Search

Background: Learning of burn patient assessment is very important, but heart-breaking for nursing students. This study aimed to compare the effects of feedback lecture method with a serious game (BAM Game) on nursing students' knowledge and skills in the assessment of burn patients. Method: In this randomized controlled clinical trial, 42 nursing students in their 5th semester at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences School of Nursing and Midwifery, were randomly assigned to intervention (BAM game, available for two weeks) and control (feedback lecture method presented in two 90-minute sessions) groups. Two weeks after the intervention, all students were evaluated for their knowledge (using knowledge assessment test) and skills (using an Objective Structured Clinical Examination). Statistical analysis involved independent t-test, Fisher's exact test, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), and univariable and multivariable ordinal logistic regression models. Results: Following the intervention, the skill scores were 16.4 (SD 2.2) for the intervention group and 11.8 (SD 3.8) for the control group. Similarly, the knowledge scores were 17.4 (SD 2.2) for the intervention group and 14.7 (SD 2.6) for the control group. Both differences were statistically significant (P <.001). These differences remained significant even after adjusting for various factors such as age, gender, marital status, residence, university entrance exam rank, and annual GPA (P <.05). Furthermore, the BAM game group showed significantly higher skills rank than the feedback lecture group across most stations (eight of ten) (P <.05) in the univariable analysis. Multivariable analysis also revealed a significantly higher skills score across most stations even after adjusting for the mentioned factors (P <.05). These results suggest that the BAM game group had higher skills scores over a range of 1.5 to 3.9 compared to the feedback lecture group. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that nursing students who participated in the BAM game group exhibited superior performance in knowledge acquisition and skill development, compared to those in the control group. These results underscore a significant enhancement in educational outcomes for students involved with the BAM game, confirming its utility as a potent and effective pedagogical instrument within the realm of nursing education. Trial registration: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials: IRCT20220410054483N1, Registration date: 18/04/2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effectiveness and safety of moderately hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) has been demonstrated in several pivotal randomized trials. However, the feasibility of applying simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) to the tumor bed and regional node irradiation (RNI) using modern radiotherapy techniques with HFRT needs further evaluation. Methods: This prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled, non-inferiority phase III trial aims to determine the non-inferiority of HFRT combined with SIB (HFRTsib) compared with conventional fractionated radiotherapy with sequential boost (CFRTseq) in terms of five-year locoregional control rate in breast cancer patients undergoing upfront BCS. A total of 2904 participants will be recruited and randomized in a 1:1 ratio into the HFRTsib and CFRTseq groups. All patients will receive whole breast irradiation, and those with positive axillary nodes will receive additional RNI, including internal mammary irradiation. The prescribed dose for the HFRTsib group will be 40 Gy in 15 fractions, combined with a SIB of 48 Gy in 15 fractions to the tumor bed. The CFRTseq group will receive 50 Gy in 25 fractions, with a sequential boost of 10 Gy in 5 fractions to the tumor bed. Discussion: This trial intends to assess the effectiveness and safety of SIB combined with HFRT in early breast cancer patients following BCS. The primary endpoint is locoregional control, and the results of this trial are expected to offer crucial evidence for utilizing HFRT in breast cancer patients after BCS. Trial registration: This trial was registered at ClincalTrials.gov (NCT04025164) on July 18, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Treatment of pregnancy‐associated breast cancer is complex, as providers try to balance risks to the pregnant person and the developing fetus. Given increased case fatality and increasing incidence, there is a pressing need understand the efficacy and safety of different treatment regimens in this population; however, pregnant and lactating people have traditionally been excluded from participating in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Given recent efforts to expand the inclusion criteria for oncology RCTs, this study aimed to review the inclusion/exclusion criteria of current breast cancer RCTs to assess what proportion of trials permitted enrollment of pregnant and lactating persons. Material and methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of ClinicalTrials.gov in January 2022 to identify interventional studies of breast cancer in adults that were actively recruiting. The primary outcomes were the exclusion of pregnant and lactating people. Results: The search identified 1706 studies, of which 1451 met eligibility criteria. Overall, 69.4% and 54.8% of studies excluded pregnant and lactating people, respectively. The exclusion of