surgery.
Restrictions such as arm immobilization, showering and weight lifting, in addition to contradictory advice between various hospitals and physicians, can negatively affect patient quality of life and increase patient anxiety with no current evidence for benefit. A cluster cross over randomized trial has been designed to test the comparative effectiveness of lenient vs strict arm restrictions for all patients receiving implantable devices.
Instructions within both arms of this study are considered within reasonable practice in Canada.
All arm restriction instructions and parameters will be embedded within EPIC, nurses will teach the restriction in addition they will be provide to the patients via printed EPIC discharge summaries. Further links will be embedded in the After Visit Summary (AFS) printouts and my Chart for patients in EPIC. These instructions will be changed every 8 months, as per the crossover design of the trial. Additionally, both arms will utilize interactive voice recognition (IVR) to provide patients with further reminders and instruction on arm restrictions.
All patients are given standard of care instructions for follow up and complication assessment through the investigators' device clinic and 24/7 on call nursing program.
Restrictions such as arm immobilization, showering and weight lifting, in addition to contradictory advice between various hospitals and physicians, can negatively affect patient quality of life and increase patient anxiety with no current evidence for benefit. A cluster cross over randomized trial has been designed to test the comparative effectiveness of lenient vs strict arm restrictions for all patients receiving implantable devices.
Instructions within both arms of this study are considered within reasonable practice in Canada.
All arm restriction instructions and parameters will be embedded within EPIC, nurses will teach the restriction in addition they will be provide to the patients via printed EPIC discharge summaries. Further links will be embedded in the After Visit Summary (AFS) printouts and my Chart for patients in EPIC. These instructions will be changed every 8 months, as per the crossover design of the trial. Additionally, both arms will utilize interactive voice recognition (IVR) to provide patients with further reminders and instruction on arm restrictions.
All patients are given standard of care instructions for follow up and complication assessment through the investigators' device clinic and 24/7 on call nursing program.
Detailed Description:
The purpose and objectives of this study is to investigate whether reducing the existing restrictions on patients post CIED will result in an improved patient experience post operatively and reduce complication rates. Results from this study will create standardized, postoperative arm restriction recommendations more uniform between various hospitals.
Hypothesis: The investigators hypothesize that outcomes of the post CIED implanted patients given lenient arm restriction will be non-inferior to those with prolonged arm restriction at reducing a combined primary endpoint of lead dislodgement, device infection, clinically significant pocket hematoma, upper limb DVT and frozen shoulder.
Clinical relevance: The investigators anticipate that patients with minimal (lenient) arm restriction will have similar postoperative complication rates compared to the prolonged arm restriction. Should this hypothesis be proven, this will greatly improve patient quality of life post CIED with less stringent restrictions.
Hypothesis: The investigators hypothesize that outcomes of the post CIED implanted patients given lenient arm restriction will be non-inferior to those with prolonged arm restriction at reducing a combined primary endpoint of lead dislodgement, device infection, clinically significant pocket hematoma, upper limb DVT and frozen shoulder.
Clinical relevance: The investigators anticipate that patients with minimal (lenient) arm restriction will have similar postoperative complication rates compared to the prolonged arm restriction. Should this hypothesis be proven, this will greatly improve patient quality of life post CIED with less stringent restrictions.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: