ABSTRACT
Objectives This article observes the mean daily dose of fentanyl required for adequate sedation in critically ill, mechanically ventilated children randomized to receive dexmedetomidine or placebo.Methods We conducted Dexmedetomidine Opioid Sparing Effect in Mechanically Ventilated Children (DOSE), a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalating trial. We enrolled children aged 35 weeks postmenstrual to 17 years (inclusive) admitted across 13 pediatric multidisciplinary and cardiac intensive care units. Adequate sedation was based on a State Behavioral Score and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of -1 or lower. Only the first two dexmedetomidine dosing cohorts opened for enrollment, due to early trial closure during the coronavirus 2019 pandemic. Thirty children were randomized over 13 months and included in the analyses.Results Demographic and baseline characteristics were not different between dexmedetomidine and placebo cohorts. Similarly, mean daily fentanyl use was not different, using an unadjusted mixed regression model that considered treatment, time, and a treatment-by-time interaction. Adverse events and safety events of special interest were not different between cohorts.Conclusion The DOSE trial revealed that dexmedetomidine added to fentanyl does not impact safety and may not spare fentanyl use in critically ill children, although the trial did not meet its recruitment goals, due to early closure during the coronavirus 2019 pandemic. More rigorous inpatient pediatric trials like DOSE that study critically ill, mechanically ventilated children are needed. Despite the many obstacles faced, the DOSE trial presents challenges from which the greater research community can learn and use to optimize future therapeutic trials in children.
ABSTRACT
Background: In traditional Persian medicine, an herbal cold remedy containing Sugarcane, Black Myrobalan, and mastic is mentioned and it was being widely provided by grocery stores. With the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, the increased desire for this traditional remedy has led to a debate in society. Huge parts of the Iranian population have started using this remedy for the treatment of COVID-19;while no study has evaluated its efficiency and possible side effects. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the effects of Sugarcane, Black Myrobalan, and Mastic herbal medications for COVID-19 patients. Methods: This was a double-blinded randomized clinical trial study conducted over three months from May 2020 to July 2020 in SARS-COV2 PCR positive patients admitted in the COVID-19 ward of Peymaniyeh Hospital in Jahrom, Iran. Patients with severe COVID-19 infection were not recruited. The intervention group received the routine COVID-19 treatment protocol and the herbal supplement received the combination of black myrobalan and mastic and sugarcane, twice a day (3 g of herbal supplement). Study groups were compared in terms of demographic variables, vital signs, and clinical and laboratory variables for safety and efficiency assessment. Results: Seventy-two patients with COVID-19, divided into intervention (n=37) and control (n = 35) groups were studied. Intervention and control groups had not any significant difference in terms of baseline characteristics. The time-to-event analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in 4 symptoms of cough, fever, dyspnea, and myalgia (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in averaged O2 vital signs between the two groups (P>0.05). The Control group in comparison to the intervention group had a significantly lower decrease in C-reactive protein during 7 days (P<0.05). Patients in the herbal supplement group were hospitalized for 4.12 days and patients in the control group were hospitalized for 8.37 days (P=0.001). ICU admission and death only happened in 3 (8.6%) patients of the control group. Conclusion: This study showed that the proposed herbal remedy could be applied as supplementation to conventional management of COVID-19 patients with mild disease, while more research is needed for clinical application of this remedy. © 2023 by SPC (Sami Publishing Company)
ABSTRACT
Background: Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) is a quality improvement intervention designed to enhance access to kidney transplantation and living kidney donation. We conducted a cluster-randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of the intervention versus usual care on completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Objective: To prespecify the statistical analysis plan for the EnAKT LKD trial. Design: The EnAKT LKD trial is a pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, cluster-randomized, superiority, clinical trial. Randomization was performed at the level of the chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (the "clusters"). Setting: Twenty-six CKD programs in Ontario, Canada. Participants: More than 10 000 patients with advanced CKD (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis) with no recorded contraindication to receiving a kidney transplant. Methods: The trial data (including patient characteristics and outcomes) will be obtained from linked administrative health care databases (the "registry"). Stratified covariate-constrained randomization was used to allocate the 26 CKD programs (1:1) to provide the intervention or usual care from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021 (4.17 years). CKD programs in the intervention arm received the following: (1) support for local quality improvement teams and administrative needs; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders. Outcomes: The primary outcome is completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant, where up to 4 unique steps per patient will be considered: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) a potential living kidney donor begins their evaluation at a transplant center to donate a kidney to the patient, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant waitlist, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor. Analysis plan: Using an intent-to-treat approach, the primary outcome will be analyzed using a patient-level constrained multistate model adjusting for the clustering in CKD programs. Trial Status: The EnAKT LKD trial period is November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. We expect to analyze and report the results once the data for the trial period is available in linked administrative health care databases. Trial Registration: The EnAKT LKD trial is registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health at clincaltrials.gov (NCT03329521 available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03329521). Statistical Analytic Plan: Version 1.0 August 26, 2022.
