The use of transvaginal synthetic mesh for anterior vaginal wall prolapse repair: a randomized controlled trial

The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of transvaginal trocar-guided polypropylene mesh insertion with traditional colporrhaphy for treatment of anterior vaginal wall prolapse.This is a randomized controlled trial in which women with advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse, at least stage II with Ba a parts per thousand yenaEuro parts per thousand+1 cm according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) classification, were randomly assigned to have either anterior colporrhaphy (n = 39) or repair using trocar-guided transvaginal mesh (n = 40). the primary outcome was objective cure rate of the anterior compartment (point Ba) assessed at the 12-month follow-up visit, with stages 0 and I defined as anatomical success. Secondary outcomes included quantification of other vaginal compartments (POP-Q points), comparison of quality of life by the prolapse quality of life (P-QOL) questionnaire, and complication rate between the groups after 1 year. Study power was fixed as 80 % with 5 % cutoff point (p < 0.05) for statistical significance.The groups were similar regarding demographic and clinical preoperative parameters. Anatomical success rates for colporrhaphy and repair with mesh placement groups were 56.4 vs 82.5 % (95 % confidence interval 0.068-0.54), respectively, and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (p = 0.018). Similar total complication rates were observed in both groups, with tape exposure observed in 5 % of the patients. There was a significant improvement in all P-QOL domains as a result of both procedures (p < 0.001), but they were not distinct between groups (p > 0.05).Trocar-guided transvaginal synthetic mesh for advanced anterior POP repair is associated with a higher anatomical success rate for the anterior compartment compared with traditional colporrhaphy. Quality of life equally improved after both techniques. However, the trial failed to detect differences in P-QOL scores and complication rates between the groups.

Randomized, controlled trial investigating short-term health-related quality of life with doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Group, Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer and the New Drug Development Group Study.

PURPOSE: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) or doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) as first-line chemotherapy treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients (n = 275) with anthracycline-naive measurable metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned to AT (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) as an intravenous bolus plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion) or AC (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. Dose escalation of paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m(2)) was planned at cycle 2 to reach equivalent myelosuppression in the two groups. HRQOL was assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and the EORTC Breast Module at baseline and the start of cycles 2, 4, and 6, and 3 months after the last cycle. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of the patients (n = 219) completed a baseline measure. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HRQOL between the two treatment groups. In both groups, selected aspects of HRQOL were impaired over time, with increased fatigue, although some clinically significant improvements in emotional functioning were seen, as well as a reduction in pain over time. Overall, global quality of life was maintained in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This information is important when advising women patients of the expected HRQOL consequences of treatment regimens and should help clinicians and their patients make informed treatment decisions.

STAR 3 randomized controlled trial to compare sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with multiple daily injections in the treatment of type 1 diabetes: research design, methods, and baseline characteristics of enrolled subjects.

BACKGROUND: Sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAPT) integrates real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and offers an alternative to multiple daily injections (MDI). Previous studies provide evidence that SAPT may improve clinical outcomes among people with type 1 diabetes. Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy for A1c Reduction (STAR) 3 is a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of SAPT to that of MDI in subjects with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Subjects were randomized to either continue with MDI or transition to SAPT for 1 year. Subjects in the MDI cohort were allowed to transition to SAPT for 6 months after completion of the study. SAPT subjects who completed the study were also allowed to continue for 6 months. The primary end point was the difference between treatment groups in change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) percentage from baseline to 1 year of treatment. Secondary end points included percentage of subjects with HbA1c < or =7% and without severe hypoglycemia, as well as area under the curve of time spent in normal glycemic ranges. Tertiary end points include percentage of subjects with HbA1c < or =7%, key safety end points, user satisfaction, and responses on standardized assessments. RESULTS: A total of 495 subjects were enrolled, and the baseline characteristics similar between the SAPT and MDI groups. Study completion is anticipated in June 2010. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this randomized controlled trial should help establish whether an integrated RT-CGM and CSII system benefits patients with type 1 diabetes more than MDI.

Scientific writing: a randomized controlled trial comparing standard and on-line instruction.

BACKGROUND: Writing plays a central role in the communication of scientific ideas and is therefore a key aspect in researcher education, ultimately determining the success and long-term sustainability of their careers. Despite the growing popularity of e-learning, we are not aware of any existing study comparing on-line vs. traditional classroom-based methods for teaching scientific writing. METHODS: Forty eight participants from a medical, nursing and physiotherapy background from US and Brazil were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 24 per group): An on-line writing workshop group (on-line group), in which participants used virtual communication, google docs and standard writing templates, and a standard writing guidance training (standard group) where participants received standard instruction without the aid of virtual communication and writing templates. Two outcomes, manuscript quality was assessed using the scores obtained in Six subgroup analysis scale as the primary outcome measure, and satisfaction scores with Likert scale were evaluated. To control for observer variability, inter-observer reliability was assessed using Fleiss's kappa. A post-hoc analysis comparing rates of communication between mentors and participants was performed. Nonparametric tests were used to assess intervention efficacy. RESULTS: Excellent inter-observer reliability among three reviewers was found, with an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) agreement = 0.931882 and ICC consistency = 0.932485. On-line group had better overall manuscript quality (p = 0.0017, SSQSavg score 75.3 +/- 14.21, ranging from 37 to 94) compared to the standard group (47.27 +/- 14.64, ranging from 20 to 72). Participant satisfaction was higher in the on-line group (4.3 +/- 0.73) compared to the standard group (3.09 +/- 1.11) (p = 0.001). The standard group also had fewer communication events compared to the on-line group (0.91 +/- 0.81 vs. 2.05 +/- 1.23; p = 0.0219). CONCLUSION: Our protocol for on-line scientific writing instruction is better than standard face-to-face instruction in terms of writing quality and student satisfaction. Future studies should evaluate the protocol efficacy in larger longitudinal cohorts involving participants from different languages.

