ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03328182Updated Jul 5, 2019Results posted

Assessment of an Oral Endotracheal Subglottic Tube Holder

An interventional study of New oral endotracheal tube holder in Intubation, sponsored by Hollister Incorporated. Completed at 4 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-07-05.

Sponsored by Hollister Incorporated · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
34
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study is designed to assess the acceptability and usability of a new Endotracheal Tube (ET) holding device for an orally intubated patient.

Read the detailed description

This is a multiple site prospective assessment of the study product in ICU settings. The study is comprised of each intubated subject wearing one study product until the device either needs to be changed or is no longer required by the subject. The study product is designed to hold a standard or subglottic ET tube and help reduce the potential for occlusion (blockage) of the tube.

02

Conditions studied

  • Intubation
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Hollister Incorporated is the lead sponsor of 16 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Is 18 years of age or older and require oral tracheal intubation with subglottic ET tube size 6.0-8.0mm
  2. Requires the use of a bite block per the hospital's standard of care
  3. Has intact skin on and around application site, including cheeks and lips
  4. Oral cavity is free of open sores, ulcers, wounds, and lesions
  5. Subject or Legal Authorized representative (LAR) able to provide for the study
  6. Is qualified to participate in the opinion of the Investigator, or designee

Exclusion criteria

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

  1. Has actual or perceived loose teeth, is without teeth, or is unable to wear upper dentures
  2. Has facial hair that interferes with the adhesion of the skin barrier pads
  3. Has a skin disease or condition, or damaged skin on the application site, such as psoriasis, eczema, atopic dermatitis, active cancer, sores, sunburns, scars, moles
  4. Has a medical condition, surgery or a procedure that prevents the proper application of the device, including placement of the neck strap.
  5. Has a known or stated allergy to adhesives
  6. Currently is participating in any clinical study which may affect the performance of the device
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Clinically significant

Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
34 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    New oral endotracheal tube holder

    Single Study Product Arm

    Device: New oral endotracheal tube holder

Interventions

  • DeviceNew oral endotracheal tube holder

    The single arm study product is designed to hold a standard or subglottic ET tube.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Overall Acceptability With Study Product

    The overall acceptability relating to general experience with the study product during use will be rated with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1=Very Unacceptable to 5=Very Acceptable

    Time frame: At product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product)

  2. Usability of Study Product

    The usability of the study product at application and at removal.

    Time frame: At application and product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product)

07

Results

Posted Jul 5, 2019

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneNew Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
Started34
Completed30
Not completed4
Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject1
Withdrew: Protocol violation2
Withdrew: No product evaluated1

Outcome measures

PrimaryOverall Acceptability With Study Product

The overall acceptability relating to general experience with the study product during use will be rated with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1=Very Unacceptable to 5=Very Acceptable

Time frame:
At product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product)
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Overall Acceptability With Study Product
ParticipantsNew Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
Very Acceptable13
Acceptable15
Neither acceptable nor acceptable0
Unacceptable2
Very Unacceptable0
PrimaryUsability of Study Product

The usability of the study product at application and at removal.

Time frame:
At application and product removal (maximum 29 days of patient wearing product)
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Usability of Study Product
ParticipantsNew Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
Ease of application — Very easy to apply20
Ease of application — Easy to apply8
Ease of application — Neither easy nor difficult to apply1
Ease of application — Difficult to apply1
Ease of application — Very difficult to apply0
Ease of application — Not Applicable0
Ease of removal — Very easy to apply18
Ease of removal — Easy to apply7
Ease of removal — Neither easy nor difficult to apply2
Ease of removal — Difficult to apply1
Ease of removal — Very difficult to apply0
Ease of removal — Not Applicable2

Adverse events

Collected over maximum 29 days of patient wearing product. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder1/30 (3.3%)3/30 (10%)1/30 (3.3%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventNew Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
DeathInfections and infestations1/30
Oral BleedingGeneral disorders1/30
Loose teethGeneral disorders1/30
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventNew Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
Skin lesionSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders1/30

Baseline characteristics

Enrolled patients found eligible per Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
Mean52.5 (21 to 84)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
Female13
Male17
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)New Oral Endotracheal Tube Holder
United States30
08

Study locations

4 sites
  • Community Regional Medical Center
    Fresno, California 93701, United States
  • Legacy Mount Hood Medical Center
    Gresham, Oregon 97030, United States
  • Legacy Good Samaritan Medical Center
    Portland, Oregon 97210, United States
  • Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center
    Portland, Oregon 97227, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Buckley JC, Brown AP, Shin JS, Rogers KM, Hoftman NN. A Comparison of the Haider Tube-Guard(R) Endotracheal Tube Holder Versus Adhesive Tape to Determine if This Novel Device Can Reduce Endotracheal Tube Movement and Prevent Unplanned Extubation. Anesth Analg. 2016 May;122(5):1439-43. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001222. PubMed 26983051 ↗
  • Mohammed, H & Hassan, M. (2015). Endotracheal tube securements: Effectiveness of three techniques among orally intubated patients. Egyptian Journal of Chest Diseases and Tuberculosis 64:183-196

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 5, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03328182
Lead sponsor
Hollister Incorporated
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 1, 2017
Start date
Oct 23, 2017
Primary completion
Jun 8, 2018
Completion
Jun 15, 2018
Results posted
Jul 5, 2019
Last update
Jul 5, 2019

Study contacts

Laura Vander Werff, MD
principal investigator · Legacy Mount Hood Medical Center
Brian Young, MD
principal investigator · 1. Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center 2. Legacy Good Samaritan Medical Center
Arash Afshinnik, MD
principal investigator · Community Regional Medical Center

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion