Wildiers 2009.
Methods | Open‐label randomised phase III randomised multi‐centre trial | |
Participants | 440 patients randomised: 333 enrolled; remainder excluded because no informed consent or not met inclusion criteria. 333 patients allocated to Group I (115 patients); Group 2 (112 patients) or Group 3 (106 patients). Mean age: Group 1 = 70.7 years Group 2 = 74.3 years Group 3 = 72.6 years Gender: approximately 50:50 in all three groups All had cancer except 5 in Group 1, 7 in Group 2 and 5 in Group 3. |
|
Interventions | Randomly allocated to: Group 1: Atropine 0.5 mg subcutaneous bolus, followed by 3 mg/24 hours Group 2: Scopolamine (hyoscine hydrobromide) 0.25 mg subcutaneous bolus, followed by 1.5 mg/24 hours Group 3: Hyoscine butylbromide 20 mg subcutaneous bolus, followed by 60 mg/24 hours If death rattle persisted at score of 2 or 3 after 12 hours, starting bolus dose of same drug readministered and maintenance dose doubled. |
|
Outcomes | Nurse assessment at 30 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours and every 24 hours until death. Death rattle intensity scored using scale of 0‐3: 0 = not audible; 1 = only audible near the patient; 2 = clearly audible at the end of the patient's bed in a quiet room; 3 = clearly audible at a distance of about 9.5m in a quiet room. At one hour: no significant difference in effectiveness between the three groups: Group 1 (atropine): 42% Group 2 (scopolamine): 37% Group 3 (hyoscine butylbromide): 42%. Steady increase in effectiveness up to 24 hours, from 70% of patients at start of therapy to 30% at 24 hours had death rattle intensity scores of 2 or 3. |
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Stratified per centre |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Closed envelope system |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Outcomes fully reported. |
Incomplete outcome data addressed | Unclear risk | Randomisation took place ahead of consent and checking against inclusion criteria ‐ analysis not carried out on basis of intention to treat |
Blinding | High risk | Open label |