pregnant and lactating persons differed by study characteristics but extended across all trial designs, locations, phases and interventions. Exclusion of pregnant and lactating persons was most common in trials where the intervention was biological (86.3%), drug (83.5%) or radiation (81.5%). Conclusions: The exclusion of pregnant and lactating people from clinical trials contributes to evidence gaps in how to treat this population. A paradigm shift is needed that focuses on how research can be used to protect pregnant people from future harms, instead of protecting pregnant people from research‐related risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Fluoridation of public water systems is known as a safe and effective strategy for preventing dental caries based on evidence from non-randomized studies. Yet 110 million Americans do not have access to a fluoridated public water system and many others do not drink tap water. This article describes the study protocol for the first randomized controlled trial (RCT) of fluoridated water that assesses its potential dental caries preventive efficacy when delivered in bottles. Methods: waterBEST is a phase 2b proof-of-concept, randomized, quadruple-masked, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial designed to estimate the potential efficacy of fluoridated versus non-fluoridated bottled water to prevent dental caries incidence in the first 4 years of life. Two hundred children living in eastern North Carolina, USA, and aged 2–6 months at screening are being allocated at random in a 1:1 ratio to receive fluoridated (0.7 mg/L F) or non-fluoridated bottled water sourced from two local public water systems. Throughout the 3.5-year intervention, study water is delivered monthly in 5-gallon bottles to each child's home with instructions to use it whenever the child consumes water as a beverage or in food preparation. Parents are interviewed quarterly to monitor children's water consumption and health. At annual visits, the presence of dental caries is evaluated with a dental screening examination. Clippings from fingernails and toenails are collected to quantify fluoride content as a biomarker of total fluoride intake. The primary endpoint is the number of primary tooth surfaces decayed, missing, or filled due to dental caries measured by the study dentist near the time of the child's fourth birthday. Tooth decay is assessed at the threshold of macroscopic enamel loss. For the primary aim, a least-squares, generalized linear model will estimate efficacy and its one-tailed, upper 80% confidence limit. Discussion: waterBEST is the first evaluation of a randomized intervention of fluoridated drinking water in bottles to prevent dental caries in the primary dentition. This innovative method of delivering fluoridated water has the potential to prevent early childhood caries in a large segment of the US population that currently does not benefit from fluoridated public water. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04893681. Registered on March 2022. Last update posted on 10 October 2023. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04893681?cond=Dental%20Caries%20in%20Children&term=fluoride&locStr=North%20Carolina,%20USA&country=United%20States&state=North%20Carolina&distance=50&rank=1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Exogenous hydrogen sulfide (H2S) has a positive effect on respiratory diseases. Oleo-gum of Ferula assa-foetida contains this compound. This study assessed the effects of Ferula assa-foetida L. oleo gum resin and tragacanth (Phytopaj) on patients with COVID-19. Materials and Methods: A randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial (RCT) phase 2 was conducted in Mashhad on hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In this RCT, 122 patients were randomly assigned to either receive a 14-day oral phytopaj plus ordinary treatment or ordinary treatment only. Changes in peripheral blood lymphocyte count (LC) and blood oxygen saturation (PO2) were the endpoints. Results: Mean±SD of PO2 in Phytopaj comparison ordinary treatment before intervention was 91.86±4.62 and 91.41±9.18, after the intervention it was 93.22±4.26 and 91.91±5.92 mmHg; before intervention, mean±SD of peripheral blood lymphocyte count was 1015.90±500.55, and 1104.28±543.61, and after intervention, it was 1652.27±921.38 and 1326.12±719.28/μL respectively. Conclusion: Phyopaj is most useful in moderate stages of Covid19, and it is not recommended for elderly patients and patients with comorbidity until more insight is gained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study (ISRCTN17174559) aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of a kind of herbal porridge (Hou Gu Mi Xi) on the clinical symptoms of functional dyspepsia (FD). This was a single‐center, single‐dose, prospective, double‐blind, randomized controlled trial involving 64 participants with FD (35 cases and 29 controls) for 2 months of intervention and 1 month of follow‐up. The 7‐point Global Overall Symptom Scale (GOSS), 36‐Item Short Form Survey (SF‐36), and other indicators were assessed at baseline (day 0), at days 15, 30, and 60 of treatment, and at follow‐up 1 month after the end of the intervention. Many participants with FD achieved remission of their epigastric symptoms at follow‐up on the 90th day after treatment with herbal porridge compared to the placebo group (45.71% vs. 20.69%, p =.036). Furthermore, herbal porridge appeared to be effective in improving