Contexte: EnAKT LKD est une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité visant à améliorer l'accès à la transplantation rénale et au don vivant de rein. Nous avons mené un essai clinique randomisé par grappes afin d'évaluer l'effet de l'intervention, par rapport aux soins habituels, sur le taux d'étapes clés réalisées dans le processus de réception d'une greffe de rein. Objectif: Exposer les grandes lignes du plan d'analyse statistique de l'essai EAKT LKD. Conception: EAKT LKD est un essai clinique pragmatique ouvert, à deux bras, en groupes parallèles, basé sur un registre, et randomisé en grappes. La randomisation a été réalisée au niveau des programmes d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC) (les « grappes ¼). Cadre: 26 programmes d'IRC en Ontario (Canada). Sujets: Plus de 10 000 patients atteints d'IRC de stade avancé (des patients approchant le besoin de dialyse ou recevant une hémodialyse d'entretien) sans contre-indication documentée à la greffe rénale. Méthodologie: Les données de l'essai (y compris les caractéristiques et les résultats des patients) seront obtenues à partir de bases de données administratives en santé (le « registre ¼). La randomisation stratifiée avec contraintes de covariables a servi à répartir les 26 programmes d'IRC (1:1) selon qu'ils allaient fournir l'intervention ou les soins habituels entre le 1er novembre 2017 et le 31 décembre 2021 (4,17 ans). Les programmes d'IRC du bras d'intervention ont eu droit au soutien suivant: (1) des équipes locales d'amélioration de la qualité et du soutien administratif; (2) de l'information et des ressources sur mesure pour le personnel, les patients et les donneurs vivants; (3) du soutien de la part de receveurs et de donneurs vivants; et (4) des rapports sur le rendement au niveau du programme et une surveillance assurée par les chefs de programme. Résultats: Le principal critère d'évaluation est le taux d'étapes clés accomplies vers la réception d'une greffe de rein, où jusqu'à quatre étapes uniques par patient seront comptabilisées: (1) le patient est aiguillé vers un centre de transplantation pour évaluation; (2) un possible donneur vivant de rein contacte un centre de transplantation pour un receveur en particulier et amorce son évaluation; (3) le patient est ajouté à la liste d'attente pour une transplantation d'un donneur décédé, et (4) le patient reçoit une greffe de rein d'un donneur vivant ou décédé. Plan d'analyse: Selon une approche fondée sur l'intention de traiter, le critère d'évaluation principal sera analysé au niveau du patient en utilisant un modèle multiétats contraint, corrigé dans les programmes d'IRC en fonction du regroupement. Statut de l'essai: L'essai EnAKT LKD s'est tenu du 1er novembre 2017 au 31 décembre 2021. Nous analyserons les résultats et en rendrons compte dès que les données seront disponibles dans les bases de données administratives couplées du système de santé.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite the prior evidence of the impacts of sumac on glycemic indices, lipid profile and visceral fat, there is a lack of evidence regarding the efficacy of sumac in cases with metabolic syndrome (MetS). Therefore, we aimed to assess the effect of sumac supplementation on MetS markers among adults with this syndrome. METHODS: In this triple-blinded randomized placebo-controlled cross-over clinical trial 47 adults with MetS were randomly assigned to receive 500 mg sumac or placebo (lactose) capsule, twice a day. Each phase took 6 weeks and there was a 2-week washout between phases. All clinical evaluations and laboratory tests were conducted before and after each phase. RESULTS: At the baseline of the study, mean (± SD) age, weight, and waist circumference of participants were respectively 58.7 (± 5.8) yr, 79.9 (± 14.3) kg, and 107.6 (± 10.8) cm. Intention to treat analysis (ITT) analyses revealed that sumac supplementation decreased systolic blood pressure by 5 mmHg (128.8 ± 21.4 at the baseline vs. 123.2 ± 17.6 after 6 weeks intervention, P = 0.001). The comparison of changes in two trial arms showed that sumac supplementation significantly reduced systolic blood pressure (sumac group -5.59 ± 10.6 vs. control group 0.76 ± 10.5, P = 0.004), but did not change anthropometric indices or diastolic blood pressure. Similar results were also found in the per-protocol analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This cross-over trial revealed that sumac supplementation could reduce systolic blood pressure in men and women with MetS. Daily intake of 1000 mg sumac, as an adjuvant therapy, may be beneficial in management of MetS in adults.
Subject(s)
Metabolic Syndrome , Rhus , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Anthropometry , Blood Pressure , Dietary Supplements , Metabolic Syndrome/drug therapy , Cross-Over StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is a pressing need for scalable healthcare solutions and a shift in the rehabilitation paradigm from hospitals to homes to tackle the increase in stroke incidence while reducing the practical and economic burden for patients, hospitals, and society. Digital health technologies can contribute to addressing this challenge; however, little is known about their effectiveness in at-home settings. In response, we have designed the RGS@home study to investigate the effectiveness, acceptance, and cost of a deep tech solution called the Rehabilitation Gaming System (RGS). RGS is a cloud-based system for delivering AI-enhanced rehabilitation using virtual reality, motion capture, and wearables that can be used in the hospital and at home. The core principles of the brain theory-based RGS intervention are to deliver rehabilitation exercises in the form of embodied, goal-oriented, and task-specific action. METHODS: The RGS@home study is a randomized longitudinal clinical trial designed to assess whether the combination of the RGS intervention with standard care is superior to standard care alone for the functional recovery of stroke patients at the hospital and at home. The study is conducted in collaboration with hospitals in Spain, Sweden, and France and includes inpatients and outpatients at subacute and chronic stages post-stroke. The intervention duration is 3 months with assessment at baseline and after 3, 6, and 12 months. The impact of RGS is evaluated in terms of quality of life measurements, usability, and acceptance using standardized clinical scales, together with health economic analysis. So far, one-third of the patients expected to participate in the study have been recruited (N = 90, mean age 60, days after stroke ≥ 30 days). The trial will end in July 2023. DISCUSSION: We predict an improvement in the patients' recovery, high acceptance, and reduced costs due to a soft landing from the clinic to home rehabilitation. In addition, the data provided will allow us to assess whether the prescription of therapy at home can counteract deterioration and improve quality of life while also identifying new standards for online and remote assessment, diagnostics, and intervention across European hospitals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: C linicalTrials.gov NCT04620707. Registered on November 3, 2020.
Subject(s)
Stroke Rehabilitation , Stroke , Telemedicine , Humans , Middle Aged , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Recovery of Function , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/therapy , Stroke Rehabilitation/methodsABSTRACT
To assess the virucidal effect of povidone iodine (PVP-I) on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) located in the nasopharynx and suitable dose-formulation for nasal application were the purpose of this clinical trial. This single-center, open-label randomized clinical trial with a 7-arm parallel-group design was conducted in Dhaka Medical College (DMC) Hospital. A total of 189 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS CoV-2 positive cases aged 12-90 years with symptoms was sequentially enrolled following randomization. Nasopharyngeal clearance of SARS-CoV-2 was tested against PVP-I nasal irrigation (NI) at diluted concentrations of 0.4%, 0.5% and 0.6%, and PVP-I nasal spray (NS) at diluted concentrations of 0.5% and 0.6%. All groups were compared to the corresponding controls (distilled water). Written informed consent was ensured before participation. All procedures were conducted in after ethical clearance from the Ethical Review Board and in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Viral clearance in a repeat RT-PCR (qualitative) was the primary outcome, and occurrence of any adverse event following administration of testing drug was considered as the secondary outcome. Analysis was performed using SPSS (Version 26). All cases were randomized into seven groups and each group consists of 27-patient. Mean age of the cases 43.98 ± 12.67 years (SD). All strength of NI were effective in nasopharyngeal clearance compared to the control (0.4%, p = 0.006; 0.5%, p < 0.001; and 0.6%, p = 0.018). Similarly, all strength of the NS is also effective than control (0.5%, p = < 0.001; and 0.6%, p ≤ 0.001). Highest nasopharyngeal clearance was observed in patients using 0.5% NI (n = 25, 92.6%, p = 0.018). Nasal irritation was the single most adverse event recorded in this trial and found in two patients using 0.4%, and 0.6% PVP-I NI, respectively. Both PVP-I NS and NI are effective for nasopharyngeal clearance in-vivo. However, further community trials are needed to repurpose these solutions as preventive agents against SARS-CoV2. Ethical clearance memo no ERC-DMC/ECC/2020/93. Trial registration NCT Identifier number NCT04549376. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12070-022-03106-0.
ABSTRACT
Background and aim: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a proliferation of intubation barriers designed to protect healthcare workers from infection. We developed the Suction-Assisted Local Aerosol Containment Chamber (SLACC) and tested it in the operating room. The primary objectives were to determine the ease and safety of airway management with SLACC, and to measure its efficacy of aerosol containment to determine if it significantly reduces exposure to health care workers. Method(s): In this randomized clinical trial, adult patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery with general endotracheal anesthesia were screened and informed consent obtained from those willing to participate. Patients were randomized to airway management either with or without the SLACC device. Patients inhaled nebulized saline before and during anesthesia induction to simulate the size and concentration of particles seen with severe symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Result(s): 79 patients were enrolled and randomized. Particle number concentration (PNC) at the patients' and healthcare workers' locations were measured and compared between the SLACC vs. control groups during airway management. Ease and success of tracheal intubation were recorded for each patient. All intubations were successful and time to intubation was similar between the two groups. Healthcare workers were exposed to significantly lower particle number concentrations (#/cm3) during airway management when SLACC was utilized vs. control. The particle count outside SLACC was reduced by 97% compared to that inside the device. Conclusion(s): The SLACC device does not interfere with airway management and significantly reduces healthcare worker exposure to aerosolized particles during airway management.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd
ABSTRACT
Clinical Cohort Studies (CCS), such as randomized clinical trials, are a great source of documented clinical research. Ideally, a clinical expert inspects these articles for exploratory analysis ranging from drug discovery for evaluating the efficacy of existing drugs in tackling emerging diseases to the first test of newly developed drugs. However, more than 100 articles are published daily on a single prevalent disease like COVID-19 in PubMed. As a result, it can take days for a physician to find articles and extract relevant information. Can we develop a system to sift through these articles faster and document the crucial takeaways from each of these articles? In this work, we propose CCS Explorer, an end-to-end system for relevance prediction of sentences, extractive summarization, and patient, outcome, and intervention entity detection from CCS. CCS Explorer is packaged in a web-based graphical user interface where the user can provide any disease name. CCS Explorer then extracts and aggregates all relevant information from articles on PubMed based on the results of an automatically generated query produced on the back-end. For each task, CCS Explorer fine-tunes pre-trained language representation models based on transformers with additional layers. The models are evaluated using two publicly available datasets. CCS Explorer obtains a recall of 80.2%, AUC-ROC of 0.843, and an accuracy of 88.3% on sentence relevance prediction using BioBERT and achieves an average Micro F1-Score of 77.8% on Patient, Intervention, Outcome detection (PIO) using PubMedBERT. Thus, CCS Explorer can reliably extract relevant information to summarize articles, saving time by ~660×. © 2022 IEEE.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated anxiety and related symptoms among the general population. In order to cope with the mental health burden, we developed an online brief modified mindfulness-based stress reduction (mMBSR) therapy. We performed a parallel-group randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of the mMBSR for adult anxiety with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) as an active control. Participants were randomized to mMBSR, CBT or waitlist group. Those in the intervention arms performed each therapy for 6 sections in 3 weeks. Measurements were conducted at baseline, post-treatment and 6 months post-treatment by Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Patient Health Questionnaire-15, reverse scored Cohen Perceived Stress scale, Insomnia Severity Index, and Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale. 150 participants with anxiety symptoms were randomized to mMBSR, CBT or waitlist group. Post intervention assessments showed that mMBSR improved the scores of all the six mental problem dimensions (anxiety, depression, somatization, stress, insomnia, and the experience of pleasure) significantly compared to the waitlist group. During 6-month post treatment assessment, the scores of all six mental problem dimensions in the mMBSR group still showed improvement compared to baseline and showed no significant difference with the CBT group. Our results provide positive evidence for the efficacy and feasibility of an online brief modified MBSR program to alleviate anxiety and related symptoms of individuals from the general population, and the therapeutic benefits of mMBSR persisted for up to six months. This low resource-consuming intervention could facilitate the challenges of supplying psychological health therapy to large scale of population.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mindfulness , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders , Adult , Humans , Anxiety/therapy , Anxiety/psychology , Anxiety Disorders/therapy , Depression/therapy , Depression/psychology , East Asian People , Mindfulness/methods , Pandemics , Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders/therapy , Stress, Psychological/therapy , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Treatment Outcome , Cognitive Behavioral Therapy , Waiting ListsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Perinatal mood disorders such as depression and anxiety are common, with subclinical symptomology manifesting as perinatal mood disturbances being even more prevalent. These could potentially affect breastfeeding practices and infant development. Pregnant and lactating women usually limit their exposure to medications, including those for psychological symptoms. Interestingly, the naturally occurring probiotic Bifidobacterium longum (BL) NCC3001 has been shown to reduce anxious behavior in preclinical models and feelings of low mood in nonpregnant human adults. During the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health issues increased, and conventionally conducted clinical trials were restricted by social distancing regulations. OBJECTIVE: This study, Probiotics on Mothers' Mood and Stress (PROMOTE), aimed to use a decentralized clinical trial design to test whether BL NCC3001 can reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress over the perinatal period. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, and 3-parallel-arm study aimed to recruit 180 women to evaluate the efficacy of the probiotic taken either during pregnancy and post partum (from 28-32 weeks' gestation until 12 weeks after delivery; n=60, 33.3%) or post partum only (from birth until 12 weeks after delivery; n=60, 33.3%) in comparison with a placebo control group (n=60, 33.3%). Participants consumed the probiotic or matched placebo in a drink once daily. Mood outcomes were measured using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale questionnaires, captured electronically at baseline (28-32 weeks' gestation) and during e-study sessions over 5 further time points (36 weeks' gestation; 9 days post partum; and 4, 8, and 12 weeks post partum). Saliva and stool samples were collected longitudinally at home to provide mechanistic insights. RESULTS: In total, 520 women registered their interest on our website, of whom 184 (35.4%) were eligible and randomized. Of these 184 participants, 5 (2.7%) withdrew after randomization, leaving 179 (97.3%) who completed the study. Recruitment occurred between November 7, 2020, and August 20, 2021. Advertising on social media brought in 46.9% (244/520) of the prospective participants, followed by parenting-specific websites (116/520, 22.3%). Nationwide recruitment was achieved. Data processing is ongoing, and there are no outcomes to report yet. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple converging factors contributed to speedy recruitment and retention of participants despite COVID-19-related restrictions. This decentralized trial design sets a precedent for similar studies, in addition to potentially providing novel evidence on the impact of BL NCC3001 on symptoms of perinatal mood disturbances. This study was ideal for remote conduct: because of the high digital literacy and public trust in digital security in Singapore, the intervention could be self-administered without regular clinical monitoring, and the eligibility criteria and outcomes were measured using electronic questionnaires and self-collected biological samples. This design was particularly suited for a group considered vulnerable-pregnant women-during the challenging times of COVID-19-related social restrictions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04685252; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04685252. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41751.
ABSTRACT
Influenza vaccination rates are low. Working with a large US health system, we evaluated three health system-wide interventions using the electronic health record's patient portal to improve influenza vaccination rates. We performed a two-arm RCT with a nested factorial design within the treatment arm, randomizing patients to usual-care control (no portal interventions) or to one or more portal interventions. We included all patients within this health system during the 2020-2021 influenza vaccination season, which overlapped with the COVID-19 pandemic. Through the patient portal, we simultaneously tested: pre-commitment messages (sent September 2020, asking patients to commit to a vaccination); monthly portal reminders (October - December 2020), direct appointment scheduling (patients could self-schedule influenza vaccination at multiple sites); and pre-appointment reminder messages (sent before scheduled primary care appointments, reminding patients about influenza vaccination). The main outcome measure was receipt of influenza vaccine (10/01/2020-03/31/2021). We randomized 213,773 patients (196,070 adults ≥18 years, 17,703 children). Influenza vaccination rates overall were low (39.0%). Vaccination rates for study arms did not differ: Control (38.9%), pre-commitment vs no pre-commitment (39.2%/38.9%), direct appointment scheduling yes/no (39.1%/39.1%), pre-appointment reminders yes/no (39.1%/39.1%); p > 0.017 for all comparisons (p value cut-off adjusted for multiple comparisons). After adjusting for age, gender, insurance, race, ethnicity, and prior influenza vaccination, none of the interventions increased vaccination rates. We conclude that patient portal interventions to remind patients to receive influenza vaccine during the COVID-19 pandemic did not raise influenza immunization rates. More intensive or tailored interventions are needed beyond portal innovations to increase influenza vaccination.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Adult , Child , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Economics, Behavioral , Pandemics , Reminder Systems , COVID-19/prevention & control , VaccinationABSTRACT
