Trials
Latest Publications


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

7910
(FIVE YEARS 4623)

H-INDEX

74
(FIVE YEARS 35)

Published By Springer (Biomed Central Ltd.)

1745-6215, 1745-6215
Updated Sunday, 28 November 2021

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas A. Giordano ◽  
Jesse Seilern und Aspang ◽  
J‘Lynn Baker ◽  
Cammie Wolf Rice ◽  
Bailey Barrell ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Orthopedic trauma patients face complex pain management needs and are frequently prescribed opioids, leaving them at-risk for prolonged opioid use. To date, post-trauma pain management research has placed little emphasis on individualized risk assessments for misuse and systematically implementing non-pharmacologic pain management strategies. Therefore, a community-academic partnership was formed to design a novel position in the healthcare field (Life Care Specialist (LCS)), who will educate patients on the risks of opioids, tapering usage, safe disposal practices, and harm reduction strategies. In addition, the LCS teaches patients behavior-based strategies for pain management, utilizing well-described techniques for coping and resilience. This study aims to determine the effects of LCS intervention on opioid utilization, pain control, and patient satisfaction in the aftermath of orthopedic trauma. Methods In total, 200 orthopedic trauma patients will be randomized to receive an intervention (LCS) or a standard-of-care control at an urban level 1 trauma center. All patients will be assessed with comprehensive social determinants of health and substance use surveys immediately after surgery (baseline). Follow-up assessments will be performed at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively, and will include pain medication utilization (morphine milligram equivalents), pain scores, and other substance use. In addition, overall patient wellness will be evaluated with objective actigraphy measures and patient-reported outcomes. Finally, a survey of patient understanding of risks of opioid use and misuse will be collected, to assess the influence of LCS opioid education. Discussion There is limited data on the role of individualized, multimodal, non-pharmacologic, behavioral-based pain management intervention in opioid-related risk-mitigation in high-risk populations, including the orthopedic trauma patients. The findings from this randomized controlled trial will provide scientific and clinical evidence on the efficacy and feasibility of the LCS intervention. Moreover, the final aim will provide early evidence into which patients benefit most from LCS intervention. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT04154384. Registered on 11/6/2019 (last updated on 6/10/2021).


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlijn J. M. Wibbelink ◽  
Christopher W. Lee ◽  
Nathan Bachrach ◽  
Sarah K. Dominguez ◽  
Thomas Ehring ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Trauma-focused treatments for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are commonly delivered either once or twice a week. Initial evidence suggests that session frequency affects treatment response, but very few trials have investigated the effect of session frequency. The present study’s aim is to compare treatment outcomes of twice-weekly versus once-weekly sessions of two treatments for PTSD related to childhood trauma, imagery rescripting (ImRs) and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR). We hypothesize that both treatments will be more effective when delivered twice than once a week. How session frequency impacts treatment response, whether treatment type moderates the frequency effect, and which treatment type and frequency works best for whom will also be investigated. Methods The IREM-Freq trial is an international multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted in mental healthcare centers across Australia, Germany, and the Netherlands. We aim to recruit 220 participants, who will be randomized to one of four conditions: (1) EMDR once a week, (2) EMDR twice a week, (3) ImRs once a week, or (4) ImRs twice a week. Treatment consists of 12 sessions. Data are collected at baseline until one-year follow-up. The primary outcome measure is clinician-rated PTSD symptom severity. Secondary outcome measures include self-reported PTSD symptom severity, complex PTSD symptoms, trauma-related cognitions and emotions, depressive symptoms, dissociation, quality of life, and functioning. Process measures include memory, learning, therapeutic alliance, motivation, reluctance, and avoidance. Additional investigations will focus on predictors of treatment outcome and PTSD severity, change mechanisms of EMDR and ImRs, the role of emotions, cognitions, and memory, the optimization of treatment selection, learned helplessness, perspectives of patients and therapists, the network structure of PTSD symptoms, and sudden treatment gains. Discussion This study will extend our knowledge on trauma-focused treatments for PTSD related to childhood trauma and, more specifically, the importance of session frequency. More insight into the optimal session frequency could lead to improved treatment outcomes and less dropout, and in turn, to a reduction of healthcare costs. Moreover, the additional investigations will broaden our understanding of how the treatments work and variables that affect treatment outcome. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register NL6965, registered 25/04/2018.


