METHODS: TIPS-3 is a 2x2x2 factorial randomized controlled trial that will examine the effect of a FDC polypill on major CV outcomes in a primary prevention population. This study aims to determine whether the Polycap (comprised of atenolol, ramipril, hydrochlorothiazide, and a statin) reduces CV events in persons without a history of CVD, but who are at least at intermediate CVD risk. Additional interventions in the factorial design of the study will compare the effect of (1) aspirin versus placebo on CV events (and cancer), (2) vitamin D versus placebo on the risk of fractures, and (3) the combined effect of aspirin and the Polycap on CV events.
RESULTS: The study has randomized 5713 participants across 9 countries. Mean age of the study population is 63.9 years, and 53% are female. Mean INTERHEART risk score is 16.8, which is consistent with a study population at intermediate CVD risk.
CONCLUSION: Results of the TIP-3 study will be key to determining the appropriateness of FDC therapy as a strategy in the global prevention of CVD.
OBJECTIVE: We have conducted a systematic review of two major (FIGHT and LIVE) placebo-controlled trials of liraglutide and its clinical effect on the ejection fraction of subjects with heart failure.
METHODS: Medline data was retrieved for trials involving liraglutide from 2012 to 2020. The inclusion criteria for trials were: subjects with or without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), subjects with heart failure with rLVEF, major trials (phase II or III) on liraglutide, trials included liraglutide with defined efficacy primary outcome of patients with heart failure with rLVEF. The search was limited to the English language, whereby two trials [FIGHT and LIVE] had been included and two trials were excluded due to different primary outcomes. Participants (541) had been randomized for either liraglutide or placebo for 24 weeks.
RESULTS: In the FIGHT trial the primary intention-to-treat, sensitivity, and diabetes subgroup analyses have shown no significant between-group difference in the global rank scores (mean rank of 146 in the liraglutide group versus 156 in the placebo group; Wilcoxon rank-sum P=.31), number of deaths, re-hospitalizations for heart failure, or the composite of death or change in NT-pro BNP level (P= .94). In the LIVE trial, the change in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline to week 24 was not significantly different between treatment groups. The overall discontinuation rate of liraglutide was high in the FIGHT trial (29%, 86) as compared to that in the LIVE trial (11.6%, 28).
CONCLUSION: FIGHT and LIVE trials have demonstrated that liraglutide use in subjects with heart failure and rLVEF was implicated with an increased adverse risk of heart failure-related outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of s.c. tramadol vs. i.v. tramadol in patients with moderate pain due to extremity injury in the ED.
DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: This non-inferiority randomized controlled trial included adult patients presented to an academic, tertiary hospital ED with moderate pain (pain score of 4-6 on the visual analog scale) due to extremity injury. Intervention patients stratified to pain score were randomized to receive 50 mg of i.v. or s.c. tramadol.
OUTCOMES MEASURE AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcome measure was the difference in the pain score reduction at 30 min after tramadol administration between the two groups. The noninferiority null hypothesis was that the therapeutic difference in terms of pain score reduction of more than 0.8 exists between the two treatment groups at the endpoint.
MAIN RESULTS: In total 232 patients were randomized to i.v. ( n = 115) or s.c. ( n = 117). Although 225 were analyzed in the per-protocol population (i.v. = 113; s.c. = 112). The baseline median pain score was 6 (IQR, 5-6). Median pain score reduction at 30 min after administration was 2 (IQR, 1-3) in the IV group vs. 2 (IQR, 1-2) in the s.c. group with a median difference of 0 (IQR, 0-0), which was below the prespecified noninferiority margin of 0.8. Adverse events in the i.v. group were higher compared to the s.c. group (33.6% vs. 8.9%, P ≤ 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The s.c. tramadol is noninferior to i.v. tramadol in the treatment of moderate pain from extremity injuries.
METHODS/DESIGN: Three hundred and twenty premenopausal women working in a public university in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia will be randomized to receive either vitamin D supplement (50,000 IU weekly for 8 weeks and 50,000 IU monthly for 10 months) or placebo for 12 months. At baseline, all participants are vitamin D deficient (≤ 20 ng/ml or 50 nmol/l). Both participants and researchers will be blinded. The serum vitamin D levels of all participants collected at various time points will only be analysed at the end of the trial. Outcome measures such as 25(OH) D3, HOMA-IR, blood pressure, full lipid profiles will be taken at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. Health related quality of life will be measured at baseline and 12 months. The placebo group will be given delayed treatment for six months after the trial.