Background: Among interleukin-6 inhibitors suggested for use in COVID-19, there are few robust evidences for the efficacy of sarilumab. Herein, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in severe COVID-19. Methods: In this phase 3, open-labeled, randomized clinical trial, conducted at 5 Italian hospitals, adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia (excluding mechanically ventilated) were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous sarilumab (400 mg, repeatable after 12 h) plus standard of care (SOC) (arm A) or to continue SOC (arm B). Randomization was web-based. As post-hoc analyses, the participants were stratified according to baseline inflammatory parameters. The primary endpoint was analysed on the modified Intention-To-Treat population, including all the randomized patients who received any study treatment (sarilumab or SOC). It was time to clinical improvement of 2 points on a 7-points ordinal scale, from baseline to day 30. We used Kaplan Meier method and log-rank test to compare the primary outcome between two arms, and Cox regression stratified by clinical center and adjusted for severity of illness, to estimate the hazard ratio (HR). The trial was registered with EudraCT (2020-001390-76). Findings: Between May 2020 and May 2021, 191 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom, excluding nine dropouts, 176 were assigned to arm A (121) and B (55). At day 30, no significant differences in the primary endpoint were found (88% [95% CI 81-94] in arm A vs 85% [74-93], HR 1.07 [0.8-1.5] in arm B; log-rank p = 0.50). After stratifying for inflammatory parameters, arm A showed higher probability of improvement than B without statistical significance in the strata with C reactive protein (CRP) < 7 mg/dL (88% [77-96] vs 79% [63-91], HR 1.55 [0.9-2.6]; log-rank p = 0.049) and in the strata with lymphocytes <870/mmc (90% [79-96]) vs (73% [55-89], HR 1.53 [0.9-2.7]; log-rank p = 0.058). Overall, 39/121 (32%) AEs were reported in arm A and 14/55 (23%) in B (p = 0.195), while serious AEs were 22/121 (18%) and 7/55 (11%), respectively (p = 0.244). There were no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation: The efficacy of sarilumab in severe COVID-19 was not demonstrated both in the overall and in the stratified for severity analysis population. Exploratory analyses suggested that subsets of patients with lower CRP values or lower lymphocyte counts might have had benefit with sarilumab treatment, but this finding would require replication in other studies. The relatively low rate of concomitant corticosteroid use, could partially explain our results. Funding: This study was supported by INMI "Lazzaro Spallanzani" Ricerca Corrente Linea 1 on emerging and reemerging infections, funded by Italian Ministry of Health.
ABSTRACT
Vitamin D supplementation has been shown to reduce the incidence of acute respiratory infections in populations at risk. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of preventing viral infections in healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to assess the hypothesis that vitamin D3 supplementation at 5000 IU daily reduces influenza-like illness (ILI), including COVID-19, in healthcare workers. We conducted a prospective, controlled trial at a tertiary university hospital. A random group of healthcare workers was invited to receive 5000 IU daily vitamin D3 supplementation for nine months, while other random healthcare system workers served as controls. All healthcare workers were required to self-monitor and report to employee health for COVID-19 testing when experiencing symptoms of ILI. COVID-19 test results were retrieved. Incidence rates were compared between the vitamin D and control groups. Workers in the intervention group were included in the analysis if they completed at least 2 months of supplementation to ensure adequate vitamin D levels. The primary analysis compared the incidence rate of all ILI, while secondary analyses examined incidence rates of COVID-19 ILI and non-COVID-19 ILI. Between October 2020 and November 2021, 255 healthcare workers (age 47 ± 12 years, 199 women) completed at least two months of vitamin D3 supplementation. The control group consisted of 2827 workers. Vitamin D3 5000 IU supplementation was associated with a lower risk of ILI (incidence rate difference: -1.7 × 10-4/person-day, 95%-CI: -3.0 × 10-4 to -3.3 × 10-5/person-day, p = 0.015) and a lower incidence rate for non-COVID-19 ILI (incidence rate difference: -1.3 × 10-4/person-day, 95%-CI -2.5 × 10-4 to -7.1 × 10-6/person-day, p = 0.038). COVID-19 ILI incidence was not statistically different (incidence rate difference: -4.2 × 10-5/person-day, 95%-CI: -10.0 × 10-5 to 1.5 × 10-5/person-day, p = 0.152). Daily supplementation with 5000 IU vitamin D3 reduces influenza-like illness in healthcare workers.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Virus Diseases , Humans , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Cholecalciferol/therapeutic use , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , COVID-19 Testing , Prospective Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vitamin D , Vitamins/therapeutic use , Virus Diseases/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Dietary Supplements , Double-Blind MethodABSTRACT
