scholarly journals Comparative effectiveness of individualised homeopathy and antibiotics in the treatment of bovine clinical mastitis: randomised controlled trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 182 (14) ◽  
pp. 407-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Keller ◽  
Albert Sundrum

Based on the widespread use of homeopathy in dairy farm practice when treating mastitis, a blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to assess the effectiveness of homeopathic treatment of clinical mastitis on four dairy farms. The study considered specific guidelines for RCTs as well as the basic principles of individualised homeopathy and involved 180 lactating dairy cows. Evaluation of cure rates was based on clinical investigation of the udder and on laboratory analysis of milk samples. In culture-positive cases, the antibiotic treatment provided suboptimal bacteriological cures (60–81 per cent) but was more effective than individualised homeopathy (33–43 per cent) whose effects appeared little different to those of placebos (45–47 per cent) (P≤0.05). On the cytological cure level, all three treatment methods were similarly ineffective: antibiotic being 2–21 per cent, individualised homeopathy 0–8 per cent and placebo 3–13 per cent (P≤0.05; P=0.13). Antibiotics, individualised homeopathy and placebo had similar effects on bacteriological and cytological cure in cases of culture-negative milk samples (P>0.4) and Escherichia coli infections (P=1.0). The study results implied that the effectiveness of individualised homeopathy does not go beyond a placebo effect and successful treatment is highly dependent on the specific mastitis pathogen. Thus, antimicrobial or alternative remedies used should be based on the bacterial culture of the milk sample.Trial registration numberNTP-ID: 00008011-1-9, Pre-results.

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. e015505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liesbeth M van Vliet ◽  
Sandra van Dulmen ◽  
Bram Thiel ◽  
Gerard W van Deelen ◽  
Stephanie Immerzeel ◽  
...  

IntroductionPlacebo effects (true biopsychological effects not attributable to the active ingredients of medical technical interventions) can be attributed to several mechanisms, such as expectancy manipulation and empathy manipulation elicited by a provider’s communication. So far, effects have primarily been shown in laboratory settings. The aim of this study is to determine the separate and combined effects of expectancy manipulation and empathy manipulation during preoperative and postoperative tonsillectomy analgesia care on clinical adult patients’ outcomes.Methods and analysisUsing a two-by-two randomised controlled trial, 128 adult tonsillectomy patients will be randomly assigned to one out of four conditions differing in the level of expectancy manipulation (standard vs enhanced) and empathy manipulation (standard vs enhanced). Day care ward nurses are trained to deliver the intervention, while patients are treated via the standard analgesia protocol and hospital routines. The primary outcome, perceived pain, is measured via hospital routine by a Numeric Rating Scale, and additional prehospitalisation, perihospitalisation and posthospitalisation questionnaires are completed (until day 3, ie, 2 days after the operation). The manipulation is checked using audio recordings of nurse–patient interactions.Ethics and disseminationAlthough communication is manipulated, the manipulations do not cross norms or values of acceptable behaviour. Standard medical care is provided. The ethical committee of the UMC Utrecht and the local OLVG hospital committee approved the study. Results will be published via (inter)national peer-reviewed journals and a lay publication.Trial registration numberNTR5994; Pre-results.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e028664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Songqiao Liu ◽  
Chen Yao ◽  
Junhua Zhang ◽  
Yi Yang ◽  
Haibo Qiu

IntroductionSepsis is a major challenge with high incidence and is associated with high mortality worldwide. Current management of sepsis remains mainly supportive except for treatment with antibiotics. Both basic research and clinical investigation have shown that the Chinese herbal-derived therapeutic Xuebijing (XBJ) injection is beneficial for patients with sepsis. However, the quality of evidence supporting the therapeutic use of XBJ in sepsis is limited. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the Efficacy of Xuebijing Injection for Sepsis, compared with a placebo, on the outcome of patients with sepsis in the intensive care unit (ICU).Methods and analysisIn this multicentre, blinded randomised controlled trial, we are recruiting a total of 1800 subjects who met Sepsis 3.0 criteria. Subjects will be randomised (1:1) to receive XBJ, every 12 hours for 5 days or a matching placebo and usual care. The primary outcome is 28 days all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes will be the improvement of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, the improvement of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality in ICU and duration of stay in the ICU. Investigators, participants and statisticians will be blinded to the allocated treatment.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by all ethics committees of the centres that will participate in this trial. The findings of the study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and present at conferences. Once this study is complete, the results of this trial may help provide evidence-based recommendations for complementary therapeutic options for patients with sepsis.Trial registration numberNCT03238742 and ChiCTR-IPR-17012713.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e044833
Author(s):  
Gabriel Silver ◽  
Yordanka Krastev ◽  
Miriam K Forbes ◽  
Brenton Hamdorf ◽  
Barry Lewis ◽  
...  

IntroductionPerfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a diverse group of compounds that have been used in hundreds of industrial applications and consumer products including aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) for many years. Multiple national and international health and environmental agencies have accepted that PFAS exposures are associated with numerous adverse health effects. Australian firefighters have been shown to have elevated levels of PFAS in their blood, specifically perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), due to the historical use of AFFF. While PFAS concentrations decline over time once the source of exposure has been removed, their potential adverse health effects are such that it would be prudent to develop an intervention to lower levels at a faster rate than occurs via natural elimination rates.Methods and analysisThis is a randomised controlled trial of current and former Australian firefighters in the Metropolitan Fire Brigade/Fire Rescue Victoria, and contractors, with previous occupational exposure to PFAS and baseline elevated PFOS levels. The study is investigating whether whole blood donation every 12 weeks or plasma donation every 6 weeks will significantly reduce PFAS levels, compared with a control group. We have used covariate-adaptive randomisation to balance participants’ sex and blood PFAS levels between the three groups and would consider a 25% reduction in serum PFOS and PFHxS levels to be potentially clinically significant after 12 months of whole blood or plasma donation. A secondary analysis of health biomarkers is being made of changes between screening and week 52 in all three groups.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number: 3855), final protocol V.2 dated 12 June 2019. Study results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences.Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000204145).


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e042953
Author(s):  
Martin John Connor ◽  
Taimur Tariq Shah ◽  
Katarzyna Smigielska ◽  
Emily Day ◽  
Johanna Sukumar ◽  
...  

IntroductionSurvival in men diagnosed with de novo synchronous metastatic prostate cancer has increased following the use of upfront systemic treatment, using chemotherapy and other novel androgen receptor targeted agents, in addition to standard androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Local cytoreductive and metastasis-directed interventions are hypothesised to confer additional survival benefit. In this setting, IP2-ATLANTA will explore progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes with the addition of sequential multimodal local and metastasis-directed treatments compared with standard care alone.MethodsA phase II, prospective, multicentre, three-arm randomised controlled trial incorporating an embedded feasibility pilot. All men with new histologically diagnosed, hormone-sensitive, metastatic prostate cancer, within 4 months of commencing ADT and of performance status 0 to 2 are eligible. Patients will be randomised to Control (standard of care (SOC)) OR Intervention 1 (minimally invasive ablative therapy to prostate±pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND)) OR Intervention 2 (cytoreductive radical prostatectomy±PLND OR prostate radiotherapy±pelvic lymph node radiotherapy (PLNRT)). Metastatic burden will be prespecified using the Chemohormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease (CHAARTED) definition. Men with low burden disease in intervention arms are eligible for metastasis-directed therapy, in the form of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) or surgery. Standard systemic therapy will be administered in all arms with ADT±upfront systemic chemotherapy or androgen receptor agents. Patients will be followed-up for a minimum of 2 years. Primary outcome: PFS. Secondary outcomes include predictive factors for PFS and overall survival; urinary, sexual and rectal side effects. Embedded feasibility sample size is 80, with 918 patients required in the main phase II component. Study recruitment commenced in April 2019, with planned follow-up completed by April 2024.Ethics and disseminationApproved by the Health Research Authority (HRA) Research Ethics Committee Wales-5 (19/WA0005). Study results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03763253; ISCRTN58401737


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e039981
Author(s):  
Maleea Denise Holbert ◽  
Roy M Kimble ◽  
Mark Chatfield ◽  
Bronwyn R Griffin

