scholarly journals A Study to Inform the Design of a National Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial to Evaluate If Reducing Serum Phosphate to Normal Levels Improves Clinical Outcomes including Mortality, Cardiovascular Events, Bone Pain, or Fracture in Patients on Dialysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramya Bhargava ◽  
Philip A. Kalra ◽  
Paul Brenchley ◽  
Helen Hurst ◽  
Alastair Hutchison
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Phosphate Binders ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
Definitive Trial ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background. Retrospective, observational studies link high phosphate with mortality in dialysis patients. This generates research hypotheses but does not establish “cause-and-effect.” A large randomised controlled trial (RCT) of about 3000 patients randomised 50 : 50 to lower or higher phosphate ranges is required to answer the key question: does reducing phosphate levels improve clinical outcomes? Whether such a trial is technically possible is unknown; therefore, a study is necessary to inform the design and conduct of a future, definitive trial.Methodology. Dual centre prospective parallel group study: 100 dialysis patients randomized to lower (phosphate target 0.8 to 1.4 mmol/L) or higher range group (1.8 to 2.4 mmol/L). Non-calcium-containing phosphate binders and questionnaires will be used to achieve target phosphate. Primary endpoint: percentage successfully titrated to required range and percentage maintained in these groups over the maintenance period. Secondary endpoints: consent rate, drop-out rates, and cardiovascular events.Discussion. This study will inform design of a large definitive trial of the effect of phosphate on mortality and cardiovascular events in dialysis patients. If phosphate lowering improves outcomes, we would be reassured of the validity of this clinical practice. If, on the other hand, there is no improvement, a reassessment of resource allocation to therapies proven to improve outcomes will result.Trial Registration Number. This trial is registered with ISRCTN registration numberISRCTN24741445.

scholarly journals Nurse-based secondary preventive follow-up by telephone reduced recurrence of cardiovascular events: a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Lotta Irewall ◽  
Anders Ulvenstam ◽  
Anna Graipe ◽  
Joachim Ögren ◽  
Thomas Mooe
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractEnhanced follow-up is needed to improve the results of secondary preventive care in patients with established cardiovascular disease. We examined the effect of long-term, nurse-based, secondary preventive follow-up by telephone on the recurrence of cardiovascular events. Open, randomised, controlled trial with two parallel groups. Between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, consecutive patients (n = 1890) admitted to hospital due to stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were included. Participants were randomised (1:1) to nurse-based telephone follow-up (intervention, n = 944) or usual care (control, n = 946) and followed until 31 December 2017. The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, cardiac revascularisation, and cardiovascular death. The individual components of the primary endpoint, TIA, and all-cause mortality were analysed as secondary endpoints. The assessment of outcome events was blinded to study group assignment. After a mean follow-up of 4.5 years, 22.7% (n = 214) of patients in the intervention group and 27.1% (n = 256) in the control group reached the primary composite endpoint (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68–0.97; ARR 4.4%, 95% CI 0.5–8.3). Secondary endpoints did not differ significantly between groups. Nurse-based secondary preventive follow-up by telephone reduced the recurrence of cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of a hydrogel dressing as an analgesic adjunct to first aid for the treatment of acute paediatric burn injuries: a prospective randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e039981
Author(s):  
Maleea Denise Holbert ◽  
Roy M Kimble ◽  
Mark Chatfield ◽  
Bronwyn R Griffin
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Geometric Mean ◽  
First Aid ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Thermal Burn ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Randomised Controlled

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).

scholarly journals Open-label placebo for insomnia (OPIN): study protocol for a cohort multiple randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e044045
Author(s):  
Ben Colagiuri ◽  
Louise Sharpe ◽  
Zahava Ambarchi ◽  
Nick Glozier ◽  
Delwyn Bartlett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Period ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Human Research Ethics ◽  
Sleep Parameters ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Insomnia Symptoms

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.

scholarly journals Rationale and design for Lowering-hyperUricaemia treatment on cardiovascular outcoMes In peritoNeal diAlysis patients: a prospective, multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial (LUMINA)

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e037842
Author(s):  
Wei Chen ◽  
Naya Huang ◽  
Haiping Mao ◽  
Xiao Yang ◽  
Qian Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Dropout Rate ◽  
Cardiovascular Outcomes ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Type I ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThe prevalence of hyperuricaemia in peritoneal dialysis patients is quite high. Studies have demonstrated a correlation between hyperuricaemia and cardiovascular disease and treatment of hyperuricaemia reportedly reduces cardiovascular risk in patients with chronic kidney disease. However, whether hyperuricaemia treatment benefits cardiovascular outcomes in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients is not yet known.Methods and analysesThis prospective, multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial was designed to evaluate the effects of hyperuricaemia treatment on cardiovascular event risk in CAPD patients. Based on a power of 80%, with type I error α=0.05, two-sided test and 1:1 parallel control study, considering a dropout rate of 20%, a total of 548 eligible patients are expected to be randomly assigned to either the hyperuricaemia treatment group (febuxostat) or control group (placebo).Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University and the ethics committees of other participating institutions. Written informed consent will be obtained from potential trial participants or authorised surrogates.The findings of the study will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals, and presentations at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberNCT03200210. 25 June 2017. The trial was started on 13 July 2017, and is expected to end by 31 December 2022. Till 20 Jan 2020, a total of 548 patients have been recruited.Protocol versionThe protocol version number and date are YLT-1604-V2.0 and 15 December 2016.

scholarly journals The MultimorbiditY COllaborative Medication Review And DEcision Making (MyComrade) study: A protocol for a cross-border pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Hynes ◽  
Andrew W Murphy ◽  
Nigel Hart ◽  
Collette Kirwan ◽  
Sarah Mulligan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Definitive Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Medication Reviews ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractBackgroundWhile international guidelines recommend medication reviews as part of the management of multimorbidity, evidence on how to implement reviews in practice in primary care is lacking. The MyComrade (MultimorbiditY Collaborative Medication Review And Decision Making) intervention is an evidence-based, theoretically-informed novel intervention which aims to support the conduct of medication reviews for patients with multimorbidity in primary care. Our aim in this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility of a trial of the intervention with unique modifications accounting for contextual variations in two neighbouring health systems (Republic of Ireland (ROI) and Northern Ireland (NI)).MethodsA pilot cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted, using a mixed methods process evaluation to investigate the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention. A total of 16 practices will be recruited (eight in ROI; eight in NI) and four practices in each jurisdiction will be randomly allocated to intervention or control. Twenty people living with multimorbidity and prescribed ≥10 repeat medications will be recruited from each practice prior to practice randomisation. In intervention practices, the MyComrade intervention will be delivered by pairs of GPs in ROI, and a GP and Practice Based Pharmacist (PBP) in NI. The GPs/GP and PBP will schedule time to review medications together using a checklist. Usual care will proceed in practices in the control arm. Data will be collected via electronic health records and postal questionnaires at recruitment, and 4- and 8-months after randomisation. Qualitative interviews to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and explore experiences related to multimorbidity management will be conducted with a purposive sample of GPs, PBPs, practice administration staff and patients in intervention and control practices. The feasibility of conducting a health economic evaluation as part of a future definitive trial will be assessed.DiscussionThe findings of this pilot study will assess the feasibility of a trial of the MyComrade intervention in two different health systems. Evaluation of the progression criteria will guide the decision to progress to a definitive trial and inform trial design. The findings will also contribute to the growing evidence-base related to intervention development and feasibility studies.Trial registrationRegistry: ISRCTN, ISRCTN80017020; Date of confirmation 4/11/2019; Retrospectively registered; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN80017020.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document