Background: The SARS-CoV virus is a precursor to the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) and has caused millions of deaths worldwide. Although exercise can be a non-pharmacological means for the prevention and treatment of various diseases, the effects on COVID-19 patients are not yet completely clear. Aims: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between physical exercise and symptoms caused by COVID-19. Methods: The present systematic review was sent for evaluation and received the PROSPERO registration protocol-CRD42021257475. The search for studies related to health and physical exercise was carried out in the following databases; the "National Library in Medicine MEDLINE-Ovid", "Embase", "Web of Science", "SportDiscus-Ebsco", and "Scopus". Results: Ten articles were included in the systematic review and the findings demonstrated the protective effects of physical exercise in patients with COVID-19. These effects were observed both in symptoms and in the period of hospitalization. In addition, the results show that the benefits of physical exercise seem to collaborate both in an individual manner and as an alternative to drug therapy. Finally, it was possible to verify the effect of physical exercise on variables, such as quality of life, cardiorespiratory capacity, and immunological biomarkers, and on the symptoms of the new Coronavirus. Conclusions: It is possible to conclude that physical exercise can be a component for the treatment of COVID-19. In addition, it could help to reduce the symptoms and severity of COVID-19, and may be considered as an adjunct to drug therapy in patients contaminated with SARS-CoV-2.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) as pre-exposure prophylaxis on COVID-19 risk. METHODS: EPICOS is a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial conducted in Spain, Bolivia, and Venezuela. Healthcare workers with negative SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG test were randomly assigned to the following: daily TDF/FTC plus HCQ for 12 weeks, TDF/FTC plus HCQ placebo, HCQ plus TDF/FTC placebo, and TDF/FTC placebo plus HCQ placebo. Randomization was performed in groups of four. Primary outcome was laboratory-confirmed, symptomatic COVID-19. We also studied any (symptomatic or asymptomatic) COVID-19. We compared group-specific 14-week risks via differences and ratios with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of 1002 individuals screened, 926 (92.4%) were eligible and there were 14 cases of symptomatic COVID-19: 220 were assigned to the TDF/FTC plus HCQ group (3 cases), 231 to the TDF/FTC placebo plus HCQ group (3 cases), 233 to the TDF/FTC plus HCQ placebo group (3 cases), and 223 to the double placebo group (5 cases). Compared with the double placebo group, 14-week risk ratios (95% CI) of symptomatic COVID-19 were 0.39 (0.00-1.98) for TDF + HCQ, 0.34 (0.00-2.06) for TDF, and 0.49 (0.00-2.29) for HCQ. Corresponding risk ratios of any COVID-19 were 0.51 (0.21-1.00) for TDF + HCQ, 0.81 (0.44-1.49) for TDF, and 0.73 (0.41-1.38) for HCQ. Adverse events were generally mild. DISCUSSION: The target sample size was not met. Our findings are compatible with both benefit and harm of pre-exposure prophylaxis with TDF/FTC and HCQ, alone or in combination, compared with placebo.
ABSTRACT
Background and Objective: It is very important and necessary to use certain methods in order to prevent or reduce the intensity of pain after surgery. Of all known methods, those that avoid the dangerous side effects of opioids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can be useful. The present study was conducted with the aim of investigating the effect of topical dexamethasone on postoperative pain intensity in patients undergoing dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). Method(s): This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on 80 patients aged 18-75 who were candidates for DCR and referred to Khatam Al-Anbia Hospital in Mashhad. Patients were randomly divided into control and intervention (dexamethasone) groups. In the intervention group, at the end of the procedure, a tampon impregnated with dexamethasone was placed in the upper part of the middle concha. In the control group, a tampon washed in distilled water was placed in the same place. Pain intensity was recorded on a verbal rating scale (VRS) 0, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hours after the operation. Finding(s): There was no significant difference in pain intensity at different time points in the two groups of intervention and control;the frequency of severe pain during recovery was equal to 22.5% and 15.7%, within 3 hours after the operation was equal to 17.5% and 10.0%, within 6 hours after the operation was equal to 12.5% and 0.5%, within 12 hours after the operation was equal to 12.5% and 2.5%, within 18 hours after the operation was equal to 0% and 2.5% and within 24 hours after the operation was equal to 0% and 0%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the process of changes in pain intensity during the 24 hours of the study based on the follow-up test. Conclusion(s): The results of the study showed that topical use of a single dose of dexamethasone (8 mg) could not reduce postoperative pain as well as the need for opioids in DCR surgery. Copyright © 2023, Babol University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C), which occurs 2-6 weeks after initial exposure to SARS-CoV-2, was first identified in early 2020 when patients presented with fever and significant inflammation, often requiring management in the intensive care unit. To date, there has been no clinical trial to determine the most effective treatment. This study compares anti-inflammatory treatments that were selected based on current treatments for Kawasaki disease, a coronary artery vasculitis that shares many clinical features with MIS-C. Methods: This randomized, comparative effectiveness trial of children with MIS-C uses the small N Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (snSMART) design for rare diseases to compare multiple therapies within an individual. Study participants were treated first with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and if needed, subjects were then randomized to one of three additional treatments (steroids, anakinra, or infliximab). Participants were re-randomized to remaining treatments if they did not demonstrate clinical improvement. Conclusion: This trial continues to enroll eligible participants to determine the most effective therapies in addition to IVIG and best order in which to use them to treat MIS-C. Trial Registration: NCT04898231.