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajat Dhar ◽  
Dean Klinkenberg ◽  
Gary Marklin

Abstract Background Brain death frequently induces hemodynamic instability and cardiac stunning. Impairments in cardiac performance are major contributors to hearts from otherwise eligible organ donors not being transplanted. Deficiencies in pituitary hormones (including thyroid-stimulating hormone) may contribute to hemodynamic instability, and replacement of thyroid hormone has been proposed as a means of improving stability and increasing hearts available for transplantation. Intravenous thyroxine is commonly used in donor management. However, small controlled trials have not been able to demonstrate efficacy. Methods This multicenter study will involve organ procurement organizations (OPOs) across the country. A total of 800 heart-eligible brain-dead organ donors who require vasopressor support will be randomly assigned to intravenous thyroxine for at least 12 h or saline placebo. The primary study hypotheses are that thyroxine treatment will result in a higher proportion of hearts transplanted and that these hearts will have non-inferior function to hearts not treated with thyroxine. Additional outcome measures are the time to achieve hemodynamic stability (weaning off vasopressors) and improvement in cardiac ejection fraction on echocardiography. Discussion This will be the largest randomized controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of thyroid hormone treatment in organ donor management. By collaborating across multiple OPOs, it will be able to enroll an adequate number of donors and be powered to definitively answer the critical question of whether intravenous thyroxine treatment increases hearts transplanted and/or provides hemodynamic benefits for donor management. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT04415658. Registered on June 4, 2020


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Masiá ◽  
S. Padilla ◽  
G. Estañ ◽  
J. Portu ◽  
A. Silva ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The incidence of non-AIDS defining cancer (NADC) is higher in people living with HIV (PLWH) than in the general population, and it is already one of the leading causes of death in the HIV-infected population. It is estimated that the situation will be aggravated by the progressive aging of PLWH. Early diagnosis through intensive cancer screening may improve the ability for therapeutic interventions and could be critical in reducing mortality, but it might also increase expenditure and harms associated with adverse events. The aim of this study is to evaluate an enhanced screening program for early diagnosis of cancer in PLWH compared to standard practice. The specific objectives are (1) to compare the frequency of cancer diagnosed at an early stage, (2) to analyze safety of the enhanced program: adverse events and unnecessary interventions, (3) to analyze the cost-utility of the program, and (4) to estimate the overall and site-specific incidence of NADC in PLWH. Methods We will conduct a multicenter, non-blinded, randomized, controlled trial, comparing two parallel arms: conventional vs enhanced screening. Data will be recorded in an electronic data collection notebook. Conventional intervention group will follow the standard of care screening in the participating centers, according to the European AIDS Clinical Society recommendations, and the enhanced intervention group will follow an expanded screening aimed to early detection of lung, liver, anal, cervical, breast, prostate, colorectal, and skin cancer. The trial will be conducted within the framework of the Spanish AIDS Research Network Cohort (CoRIS). Discussion The trial will evaluate the efficacy, safety, and efficiency of an enhanced screening program for the early diagnosis of cancer in HIV patients compared to standard of care practice. The information provided will be relevant since there are currently no studies on expanded cancer screening strategies in patients with HIV, and available data estimating cost effectiveness or cost-utility of such as programs are scarce. An enhanced program for NADC screening in patients with HIV could lead to early diagnosis and improve the prognosis of these patients, with an acceptable rate of unnecessary interventions, but it is critical to demonstrate that the benefits clearly outweigh the harms, before the strategy could be implemented. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04735445. Registered on 25 June 2019


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Margrete Mangset ◽  
Gabriele Kitzmüller ◽  
Anne S. Evju ◽  
Sanne Angel ◽  
Lena Aadal ◽  
...  

Abstract Background A commonly applied control condition in trials evaluating complex interventions in rehabilitation research is “usual care.” The main challenge is to ensure that the control group receives genuine usual care as delivered in everyday clinical practice. The assessment interviews and dialogues with the data collectors may influence the control group participants’ reflections on their condition and adjustments. This represents a threat to the internal validity of the trial. Thus, the aim of this study was to explore the perceived study-induced influence of assessment interviews on the adjustment of the members of a control group in a randomized clinical trial. The aim of the trial was to test a dialogue-based psychosocial intervention aiming at promoting the psychosocial well-being and adjustment of stroke survivors. Methods Fifteen participants in the control group of a multicenter stroke rehabilitation trial participated in narrative semi-structured interviews. Ricoeur’s interpretation theory guided the analysis. Results The perceived study-induced influence of the assessment interviews on the adjustment process of members of the control group varied considerably. The results demonstrated that the assessment interviews facilitated some participants’ feelings of control and their ability to cope. Other participants’ statements indicate that they relied on their existing personal capacity to cope and adjust and that the assessment interviews did not make any difference either on their coping ability or on their process of adjustment. Five themes were identified that described the perceived study-induced influence of the assessment interviews in the control group. The themes illustrated that the assessments served as a safety net, enhanced awareness and understanding, encouraged seeking support, allowed the opportunity to vent disappointment, or did not make any difference either way. Conclusions RCT assessment interviews may influence the adjustment process and represent a serious problem in measuring interventions over time in trials of complex interventions in rehabilitation research. To uphold rigor and stringency, the usual care control conditions should be thoroughly assessed and described. Informing participants only about the treatment they were allocated to receive might counteract the potential to dilute the difference between the two arms of the trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02338869. Registered on October 4, 2014