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of two acute burn dressings, Burnaid hydrogel dressing and plasticised polyvinylchloride film, on reducing acute pain scores in paediatric burn patients following appropriate first aid.DesignSingle-centre, superiority, two-arm, parallel-group, prospective randomised controlled trial.Participants and settingPaediatric patients (aged ≤16) presenting to the Emergency Department at the Queensland Children’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia, with an acute thermal burn were approached for participation in the trial from September 2017–September 2018.InterventionsPatients were randomised to receive either (1) Burnaid hydrogel dressing (intervention) or (2) plasticised polyvinylchloride film (Control) as an acute burn dressing.Primary and secondary outcomesObservational pain scores from nursing staff assessed 5 min post application of the randomised dressing, measured using the Face Legs Activity Cry and Consolability Scale was the primary outcome. Repeated measures of pain, stress and re-epithelialisation were also collected at follow-up dressing changes until 95% wound re-epithelialisation occurred.ResultsSeventy-two children were recruited and randomised (n=37 intervention; n=35 control). No significant between-group differences in nursing (mean difference: −0.1, 95% CI −0.7 to 0.5, p=0.72) or caregiver (MD: 1, 95% CI −8 to 11, p=0.78) observational pain scores were identified. Moreover, no significant differences in child self-report pain (MD: 0.3, 95% CI −1.7 to 2.2, p=0.78), heart rate (MD: −3, 95% CI −11 to 5, p=0.41), temperature (MD: 0.6, 95% CI −0.13 to 0.24, p=0.53), stress (geometric mean ratio: 1.53, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.53, p=0.10), or re-epithelialisation rates (MD: −1, 95% CI −3 to 1, p=0.26) were identified between the two groups.ConclusionsA clear benefit of Burnaid hydrogel dressing as an analgesic adjunct to first aid for the treatment of acute paediatric burns was not identified in this investigation.Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12617001274369).


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e044045
Author(s):  
Ben Colagiuri ◽  
Louise Sharpe ◽  
Zahava Ambarchi ◽  
Nick Glozier ◽  
Delwyn Bartlett ◽  
...  

IntroductionInsomnia is a prevalent sleep disorder that causes substantial personal and societal harm. There is evidence that placebo interventions can reduce insomnia symptoms, but this research has involved deceptively administering the placebo under the guise of a real medication (conventional placebo, CP), which has obvious ethical constraints. Open-label placebo (OLP) treatment, in which a placebo is administered with full disclosure that there are no active ingredients, has been proposed as a method of using the placebo effect ethically, but the efficacy and acceptability of OLP for insomnia is currently unknown.Methods and analysisThis study uses a cohort multiple randomised controlled trial design to compare OLP, CP and no treatment for insomnia. Two-hundred and sixty-seven participants with self-reported insomnia symptoms (Insomnia Severity Index, ISI ≥10) will be recruited into an observational study and have their sleep monitored over a 2-week period. Participants will then be randomised to one of three groups: invite to OLP, invite to CP described deceptively as a new pharmacological agent, or no invite/observational control. Those in OLP and CP accepting the invite receive identical placebos for a 2-week treatment period while sleep is monitored in all participants. The primary outcome is ISI at the end of the treatment period. Secondary outcomes include treatment uptake and clinically significant response rates, objective and subjective sleep parameters, fatigue, mood, expectancy, treatment satisfaction and side effects. Predictors of uptake and responses to OLP and CP will be explored.Ethics and disseminationThe trial has been approved by The University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee. Written informed consent is obtained from every participant. OLP and CP participants accepting the invite undergo an additional consent process. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed conference proceedings and publications.Trial registration numberACTRN12620001080910.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e019142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Jolly ◽  
Jenny Ingram ◽  
Joanne Clarke ◽  
Debbie Johnson ◽  
Heather Trickey ◽  
...  

