scholarly journals Identifying The Primary Outcome For A Randomised Controlled Trial In Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Role of A Discrete Choice Experiment

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. A537
Author(s):  
E Stamuli ◽  
D Torgerson ◽  
M Northgraves ◽  
S Ronaldson ◽  
L Cherry
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Discrete Choice Experiment ◽  
Discrete Choice ◽  
Choice Experiment ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Effect of nurse-led care on outcomes in patients with ACPA/RF-positive rheumatoid arthritis with active disease undergoing treat-to-target: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

RMD Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e001627
Author(s):  
Juliana Rachel Hoeper ◽  
Jan Zeidler ◽  
Sara Eileen Meyer ◽  
Georg Gauler ◽  
Patricia Steffens-Korbanka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Treat To Target ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Active Disease

ObjectiveTo determine the non-inferiority of nurse-led care (NLC) in patients with anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive and/or rheumatoid factor (RF)-positive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with active disease who are starting disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy, following treat-to-target (T2T) recommendations.MethodsA multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial was conducted to assess clinical effectiveness, anxiety, depression and patient satisfaction following a non-inferiority design. The participants were 224 adults with ACPA/RF-positive RA who were randomly assigned to either NLC or rheumatologist-led care (RLC). The primary outcome was the Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints measured with C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) assessed at baseline and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. A DAS28-CRP difference of 0.6 was set as the non-inferiority margin. Mean differences between the groups were assessed following per-protocol and intention-to-treat strategies.ResultsDemographic data and baseline characteristics of patients in the NLC group (n=111) were comparable to those of patients in the RLC group (n=113). The improvement in disease activity (change in DAS28-CRP, primary outcome) over the course of 12 months was significant in both groups (p<0.001). No significant differences were observed between the NLC and RLC groups (p=0.317). Non-inferiority of NLC was shown for the primary outcome and all secondary outcomes.ConclusionThis study supported the non-inferiority of NLC in managing T2T and follow-up care of patients with RA with moderate to high disease activity and poor prognostic factors in addition to RLC.Trial registration numberDRKS00013055.

scholarly journals Oral insulin immunotherapy in children at risk for type 1 diabetes in a randomised controlled trial

Diabetologia ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Assfalg ◽  
Jan Knoop ◽  
Kristi L. Hoffman ◽  
Markus Pfirrmann ◽  
Jose Maria Zapardiel-Gonzalo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Response ◽  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Antibody Responses ◽  
Oral Insulin ◽  
Cell Responses ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Aims/hypothesis Oral administration of antigen can induce immunological tolerance. Insulin is a key autoantigen in childhood type 1 diabetes. Here, oral insulin was given as antigen-specific immunotherapy before the onset of autoimmunity in children from age 6 months to assess its safety and immune response actions on immunity and the gut microbiome. Methods A phase I/II randomised controlled trial was performed in a single clinical study centre in Germany. Participants were 44 islet autoantibody-negative children aged 6 months to 2.99 years who had a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes and a susceptible HLA DR4-DQ8-containing genotype. Children were randomised 1:1 to daily oral insulin (7.5 mg with dose escalation to 67.5 mg) or placebo for 12 months using a web-based computer system. The primary outcome was immune efficacy pre-specified as induction of antibody or T cell responses to insulin and measured in a central treatment-blinded laboratory. Results Randomisation was performed in 44 children. One child in the placebo group was withdrawn after the first study visit and data from 22 insulin-treated and 21 placebo-treated children were analysed. Oral insulin was well tolerated with no changes in metabolic variables. Immune responses to insulin were observed in children who received both insulin (54.5%) and placebo (66.7%), and the trial did not demonstrate an effect on its primary outcome (p = 0.54). In exploratory analyses, there was preliminary evidence that the immune response and gut microbiome were modified by the INS genotype Among children with the type 1 diabetes-susceptible INS genotype (n = 22), antibody responses to insulin were more frequent in insulin-treated (72.7%) as compared with placebo-treated children (18.2%; p = 0.03). T cell responses to insulin were modified by treatment-independent inflammatory episodes. Conclusions/interpretation The study demonstrated that oral insulin immunotherapy in young genetically at-risk children was safe, but was not associated with an immune response as predefined in the trial primary outcome. Exploratory analyses suggested that antibody responses to oral insulin may occur in children with a susceptible INS genotype, and that inflammatory episodes may promote the activation of insulin-responsive T cells. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02547519 Funding The main funding source was the German Center for Diabetes Research (DZD e.V.) Graphical abstract