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Ho Ku ◽  
Hyun Lee ◽  
Hwa Yeon Ryu ◽  
Jae Hui Kang

Abstract Background As the population of Korea ages, interest in healthcare has increased. In particular, there is an increasing demand for immune-function improvement to prevent infectious diseases. Phellinus linteus (PL) has previously been shown to exert immune-enhancing and anticancer effects. We aim to evaluate whether PL mycelium extract, cultured from the PL KCTC0399BP strain, can increase immune function, as measured using blood-test indicators. This clinical trial protocol is designed as the main trial and is based on the results of a pilot study. Methods This clinical trial is a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Ninety-eight participants are enrolled and randomly divided into two groups: the experimental group (PL 1000 mg) and the control group (placebo). Participants are administered with experimental food or placebo for eight weeks. Blood tests are performed before trial initiation and 8 weeks later, at trial completion. Laboratory evaluation items are as follows: natural killer cell activity, tumor necrosis factor-α, interferon-γ, interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-2, IL-6, IL-12, immunoglobulin (Ig)G1, IgG2, and IgM. We will mainly use the full analysis dataset to statistically analyze the effectiveness of the treatment. Discussion This study evaluates the effects of PL extract on immune function and will contribute to knowledge on the value of PL as an immune-function–boosting functional food. Trial registration Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS) of Korea CRIS-KCT0005460. Registered on 12 October 2020


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxime Léger ◽  
Solène Pessiot-Royer ◽  
Tristan Perrault ◽  
Elsa Parot-Schinkel ◽  
Fabienne Costerousse ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Since the 2000s, opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) protocols have been spreading worldwide in anesthesia daily practice. These protocols avoid using opioid drugs during anesthesia to prevent short- and long-term opioid side effects while ensuring adequate analgesic control and optimizing postoperative recovery. Proofs of the effect of OFA protocol on optimizing postoperative recovery are still scarce. The study aims to compare the effects of an OFA protocol versus standard anesthesia protocol on the early quality of postoperative recovery (QoR) from major surgeries. Methods The SOFA trial is a prospective, randomized, parallel, single-blind, monocentric study. Patients (n = 140) scheduled for major plastic, visceral, urologic, gynecologic, or ear, nose, and throat (ENT) surgeries will be allocated to one of the two groups. The study group (OFA group) will receive a combination of clonidine, magnesium sulfate, ketamine, and lidocaine. The control group will receive a standard anesthesia protocol based on opioid use. Both groups will receive others standard practices for general anesthesia and perioperative care. The primary outcome measure is the QoR-15 value assessed at 24 h after surgery. Postoperative data such as pain intensity, the incidence of postoperative complication, and opioid consumption will be recorded. We will also collect adverse events that may be related to the anesthetic protocol. Three months after surgery, the incidence of chronic pain and the quality of life will be evaluated by phone interview. Discussion This will be the first study powered to evaluate the effect of OFA versus a standard anesthesia protocol using opioids on global postoperative recovery after a wide range of major surgeries. The SOFA trial will also provide findings concerning the OFA impact on chronic pain incidence and long-term patient quality of life. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04797312. Registered on 15 March 2021