the quality of life of participants with FD, which was reflected in the rising SF‐36 scores for physical role, bodily pain, emotional role, and mental health. Although adverse events were reported, there was no overall difference in the number of adverse events between the two groups (p =.578). Herbal porridge is another effective and safe method for improving the symptoms and quality of life in patients with FD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical trials assessing new treatment effects require a control group to compare the pure treatment effects. However, in clinical trials on regenerative medicine, rare diseases, and intractable diseases, it may be ethically difficult to assign participants to the control group. In recent years, the use of historical control data has attracted attention as a method for supplementing the number of participants in the control group. When combining historical control data with new randomized controlled trial (RCT) data, the assessment of heterogeneity using outcome data is not sufficient. Therefore, several statistical methods that consider participant outcomes and baseline characteristics, including the propensity score (PS) method have been proposed. Methods: We propose a new method considering "information on whether the data are RCT data or not" in the PS model when combining the RCT and historical control data. The performance of the proposed method in estimating the treatment effect is evaluated using simulation data. Results: When the distribution of covariates is similar between the RCT and historical control data, not much difference in performance is found between the proposed and conventional methods to estimate the treatment effect. On the other hand, when the distribution of covariates is not similar between the two kinds of data, the proposed method shows higher performance. Conclusions: Even when it is not known whether RCT and historical control data are similar, the proposed PS model is useful to estimate the treatment effect appropriately in RCTs using historical control data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vancomycin is a commonly prescribed antibiotic to treat gram-positive infections. The efficacy of vancomycin is known to be directly related to the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) index of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) divided by the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the pathogen. However, in most countries, steady-state plasma concentrations are used as a surrogate parameter of target AUC/MIC, but this practice has some drawbacks. Hence, direct AUC-guided monitoring of vancomycin using model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) tools has been proposed for earlier attainment of target concentrations and reducing vancomycin-related nephrotoxicity. However, solid scientific evidence for these benefits in clinical practice is still lacking. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aims to investigate the clinical utility of MIPD dosing of vancomycin administered via continuous infusion in hospitalized adults. Methods: Participants from 11 wards at two Belgian hospitals are randomly allocated to the intervention group or the standard-of-care comparator group. In the intervention group, clinical pharmacists perform dose calculations using CE-labeled MIPD software and target an AUC24h of 400 to 600 mg × h/L, whereas patients in the comparator group receive standard-of-care dosing and monitoring according to the institutional guidelines. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients reaching the target AUC24h/MIC of 400–600 between 48 and 72 h after start of vancomycin treatment. Secondary endpoints are the proportion of patients with (worsening) acute kidney injury (AKI) during and until 48 h after stop of vancomycin treatment, the proportion of patients reaching target AUC24h/MIC of 400–600 between 72 and 96 h after start of vancomycin treatment, and the proportion of time within the target AUC24h/MIC of 400–600. Discussion: This trial will clarify the propagated benefits and provide new insights into how to optimally monitor vancomycin treatment. Trial registration: EudraCT number: 2021-003670-31. Registered June 28, 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05535075. Registered September 10, 2022. Protocol version 3, protocol date: April 21, 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Premature ejaculation is one of the most common male sexual dysfunction, affecting approximately 30% of men. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and at the same time the safety of the cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) device in treatment of premature ejaculation disorder. Methods: Based on a randomized clinical trial, two groups were included in the study, so that the first group was treated with sertraline along with an ATANG (AT-9 model) CES, and the second group with sertraline and inactive the CES device (as the placebo group). The state of premature ejaculation after treatment (using the Premature Ejaculation Diagnostic Tool (PEDT) questionnaire) was evaluated and compared for both groups. Results: In the intervention and placebo groups, the average score of the PEDT questionnaire before the intervention did not differ significantly between the two groups (p-value equal to 0.93). However, the average score of the PEDT questionnaire after the intervention for CES group and placebo group was 10.28 ± 1.93 and 13.23 ± 3.05, respectively, which demonstrated a significant decrease in the intervention group (p-value equal to 0.01). Conclusion: The use of CES device as a complementary treatment along with routine drug treatment (sertraline) is associated with a significant improvement in the condition of premature ejaculation of patients. Trial registration: Name of the registry: IRCT Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials. Trial registration number: IRCT20210621051657N1. Date of registration: December 11, 2022. URL of trial registry record: https://en.irct.ir/trial/57201. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The distal transradial access (dTRA) has become an attractive and alternative access to the conventional transradial access (TRA) for cardiovascular interventional diagnosis and/or treatment. There was a lack of randomized clinical trials to evaluate the effect of the dTRA on the long-term radial artery occlusion (RAO). Methods: This was a prospective, randomized controlled study. The primary endpoint was the incidence of long-term RAO at 3 months after discharge. The secondary endpoints included the successful puncture rate, puncture time, and other access-related complications. Results: The incidence of long-term RAO was 0.8% (3/361) for dTRA and 3.3% (12/365) for TRA (risk ratio = 0.25, 95% confidence interval = 0.07–0.88, P = 0.02). The incidence of RAO at 24 h was significantly lower in the dTRA group than in the TRA group (2.5% vs. 6.7%, P < 0.01). The puncture success rate (96.0% vs. 98.5%, P = 0.03) and single puncture attempt (70.9% vs. 83.9%, P < 0.01) were significantly lower in the dTRA group than in the TRA group. However, the number of puncture attempts and puncture time were higher in the dTRA group. The dTRA group had a lower incidence of bleeding than the TRA group (1.5% vs. 6.0%, P < 0.01). There was no difference in the success rate of the procedure, total fluoroscopy time, or incidence of other access-related complications between the two groups. In the per-protocol analysis, the incidence of mEASY type ≥ II haematoma was significantly lower in the dTRA group, which was consistent with that in the as-treated analysis. Conclusions: The dTRA significantly reduced the incidence of long-term RAO, bleeding or haematoma. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifer: NCT05253820. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with increased levels of blood interleukin (IL)-6. Therefore, it is hypothesized that modulating the levels or effects of IL-6 could diminish airway inflammation and alter the course of COVID-19. We conducted a controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical trial on hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 in Iran. The patients were randomly distributed by block randomization to take either standard-of-care (SOC) plus 1 or 2 doses of tocilizumab 8 mg/kg or SOC alone. The endpoint was defined by clinical improvement and discharge. We enrolled 40 patients (20 patients in each group) from 10 July to 10 December 2020. After randomization, 1 patient in the SOC arm and 3 patients in the tocilizumab arm refused to participate and were eliminated from the study. The mean age of participants was 59.62±15.80 in the tocilizumab group (8 women and 9 men) and 63.52±12.83 years old in the SOC group (9 women and 10 men) groups. The number of patients who recovered did not differ significantly between the tocilizumab and SOC groups (12 [70.6%][70.6%] vs. 15 [78.9%]), respectively). Hospitalization rates were also similar between the groups (Log-rank test, p=0.615; hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI [0.39–1.78]). The results show that tocilizumab could not be a beneficial agent for treating severe cases of COVID-19 patients and would not significantly improve clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 will coexist with humans for a long time, and it is therefore important to develop effective treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Recent studies have demonstrated that antiviral therapy is a key factor in preventing patients from progressing to severe disease, even death. Effective and affordable antiviral medications are essential for disease treatment and are urgently needed. Azvudine, a nucleoside analogue, is a potential low-cost candidate with few drug interactions. However, validation of high-quality clinical studies is still limited. Methods: This is a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial involving 1096 adult patients with mild-to-moderate symptoms of COVID-19 who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19. Patients will be randomized to (1) receive azvudine tablets 5 mg daily for a maximum of 7 days or (2) receive placebo five tablets daily. All participants will be permitted to use a standard treatment strategy except antiviral therapy beyond the investigational medications. The primary outcome will be the ratio of COVID-19-related critical illness and all-cause mortality among the two groups within 28 days. Discussion: The purpose of this clinical trial is to determine whether azvudine can prevent patients at risk of severe disease from progressing to critical illness and death, and the results will identify whether azvudine is an effective and affordable antiviral treatment option for COVID-19. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05689034. Registered on 18 January 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]