IntroductionBreast feeding improves the health of mothers and infants; the UK has low rates, with marked socioeconomic inequalities. While trials of peer support services have been effective in some settings, UK trials have not improved breast feeding rates. Qualitative research suggests that many women are alienated by the focus on breast feeding. We propose a change from breast feeding-focused interactions to respecting a woman’s feeding choices, inclusion of behaviour change theory and an increased intensity of contacts in the 2 weeks after birth when many women cease to breast feed. This will take place alongside an assets-based approach that focuses on the positive capability of individuals, their social networks and communities.We propose a feasibility study for a multicentre randomised controlled trial of the Assets feeding help Before and After birth (ABA) infant feeding service versus usual care.Methods and analysisA two-arm, non-blinded randomised feasibility study will be conducted in two UK localities. Women expecting their first baby will be eligible, regardless of feeding intention. The ABA infant feeding intervention will apply a proactive, assets-based, woman-centred, non-judgemental approach, delivered antenatally and postnatally tailored through face-to-face contacts, telephone and SMS texts. Outcomes will test the feasibility of delivering the intervention with recommended intensity and duration to disadvantaged women; acceptability to women, feeding helpers and professionals; and feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial (RCT), detailing recruitment rates, willingness to be randomised, follow-up rates at 3 days, 8 weeks and 6 months, and level of outcome completion. Outcomes of the proposed full trial will also be collected. Mixed methods will include qualitative interviews with women/partners, feeding helpers and health service staff; feeding helper logs; and review of audio-recorded helper–women interactions to assess intervention fidelity.Ethics and disseminationStudy results will inform the design of a larger multicentre RCT. The National Research Ethics Service Committee approved the study protocol.Trial registration numberISRCTN14760978; Pre-results.


2021 ◽  
pp. bmjebm-2021-111714
Author(s):  
Heppy Khanpara ◽  
V Prakash

ObjectiveTo assess the effect of spin in the abstract of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) on physiotherapists’ perception of treatment benefit evaluated in the trial.DesignParallel-group RCT.SettingPhysiotherapy departments in hospitals and clinics in India.ParticipantsPhysiotherapists working in clinical settings.InterventionsWe selected one abstract with high level of spin published in one of the core journals of physiotherapy and created two versions of the abstract, that is, with and without spin. We randomly assigned physiotherapists working in clinical settings (N=128) to read one version of the selected abstract, with or without spin. Participants were blinded to the study design, objectives and randomisation.Main outcome measuresPhysiotherapists’ interpretation of beneficial effect of the experimental treatment (0–10 scale) reported in the abstract. The secondary outcomes were clinicians’ perception of methodological rigour and the study importance, their interest in reading the full text, and their interest in running another trial evaluating this treatment.ResultsWe found a medium reduction in confidence of beneficial effect of the experimental treatment among physiotherapists who read the abstract without spin (mean score 4.3±2.8) compared with those who read the abstract with spin (mean score 6.14±2.6). The mean difference in scores between abstracts with and without spin was 1.8 (95% CI 0.8 to 2.8; p<0.001). For other outcomes measures studied there was no statistically significant effect.ConclusionsRemoval of spin in the abstract of RCT reporting statistically non-significant results have medium effect in improving physiotherapists’ accuracy of interpretation of study results. Spin contributes to clinicians’ positive perception about the benefit of experimental intervention tested in the trial despite the evidence showing no superiority of experimental intervention.Trial registration numberCTRI/2020/02/023557.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e033150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavia K Borges ◽  
P J Devereaux ◽  
Meaghan Cuerden ◽  
Mohit Bhandari ◽  
Ernesto Guerra-Farfán ◽  
...  

IntroductionInflammation, dehydration, hypotension and bleeding may all contribute to the development of acute kidney injury (AKI). Accelerated surgery after a hip fracture can decrease the exposure time to such contributors and may reduce the risk of AKI.Methods and analysisHip fracture Accelerated surgical TreaTment And Care tracK (HIP ATTACK) is a multicentre, international, parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT). Patients who suffer a hip fracture are randomly allocated to either accelerated medical assessment and surgical repair with a goal of surgery within 6 hours of diagnosis or standard care where a repair typically occurs 24 to 48 hours after diagnosis. The primary outcome of this substudy is the development of AKI within 7 days of randomisation. We anticipate at least 1998 patients will participate in this substudy.Ethics and disseminationWe obtained ethics approval for additional serum creatinine recordings in consecutive patients enrolled at 70 participating centres. All patients provide consent before randomisation. We anticipate reporting substudy results by 2021.Trial registration numberNCT02027896; Pre-results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document