Skip to content

Supraglottic Airway for Resuscitation Trial

Comparing Two Multicomponent Strategies To Promote Supraglottic Airway Implementation During Neonatal Resuscitation

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07150923
Acronym
SUGAR
Enrollment
36503
Registered
2025-09-02
Start date
2026-01-01
Completion date
2029-09-01
Last updated
2026-02-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Delivery Room Resuscitation, Implementation Research, Infant, Newborn, Laryngeal Mask Airways, Neonatal Resuscitation, Positive Pressure Ventilation, Supraglottic Airway

Keywords

Neonatal Resuscitation, Delivery Room Resuscitation, Positive pressure ventilation, Supraglottic Airway, Laryngeal Mask Airways, Implementation Research, Infant, Newborn

Brief summary

This is a hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation parallel cluster randomized superiority trial designed to compare two strategies to promote early supraglottic airway (SA) rescue during neonatal resuscitation, with a focus on implementation outcomes.

Detailed description

Each year, approximately 3.8 million infants are born in the United States, and up to 10% require resuscitation to establish breathing at birth. Positive pressure ventilation (PPV) is the most important intervention during neonatal resuscitation and is most often delivered via facemask. However, facemask ventilation can be technically challenging, and difficulties with mask seal, airway positioning, and obstruction frequently lead to ventilation failure. Such delays prolong life-threatening asphyxia and increase the risk of morbidity and mortality. The supraglottic airway (SA) is an FDA-approved, widely available, and evidence-based alternative airway device for delivering PPV. It is safe, easy to use, and recommended in international neonatal resuscitation guidelines as an option when facemask ventilation is ineffective or endotracheal intubation is unsuccessful or not feasible. Despite strong supporting evidence, uptake of SA use in neonatal resuscitation remains low. A recent national survey of more than 5,000 Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) providers found that only 12% had ever used an SA. Reported barriers to adoption included limited clinical experience, insufficient training opportunities, preference for alternative approaches, lack of availability of SA devices in the delivery room, and limited awareness of supporting evidence. The Supraglottic Airway for Resuscitation (SUGAR) Trial is designed to address the critical evidence-to-practice gap by evaluating strategies to increase the use of supraglottic airways (SA) during neonatal resuscitation. This trial will assess the comparative effectiveness of two implementation strategies while examining the contextual factors that influence their success, with the goal of identifying barriers and facilitators to sustainable SA adoption across diverse clinical settings. By testing approaches to integrate SA use into routine neonatal resuscitation, the study aims to improve both implementation and clinical outcomes, ultimately reducing the risk of prolonged asphyxia and enhancing survival and health for newborns in the delivery room.

Interventions

OTHEREnhanced Standard of Care ("Enhanced")

Enhanced Standard of Care ("Enhanced") will include: Educational Materials and Outreach, Local Champions, Train the Trainer, Local Simulation Training, and SA Starter Packs.

OTHEREnhanced Standard of Care ("Enhanced-Plus")

Enhanced Standard of Care ("Enhanced-Plus") will include: Educational Materials and Outreach, Local Champions, Train the Trainer, Local Simulation Training, SA Starter Packs, and three additional intensive external facilitation components.

Sponsors

Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Lead SponsorOTHER
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
CollaboratorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Hybrid type 3 effectiveness-implementation parallel cluster randomized superiority trial

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
0 Days to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Population 1: Hospital Staff Population 1a: Clinical providers and administrators who complete study questionnaires Clinical provider 1a inclusion criteria: * Employed full-time by the hospital, affiliated practice, or affiliated university in a role that involves newborn resuscitation * Fluent in English Administrator 1a inclusion criteria * Oversee the care of newborns on a local level (e.g. nurse manager) or a hospital level (e.g. Chief Quality and Safety Officer) * Fluent in English Clinical provider and administrator exclusion 1a criteria: No

Exclusion criteria

Population 1b: Clinical providers who participate in qualitative interviews Clinical provider 1b inclusion criteria: * Employed full-time by the hospital, affiliated practice, or affiliated university in a role that involves newborn resuscitation * Fluent in English Clinical provider 1b

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Penetration of early SA rescueUp to 2 yearsProportion of eligible patients treated with SA as an early rescue device. Excludes SA after intubation attempt.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Initial adoption of early SA rescueUp to 2 yearsQuarters required to reach 10% penetration of SA use among eligible patients at hospital level
Sustainment of early SA rescueUp to 1 yearProportion of SA use among eligible patients per quarter examined using linear mixed effects model to quantitatively assess successful sustainment (slope of penetration proportion positive or not significantly different than 0) versus decay (slope of penetration negative) post-implementation.

Countries

United States

Contacts

CONTACTElizabeth E Foglia, MD, MSCE
foglia@chop.edu215-590-1653
CONTACTChristopher P Bonafide, MD, MSCE
bonafide@chop.edu
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORElizabeth E Foglia, MD, MSCE

Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 28, 2026