DISCUSSION: This trial will be the first study investigating the effect of vitamin D supplements on both the cardiometabolic risk and quality of life among urban premenopausal women in Malaysia. Our findings will contribute to the growing body of knowledge in the role of vitamin D supplements in the primary prevention for cardiometabolic disease.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12612000452897.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: At least 51 patients with an acute GPP flare will be randomised 2:1 to receive a single 900 mg intravenous dose of spesolimab or placebo and followed for up to 28 weeks. The primary endpoint is a Generalized Pustular Psoriasis Physician Global Assessment (GPPGA) pustulation subscore of 0 (pustule clearance) at Week 1. The key secondary endpoint is a GPPGA score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) at Week 1. Safety will be assessed over the study duration by the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events. Blood and skin biopsies will be collected to assess biomarkers. Superiority of spesolimab over placebo in the proportion of patients achieving the primary and key secondary endpoints will be evaluated.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study complies with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, the International Council for Harmonisation's Good Clinical Practice and local regulations. Ethics committee approvals have been obtained for each centre from all participating countries and are listed in online supplementary file 1. Primary results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03782792; Pre-results.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a single-centre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial. Sixty-eight patients will be randomised to receive under ultrasound guidance either a single injection of leucocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) or normal saline. All patients will undergo a standardised hamstring rehabilitation programme under the supervision of a sports physiotherapist. Outcome data will be collected before intervention (baseline), and thereafter on a weekly basis. The primary outcome measure is the duration to return-to-play. It is defined as the duration (in days) from the date on which the injury occurred until the patients were pain-free, able to perform the active knee extension test and have regained hamstring muscle strength. Secondary outcome measures include assessment of pain intensity and the effect of pain on to day-to-day functions using the self-reported Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form questionnaire. Both the primary and secondary outcomes were assessed at baseline and thereafter once a week until return to play. Also, hamstring injury recurrence within the first 6 months after recovery will be monitored via telephone. The results of this study will provide insights into the effect of LR-PRP in muscle and may help to identify the best PRP application protocol for muscle injuries.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval were obtained from the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the University of Malaya Medical Centre. Results of this trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN76844299.
DESIGN: A double-blind, cluster-randomized approach was used as a randomization method for this study to evaluate the stress management interventional program.
METHODS: A cluster-randomized controlled trial was carried out in eight comprehensive healthcare centres in Amman city, Jordan; four centres were randomly assigned to each experimental and control group. One hundred and seventy nurses were selected randomly from March 2019 - August 2019 and data were collected by using the Nursing Stress Scale & brief COPE over three data collection times. Both descriptive and inferential statistics (repeated measure ANOVA, Independent t test, and chi-squared) were used to answer the research questions of this study.
RESULTS: The results showed that both the levels of occupational stress and coping strategies were significantly different between the two study groups over the three data collection points (p method that can be used to reduce stress levels and improve coping strategies for public health nurses. The implementation of stress management interventions in health care is likely to help nurses manage occupational stress in practice.
IMPACT: Nurses suffer from a high level of occupational stress. In particular, approximately74% of nurses experience severe occupational stress, which can lead to many mental and physical disorders. However, nurses were less able to utilize the correct stress preventive strategies due to gaps in knowledge, skills, and awareness. This study contributed to the provision of empirical evidence of the effectiveness of the stress management program in reducing occupational stress and improving coping strategies among public health nurses. A stress management intervention program is a valuable non-invasive method that can be used by healthcare organizations to reduce stress levels and improve coping strategies for nurses in practice.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03833986.
BACKGROUND: Data are conflicting on the optimal strategy to reduce CAAKI and related complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
METHODS: The PRESERVE (Prevention of Serious Adverse Events Following Angiography) trial used a 2 × 2 factorial design to randomize 5,177 patients with stage III or IV chronic kidney disease undergoing angiography to IV 1.26% sodium bicarbonate or IV 0.9% sodium chloride and 5 days of oral acetylcysteine or placebo. A subgroup analysis was conducted of the efficacy of these interventions in patients who underwent PCI during the study angiographic examination. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, need for dialysis, or persistent kidney impairment at 90 days; CAAKI was a secondary endpoint.
RESULTS: A total of 1,161 PRESERVE patients (mean age 69 ± 8 years) underwent PCI. The median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 50.7 ml/min/1.73 m2 (interquartile range: 41.7 to 60.1 ml/min/1.73 m2), and 952 patients (82%) had diabetes mellitus. The primary endpoint occurred in 15 of 568 patients (2.6%) in the IV sodium bicarbonate group and 24 of 593 patients (4.0%) in the IV sodium chloride group (odds ratio: 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.33 to 1.24; p for interaction = 0.41) and in 23 of 598 patients (3.8%) in the acetylcysteine group and 16 of 563 patients (2.8%) in the placebo group (odds ratio: 1.37; 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 2.62; p for interaction = 0.29). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of CAAKI.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CKD undergoing PCI, there was no benefit of IV sodium bicarbonate over IV sodium chloride or of acetylcysteine over placebo for the prevention of CAAKI or intermediate-term adverse outcomes.
METHODS: A double-blind randomized study was carried out with 140 colorectal cancer patients on chemotherapy. Subjects were separated into two groups to receive either placebo or MCP [30 billion colony-forming unit (CFUs) per sachet] at a dose of two sachets daily for 4 weeks, and omega-3 fatty acid at a dose of 2 g daily for 8 weeks. Outcomes measured were quality of life, side effects of chemotherapy and levels of inflammatory markers such as interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and C-reactive protein.
RESULTS: The supplementation with MCP and omega-3 fatty acid improved the overall quality of life and alleviated certain side effects of chemotherapy. The supplementation with MCP and omega-3 fatty acid also managed to reduce the level of IL-6 (P = 0.002). There was a significant rise in the placebo group's serum TNF-α (P = 0.048) and IL-6 (P = 0.004).
CONCLUSION: The combined supplementation with MCP and omega-3 fatty acid may improve quality of life, reduce certain inflammatory biomarkers and relieve certain side effects of chemotherapy in colorectal patients on chemotherapy.