The providing resources to enhance African American patients' readiness to make decisions about kidney disease (PREPARED) study: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Living related kidney transplantation (LRT) is underutilized, particularly among African Americans. The effectiveness of informational and financial interventions to enhance informed decision-making among African Americans with end stage renal disease (ESRD) and improve rates of LRT is unknown. METHODS/DESIGN: We report the protocol of the Providing Resources to Enhance African American Patients' Readiness to Make Decisions about Kidney Disease (PREPARED) Study, a two-phase study utilizing qualitative and quantitative research methods to design and test the effectiveness of informational (focused on shared decision-making) and financial interventions to overcome barriers to pursuit of LRT among African American patients and their families. Study Phase I involved the evidence-based development of informational materials as well as a financial intervention to enhance African American patients' and families' proficiency in shared decision-making regarding LRT. In Study Phase 2, we are currently conducting a randomized controlled trial in which patients with new-onset ESRD receive 1) usual dialysis care by their nephrologists, 2) the informational intervention (educational video and handbook), or 3) the informational intervention in addition to the option of participating in a live kidney donor financial assistance program. The primary outcome of the randomized controlled trial will include patients' self-reported rates of consideration of LRT (including family discussions of LRT, patient-physician discussions of LRT, and identification of a LRT donor). DISCUSSION: Results from the PREPARED study will provide needed evidence on ways to enhance the decision to pursue LRT among African American patients with ESRD.

Weight loss intervention for young adults using mobile technology: design and rationale of a randomized controlled trial - Cell Phone Intervention for You (CITY).

BACKGROUND: The obesity epidemic has spread to young adults, leading to significant public health implications later in adulthood. Intervention in early adulthood may be an effective public health strategy for reducing the long-term health impact of the epidemic. Few weight loss trials have been conducted in young adults. It is unclear what weight loss strategies are beneficial in this population. PURPOSE: To describe the design and rationale of the NHLBI-sponsored Cell Phone Intervention for You (CITY) study, which is a single center, randomized three-arm trial that compares the impact on weight loss of 1) a behavioral intervention that is delivered almost entirely via cell phone technology (Cell Phone group); and 2) a behavioral intervention delivered mainly through monthly personal coaching calls enhanced by self-monitoring via cell phone (Personal Coaching group), each compared to 3) a usual care, advice-only control condition. METHODS: A total of 365 community-dwelling overweight/obese adults aged 18-35 years were randomized to receive one of these three interventions for 24 months in parallel group design. Study personnel assessing outcomes were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome is weight change at 24 [corrected] months. We hypothesize that each active intervention will cause more weight loss than the usual care condition. Study completion is anticipated in 2014. CONCLUSIONS: If effective, implementation of the CITY interventions could mitigate the alarming rates of obesity in young adults through promotion of weight loss. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01092364.

Colchicine effectiveness in symptom and inflammation modification in knee osteoarthritis (COLKOA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high prevalence and global impact of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), current treatments are palliative. No disease modifying anti-osteoarthritic drug (DMOAD) has been approved. We recently demonstrated significant involvement of uric acid and activation of the innate immune response in osteoarthritis (OA) pathology and progression, suggesting that traditional gout therapy may be beneficial for OA. We therefore assess colchicine, an existing commercially available agent for gout, for a new therapeutic application in KOA. METHODS/DESIGN: COLKOA is a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial comparing a 16-week treatment with standard daily dose oral colchicine to placebo for KOA. A total of 120 participants with symptomatic KOA will be recruited from a single center in Singapore. The primary end point is 30% improvement in total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score at week 16. Secondary end points include improvement in pain, physical function, and quality of life and change in serum, urine and synovial fluid biomarkers of cartilage metabolism and inflammation. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) substudy will be conducted in 20 participants to evaluate change in synovitis. Logistic regression will be used to compare changes between groups in an intention-to-treat analysis. DISCUSSION: The COLKOA trial is designed to evaluate whether commercially available colchicine is effective for improving signs and symptoms of KOA, and reducing synovial fluid, serum and urine inflammatory and biochemical joint degradation biomarkers. These biomarkers should provide insights into the underlying mechanism of therapeutic response. This trial will potentially provide data to support a new treatment option for KOA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02176460 . Date of registration: 26 June 2014.