scholarly journals Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention, a peer led physical activity program for adolescent girls: results of a cluster randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell Jago ◽  
Byron Tibbitts ◽  
Kathryn Willis ◽  
Emily Sanderson ◽  
Rebecca Kandiyali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Physical activity is associated with improved health. Girls are less active than boys. Pilot work showed that a peer-led physical activity intervention called PLAN-A was a promising method of increasing physical activity in secondary school age girls. This study examined the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention. Methods We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial with Year 9 (13–14 year old) girls recruited from 20 secondary schools. Schools were randomly assigned to the PLAN-A intervention or a non-intervention control group after baseline data collection. Girls nominated students to be peer leaders. The top 18 % of girls nominated by their peers in intervention schools received three days of training designed to prepare them to support physical activity. Data were collected at two time points, baseline (T0) and 5–6 months post-intervention (T1). Participants wore an accelerometer for seven days to assess the primary outcome of mean weekday minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Multivariable mixed effects linear regression was used to estimate differences in the primary outcome between the two arms on an Intention-to-Treat (ITT) basis. Resource use and quality of life were measured and a within trial economic evaluation from a public sector perspective was conducted. Results A total of 1558 girls were recruited to the study. At T0, girls in both arms engaged in an average of 51 min of MVPA per weekday. The adjusted mean difference in weekday MVPA at T1 was − 2.84 min per day (95 % CI = -5.94 to 0.25) indicating a slightly larger decline in weekday MVPA in the intervention group. Results were broadly consistent when repeated using a multiple imputation approach and for pre-specified secondary outcomes and sub-groups. The mean cost of the PLAN-A intervention was £2817 per school, equivalent to £31 per girl. Economic analyses indicated that PLAN-A did not lead to demonstrable cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per unit change in QALY. Conclusions This study has shown that the PLAN-A intervention did not result in higher levels of weekday MVPA or associated secondary outcomes among Year 9 girls. The PLAN-A intervention should not be disseminated as a public health strategy. Trial registration ISRCTN14539759–31 May, 2018.

scholarly journals Clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves in rheumatoid arthritis (A-GLOVES): randomised controlled trial with economic analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Hammond ◽  
Yeliz Prior ◽  
Sarah Cotterill ◽  
Chris Sutton ◽  
Elizabeth Camacho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Recent Change ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Dominant Hand ◽  
Night Time ◽  
Hand Pain ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Arthritis (or compression) gloves are widely prescribed to people with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of hand arthritis. They are prescribed for daytime wear to reduce hand pain and improve hand function, and/or night-time wear to reduce pain, improve sleep and reduce morning stiffness. However, evidence for their effectiveness is limited. The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves compared to placebo gloves on hand pain, stiffness and function in people with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent hand pain. Methods A parallel randomised controlled trial, in adults (≥ 18 years) with rheumatoid or undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis at 16 National Health Service sites in the UK. Patients with persistent hand pain affecting function and/or sleep were eligible. Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by recent change (or not) in medication, using permuted blocks of random sizes. Three-quarter-finger length arthritis gloves (Isotoner®: applying 23-32 mmHg pressure) (intervention) were compared to loose-fitting placebo gloves (Jobskin® classic: providing no/minimal pressure) (control). Both gloves (considered to have similar thermal qualities) were provided by occupational therapists. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded; clinicians were not. The primary outcome was dominant hand pain on activity (0–10) at 12 weeks, analysed using linear regression and intention to treat principles. Results Two hundred six participants were randomly assigned (103 per arm) and 163 (84 intervention: 79 control) completed 12-week follow-up. Hand pain improved by 1.0 (intervention) and 1.2 (control), an adjusted mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI: − 0.47 to 0.67; p = 0.72). Adverse events were reported by 51% of intervention and 36% of control group participants; with 6 and 7% respectively, discontinuing glove wear. Provision of arthritis gloves cost £129, with no additional benefit. Conclusion The trial provides evidence of no clinically important effect of arthritis gloves on any of the trial outcomes (hand pain, function and stiffness) and arthritis gloves are not cost-effective. The clinical and cost-effectiveness results support ceasing provision of arthritis gloves in routine clinical practice. Funding: National Institute for Health Research. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN25892131; Registered 05/09/2016: retrospectively registered.

scholarly journals Computerised cognitive–behavioural therapy for adults with intellectual disability: randomised controlled trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 211 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Cooney ◽  
Catherine Jackman ◽  
David Coyle ◽  
Gary O'Reilly
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundDespite the evidence base for computer-assisted cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) in the general population, it has not yet been adapted for use with adults who have an intellectual disability.AimsTo evaluate the utility of a CBT computer game for adults who have an intellectual disability.MethodA 2 × 3 (group × time) randomised controlled trial design was used. Fifty-two adults with mild to moderate intellectual disability and anxiety or depression were randomly allocated to two groups: computerised CBT (cCBT) or psychiatric treatment as usual (TAU), and assessed at pre-treatment, post-treatment and 3-month follow-up. Forty-nine participants were included in the final analysis.ResultsA significant group x time interaction was observed on the primary outcome measure of anxiety (Glasgow Anxiety Scale for people with an Intellectual Disability), favouring cCBT over TAU, but not on the primary outcome measure of depression (Glasgow Depression Scale for people with a Learning Disability). A medium effect size for anxiety symptoms was observed at post-treatment and a large effect size was observed after follow-up. Reliability of Change Indices indicated that the intervention produced clinically significant change in the cCBT group in comparison with TAU.ConclusionsAs the first application of cCBT for adults with intellectual disability, this intervention appears to be a useful treatment option to reduce anxiety symptoms in this population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document