Trials
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Collaborative Interventions for Circulation and Depression (COINCIDE): study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of collaborative care for depression in people with diabetes and/or coronary heart disease.
Depression is up to two to three times as common in people with long-term conditions. It negatively affects medical management of disease and self-care behaviors, and leads to poorer quality of life and high costs in primary care. Screening and treatment of depression is increasingly prioritized, but despite initiatives to improve access and quality of care, depression remains under-detected and under-treated, especially in people with long-term conditions. Collaborative care is known to positively affect the process and outcome of care for people with depression and long-term conditions, but its effectiveness outside the USA is still relatively unknown. Furthermore, collaborative care has yet to be tested in settings that resemble more naturalistic settings that include patient choice and the usual care providers. The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a collaborative-care intervention, for people with depression and diabetes/coronary heart disease in National Health Service (NHS) primary care, in which low-intensity psychological treatment services are delivered by the usual care provider - Increasing Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services. The study also aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention over 6 months, and to assess qualitatively the extent to which collaborative care was implemented in the intervention general practices. ⋯ COINCIDE will assess whether collaborative care can improve patient-centered outcomes, and evaluate access to and quality of care of co-morbid depression of varying intensity in people with diabetes/coronary heart disease. Additionally, by working with usual care providers such as IAPT, and by identifying and evaluating interventions that are effective and appropriate for routine use in the NHS, the COINCIDE trial offers opportunities to address translational gaps between research and implementation.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
The effect of a patient-oriented treatment decision aid for risk factor management in patients with diabetes (PORTDA-diab): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
To improve risk factor management in diabetes, we need to support effective interactions between patients and healthcare providers. Our aim is to develop and evaluate a treatment decision aid that offers personalised information on treatment options and outcomes, and is intended to empower patients in taking a proactive role in their disease management. Important features are: (1) involving patients in setting goals together with their provider; (2) encourage them to prioritise on treatments that maximise relevant outcomes; and (3) integration of the decision aid in the practice setting and workflow. As secondary aim, we want to evaluate the impact of different presentation formats, and learn more from the experiences of the healthcare providers and patients with the decision aid. ⋯ This decision aid is innovative in supporting patients and their healthcare providers to make shared decisions about multiple treatments, using the patient's data from electronic medical records. The results can contribute to the further development and implementation of electronic decision support tools for the management of chronic diseases.
-
Maintenance of the blind-to-treatment allocation is one of the most important means of avoiding bias in randomised controlled clinical trials. Commonly used methodologies to determine whether patients have become unblinded to treatment allocation are imperfect. This may be of particular concern in studies where outcomes are patient-reported, and with products which have a characteristic adverse event profile. We report the results of an evidence-based statistical approach to exploring the possible impact of unblinding to a cannabis-based medicine (Sativex®) in people with muscle spasticity due to multiple sclerosis. ⋯ There is no evidence to suggest that there was widespread unblinding to treatment allocation in these three studies. If any patients did become unblinded, then there is no evidence that this led to bias in the assessment of the treatment difference between Sativex® and Placebo for efficacy, adverse events or study drug dosing. This methodology may be suitable for assessment of the integrity of the blind in other randomized clinical trials.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Antibiotics for bronchiectasis exacerbations in children: rationale and study protocol for a randomised placebo-controlled trial.
Despite bronchiectasis being increasingly recognised as an important cause of chronic respiratory morbidity in both indigenous and non-indigenous settings globally, high quality evidence to inform management is scarce. It is assumed that antibiotics are efficacious for all bronchiectasis exacerbations, but not all practitioners agree. Inadequately treated exacerbations may risk lung function deterioration. Our study tests the hypothesis that both oral azithromycin and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid are superior to placebo at improving resolution rates of respiratory exacerbations by day 14 in children with bronchiectasis unrelated to cystic fibrosis. ⋯ Effective, evidence-based management of exacerbations in people with bronchiectasis is clinically important. Yet, there are few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the neglected area of non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis. Indeed, no published RCTs addressing the treatment of bronchiectasis exacerbations in children exist. Our multicentre, double-blind RCT is designed to determine if azithromycin and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, compared with placebo, improve symptom resolution on day 14 in children with acute respiratory exacerbations. Our planned assessment of the predictors of antibiotic response, the role of antibiotic-resistant respiratory pathogens, and whether early treatment with antibiotics affects duration and time to the next exacerbation, are also all novel.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Does intermittent pneumatic compression reduce the risk of post stroke deep vein thrombosis? The CLOTS 3 trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Approximately 80,000 patients each year are admitted to U.K. hospitals with an acute stroke and are immobile. At least 10% will develop a proximal deep vein thrombosis in the first month and 1.5% a pulmonary embolus. Although hydration, antiplatelet treatment and early mobilisation may reduce the risk of deep vein thrombosis, there are currently no preventive strategies which have been clearly shown to be both effective and safe. Anticoagulation increases the risks of bleeding and compression stockings are ineffective. Systematic reviews of small randomized trials of intermittent pneumatic compression have shown that this reduces the risk of deep vein thrombosis in patients undergoing surgery, but that there are few data concerning its use after stroke. The CLOTS trial 3 aims to determine whether, compared with best medical care, best medical care plus intermittent pneumatic compression in immobile stroke patients reduces the risk of proximal deep vein thrombosis. ⋯ The trial started recruitment in Dec 2008 and will complete recruitment during 2012. It will report results in 2013.