An evaluation of the implementation of hand held health records with adults with learning disabilities: a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background: Personal health records were implemented with adults with learning disabilities (AWLD) to try to improve their health-care. Materials and Method: Forty GP practices were randomized to the Personal Health Profile (PHP) implementation or control group. Two hundred and one AWLD were interviewed at baseline and 163 followed up after 12 months intervention (PHP group). AWLD and carers of AWLD were employed as research interviewers. AWLD were full research participants. Results: Annual consultation rates in the intervention and control groups at baseline were low (2.3 and 2.6 visits respectively). A slightly greater increase occurred over the year in the intervention group 0.6 ()0.4 to 1.6) visits ⁄ year compared with controls. AWLD in PHP group reported more health problems at follow-up 0.9 (0.0 to 1.8). AWLD liked their PHP (92%) but only 63% AWLD and 55% carers reported PHP usage. Carers had high turnover (34%). Conclusions: No significant outcomes were achieved by the intervention.

Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of Withdrawal of Inhaled Corticosteroids in Cystic Fibrosis

Rationale: Lung inflammation and injury is critical in cystic fibrosis. An ideal antiinflammatory agent has not been identified but inhaled corticosteroids are widely used despite lack of evidence.

Objectives: To test the safety of withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids with the hypothesis this would not be associated with an earlier onset of acute chest exacerbations.

Methods: Multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial in 18 pediatric and adult UK centers. Eligibility criteria included age > 6.0 yr, FEV1 ? 40% predicted, and corticosteroid use > 3 mo. During the 2-mo run-in period, all patients received fluticasone; they then took either fluticasone or placebo for 6 mo.

Measurements and Main Results: Fluticasone group: n = 84, median age 14.6 yr, mean (SD) FEV1 76% (18); placebo group: n = 87, median age 15.8 yr, mean (SD) FEV1 76% (18). There was no difference in time to first exacerbation (primary outcome) with hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 1.07 (0.68 to 1.70) for fluticasone versus placebo. There was no effect of age, atopy, corticosteroid dose, FEV1, or Pseudomonas aeruginosa status. There was no change in lung function or differences in antibiotic or rescue bronchodilator use. Fewer patients in the fluticasone group withdrew from the study due to lung-related adverse events (9 vs. 15%); with a relative risk (95% confidence interval) of 0.59 (0.23–1.48) fluticasone versus placebo.

Conclusions: In this study population (applicable to 40% of patients with cystic fibrosis in the UK), it appears safe to consider stopping inhaled corticosteroids. Potential advantages will be to reduce the drug burden on patients, reduce adverse effects, and make financial savings.

Randomised controlled trial of effects of Helicobacter pylori infection and its eradication on heartburn and gastro-oesophageal reflux: the bristol helicobacter project

Objectives To investigate the effects of Helicobacter pylori infection and its eradication on heartburn and gastro-oesophageal reflux. Design Cross sectional study, followed by a randomised placebo controlled trial. Setting Seven general practices in Bristol, England. Participants 10 537 people, aged 20-59 years, with and without H pylori infection (determined by the 13C-urea breath test). Main outcome measures Prevalence of heartburn and gastro-oesophageal acid reflux at baseline and two years after treatment to eradicate H pylori infection. Results At baseline, H pylori infection was associated with increased prevalence of heartburn (odds ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.23) but not reflux (1.05, 0.97 to 1.14). In participants with H pylori infection, active treatment had no effect on the overall prevalence of heartburn (0.99, 0.88 to 1.12) or reflux (1.04, 0.91 to 1.19) and did not improve pre-existing symptoms of heartburn or reflux. Conclusions H pylori infection is associated with a slightly increased prevalence of heartburn but not reflux. Treatment to eradicate H pylori has no net benefit in patients with heartburn or gastro-oesophageal reflux

Randomized controlled trial of interferential therapy and manipulative therapy for acute low back pain.

Study Design. A multi-center assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted. Objectives. To investigate the relative effectiveness of interferential therapy and manipulative therapy for patients with acute low back pain when used as sole treatments and in combination. Summary of Background Data. Both manipulative therapy and interferential therapy are commonly used treatments for low back pain. Evidence for the effectiveness of manipulative therapy is available only for the short term. There is no evidence for interferential therapy and no study has investigated the effectiveness of interferential therapy combined with manipulative therapy. Methods. Consenting subjects (n=240) were randomly assigned to receive a copy of the Back Book and either manipulative therapy (MT; n=80), interferential therapy (IFT; n=80) or combined manipulative therapy and interferential therapy (CT; n=80). Follow-up outcome questionnaires were posted at discharge, 6 and 12 months. Results. The groups were balanced at baseline for low back pain and demographic characteristics. All interventions were found to significantly reduce functional disability and pain and increase quality of life at discharge and to maintain these improvements at 6 and 12 months. No significant differences were found between groups for reported LBP recurrence, work absenteeism, medication consumption, exercise participation and healthcare use at 12 months. Conclusions. For acute low back pain, interferential therapy whether used in isolation or in combination with manipulative therapy was as effective as manipulative therapy alone (in addition to the Back Book).