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: We have previously shown that Environmental Enrichment (EE)-consisting of social support, novelty, and open spaces-decreased disease progression and anxiety in a rat model of endometriosis. We developed a novel EE intervention to be tested in a pilot randomized clinical trial (RCT) in patients with endometriosis, a painful, stressful disease. Objective: To translate and evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of an adapted EE intervention as an adjuvant to standard-of-care for endometriosis patients. Methods: Feasibility was assessed through recruitment, enrollment, and adherence rates. Acceptability was evaluated through a post-intervention survey and focus group discussion 3-months after the end of the intervention. Results: Of the 103 subjects recruited, 64 were randomized to the intervention group and 39 to the control group. At the start of the intervention, the study groups consisted of 29 (intervention) and 27 (control) subjects. Enrollment rates were 45.3% and 69.2%, and adherence rates were 41.4% and 100% for the intervention and control groups, respectively. Delays resulting from natural events (earthquakes, the COVID-19 pandemic) impacted enrollment and adherence rates. The most common reasons for missing an intervention were period pain (39.1%) and work-study (34.8%). There was high acceptability (>80%) of the intervention's logistics. The majority (82.4%) of subjects would continue participating in support groups regularly, and 95.7% would recommend the intervention to other patients. Conclusions: We showed that EE could be translated into an acceptable integrative multi-modal therapy perceived as valuable among participants who completed the intervention. High attrition/low adherence indicates that additional refinements would be needed to improve feasibility. Acceptability data indicate that EE has the potential to be integrated into the clinical management of patients with endometriosis and other inflammatory, painful disorders. Studies are ongoing to assess the efficacy of EE in improving pain symptoms, mental health, and quality of life (QoL).
ABSTRACT
Aim: We previously published results of the BATTLE trial, showing that patients recently infected with SARS-CoV-2 can benefit from receiving Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) with minimal adverse effects. The study incorporated two strains of this vaccine. In this study, patient outcomes were compared based on the strain of BCG because different strains have been shown to have different immunogenicity. Methods: BATTLE was a double-blind controlled trial of COVID-19 convalescent patients; symptom progression, injection-site lesion characteristics and adverse effects were compared between recipients of placebo, Russian BCG strain or Brazilian BCG strains. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two BCG strains in terms of symptom progression, lesion-size or type. Conclusion: The two strains have similar clinical outcomes in COVID-19 convalescent patients.
We previously published results of the BATTLE trial, showing that patients recently infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus can benefit from receiving BCG with minimal adverse effects. This article shows that the two BCG strains, Russian and Brazilian, have similar clinical outcomes in COVID-19 convalescent patients.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/therapy , BCG Vaccine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Russia , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of early treatment with convalescent plasma in patients with COVID-19 is debated. Nothing is known about the potential effect of other plasma components other than anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. METHODS: To determine whether convalescent or standard plasma would improve outcomes for adults in early phase of Covid19 respiratory impairment we designed this randomized, three-arms, clinical trial (PLACO COVID) blinded on interventional arms that was conducted from June 2020 to August 2021. It was a multicentric trial at 19 Italian hospitals. We enrolled 180 hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia within 5 days from the onset of respiratory distress. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard of care (n = 60) or standard of care + three units of standard plasma (n = 60) or standard of care + three units of high-titre convalescent plasma (n = 60) administered on days 1, 3, 5 after randomization. Primary outcome was 30-days mortality. Secondary outcomes were: incidence of mechanical ventilation or death at day 30, 6-month mortality, proportion of days with mechanical ventilation on total length of hospital stay, IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion, viral clearance from plasma and respiratory tract samples, and variations in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. The trial was analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: 180 patients (133/180 [73.9%] males, mean age 66.6 years [IQR 57-73]) were enrolled a median of 8 days from onset of symptoms. At enrollment, 88.9% of patients showed moderate/severe respiratory failure. 30-days mortality was 20% in Control arm, 23% in Convalescent (risk ratio [RR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-2.13, P = 0.694) and 25% in Standard plasma (RR 1.23; 95%CI, 0.63-2.37, P = 0.544). Time to viral clearance from respiratory tract was 21 days for Convalescent, 28 for Standard plasma and 23 in Control arm but differences were not statistically significant. No differences for other secondary endpoints were seen in the three arms. Serious adverse events were reported in 1.7%, 3.3% and 5% of patients in Control, Standard and Convalescent plasma arms respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Neither high-titer Convalescent nor Standard plasma improve outcomes of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04428021. First posted: 11/06/2020.