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zuzana Javorcikova ◽  
Michel Dangoisse ◽  
Stéphane Nikis ◽  
Jean-Paul Lechat ◽  
Aline Gillain ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Fibromyalgia is a chronic multidimensional pain disease with no curative treatment currently available. Its management relies on a multimodal approach involving pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic elements. Because a suggested factor in its etiology is a central sensitization phenomenon involving the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR), NMDAR antagonists have been proposed as a treatment target. Ketamine and its levogyre form, S-ketamine, have been used to treat chronic pain for many years without consensus about their therapeutic efficiency. We aim to assess the efficacy of S-ketamine as a co-treatment for fibromyalgia. Methods This prospective, randomized, single-center, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-escalation trial will compare a co-treatment with S-ketamine (intervention) to a control treatment without S-ketamine (control). It will consist of two successive cohorts with 2:1 randomization ratio (S-ketamine at two different doses: control) with 105 participants in each cohort. The protocol follow-up time will be 12 weeks, including 3 visits for the treatment (week 0, week 2, and week 4) and 3 visits for follow-up (week 6, week 9, and week 12). Our primary outcome, pain relief and/or better patient function, will be assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire. The statistical analysis will be performed on an intention-to-treat basis. If the primary outcome is reached at the end of follow-up in the first cohort with low-dose S-ketamine (0.2 mg/kg), the trial will end. If not, the trial will continue with the second cohort and high-dose S-ketamine (0.4 mg/kg). Discussion The challenge of our trial is the inclusion of a large number of participants in comparison to other trials involving ketamine or S-ketamine infusions for chronic pain management. The originality of our protocol is to include functionality in addition to pain relief as a primary outcome because these two endpoints are not linked in a linear way. For some patients, functional status is more important than pain relief. Trial registration EudraCT reference: 2020-000473-25, ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04436250, first posted June 18, 2020; last updated July 21, 2020. Protocol version 2.2 issued on September 30, 2020, after a revision by the ethics committee. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04436250


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Qinwei Fu ◽  
Hui Xie ◽  
Li Zhou ◽  
Xinrong Li ◽  
Yang Liu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Some pain, fatigue, and gastrointestinal adverse events were observed in potential association with injection of COVID-19 vaccines, while there was no preventive intervention for it. We aim to investigate the efficacy of auricular acupressure (AA) therapy in preventing and relieving AEFI after injection of COVID-19 vaccine. Methods The study design is a randomized, multicentre, three-arm controlled, single-blind trial. Participants meeting the inclusion criteria will be advertised and enrolled and assigned in the medical institutions randomly for post-injection observation. No less than 360 participants will be randomized into one of three groups: auricular acupressure group, sham auricular acupressure group, and wait-list group. Interventions will be performed immediately and will happen 4 to 5 times per day for 5 days. The primary clinical outcomes will be quality and quantity evaluation among participants who reported any AEFI and who reported local pain at injection site. Secondary outcomes will concern headache, muscle and (or) joint pain, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and other potential events. All the outcomes will be assessed at baseline and 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14 days after the injection. Both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses will be performed, with significance level determined as 5%. Discussion Results of this trial will help to clarify the value of auricular acupressure therapy in preventing and relieving overall and certain adverse events following immunization after injection of COVID-19 vaccine. Trial registration China Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) (ChiCTR2100043210). Registered on 8 February, 2021.


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Nordlund ◽  
Richard S. Henry ◽  
Linda Kwakkenbos ◽  
Marie-Eve Carrier ◽  
Brooke Levis ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma; SSc) is a rare autoimmune connective tissue disease. We completed an initial feasibility trial of an online self-administered version of the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Self-Management (SPIN-SELF) Program using the cohort multiple randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. Due to low intervention offer uptake, we will conduct a new feasibility trial with progression to full-scale trial, using a two-arm parallel, partially nested RCT design. The SPIN-SELF Program has also been revised to include facilitator-led videoconference group sessions in addition to online material. We will test the group-based intervention delivery format, then evaluate the effect of the SPIN-SELF Program on disease management self-efficacy (primary) and patient activation, social appearance anxiety, and functional health outcomes (secondary). Methods This study is a feasibility trial with progression to full-scale RCT, pending meeting pre-defined criteria, of the SPIN-SELF Program. Participants will be recruited from the ongoing SPIN Cohort (http://www.spinsclero.com/en/cohort) and via social media and partner patient organizations. Eligible participants must have SSc and low to moderate disease management self-efficacy (Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease (SEMCD) Scale score ≤ 7.0). Participants will be randomized (1:1 allocation) to the group-based SPIN-SELF Program or usual care for 3 months. The primary outcome in the full-scale trial will be disease management self-efficacy based on SEMCD Scale scores at 3 months post-randomization. Secondary outcomes include SEMCD scores 6 months post-randomization plus patient activation, social appearance anxiety, and functional health outcomes at 3 and 6 months post-randomization. We will include 40 participants to assess feasibility. At the end of the feasibility portion, stoppage criteria will be used to determine if the trial procedures or SPIN-SELF Program need important modifications, thereby requiring a re-set for the full-scale trial. Otherwise, the full-scale RCT will proceed, and outcome data from the feasibility portion will be utilized in the full-scale trial. In the full-scale RCT, 524 participants will be recruited. Discussion The SPIN-SELF Program may improve disease management self-efficacy, patient activation, social appearance anxiety, and functional health outcomes in people with SSc. SPIN works with partner patient organizations around the world to disseminate its programs free-of-charge. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT04246528. Registered on 27 January 2020


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document