A randomized trial of telemedicine efficacy and safety for nonacute headaches.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To evaluate long-term treatment efficacy and safety of one-time telemedicine consultations for nonacute headaches.Methods
We randomized, allocated, and consulted nonacute headache patients via telemedicine (n = 200) or in a traditional manner (n = 202) in a noninferiority trial. Efficacy endpoints, assessed by questionnaires at 3 and 12 months, included change from baseline in Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) (primary endpoint) and pain intensity (visual analogue scale [VAS]) (secondary endpoint). The primary safety endpoint, assessed via patient records, was presence of secondary headache within 12 months after consultation.Results
We found no differences between telemedicine and traditional consultations in HIT-6 (p = 0.84) or VAS (p = 0.64) over 3 periods. The absolute difference in HIT-6 from baseline was 0.3 (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.26 to 1.82, p = 0.72) at 3 months and 0.2 (95% CI -1.98 to 1.58, p = 0.83) at 12 months. The absolute change in VAS was 0.4 (95% CI -0.93 to 0.22, p = 0.23) after 3 months and 0.3 (95% CI -0.94 to 0.29, p = 0.30) at 12 months. We found one secondary headache in each group at 12 months. The estimated number of consultations needed to miss one secondary headache with the use of telemedicine was 20,200.Conclusion
Telemedicine consultation for nonacute headache is as efficient and safe as a traditional consultation.Clinicaltrialsgov identifier
NCT02270177.Classification of evidence
This study provides Class III evidence that a one-time telemedicine consultation for nonacute headache is noninferior to a one-time traditional consultation regarding long-term treatment outcome and safety.
SUBMITTER: Muller KI
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5501933 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe feasibility of telemedicine in diagnosing and treating nonacute headaches, such as primary headaches (migraine and tension-type) and medication-overuse headaches has not been previously investigated. By eliminating the need of travel to specialists, telemedicine may offer significant time and money savings.ObjectivesOur objective was to estimate the acceptance of telemedicine and investigate the feasibility and cost savings of telemedicine consultations in diagnosing and treating nonacute headaches.MethodsFrom September 2012 to March 2015, nonacute headache patients from Northern Norway who were referred to neurologists through an electronic application system were consecutively screened and randomized to participate in either telemedicine or traditional specialist visits. All patients were consulted by two neurologists at the neurological department in Tromsø University Hospital. Feasibility outcomes were compared between telemedicine and traditional groups. Baseline characteristics and costs were then compared between rural and urban patients. Travel costs were calculated by using the probabilistic method of the Norwegian traveling agency: the cheapest means of public transport for each study participant. Loss of pay was calculated based on the Norwegian full-time employee's average salary: < 3.5 hours=a half day's salary, > 3.5 hours spent on travel and consultation=one day's salary. Distance and time spent on travel were estimated by using Google Maps.ResultsOf 557 headache patients screened, 479 were found eligible and 402 accepted telemedicine participation (83.9%, 402/479) and were included in the final analyses. Of these, 202 received traditional specialist consultations and 200 received telemedicine. All patients in the telemedicine group were satisfied with the video quality, and 198 (99%, 198/200) were satisfied with the sound quality. The baseline characteristics as well as headache diagnostics and follow-up appointments, and the investigation, advice, and prescription practices were not statistically different between the two randomized groups. In addition, telemedicine consultations were shorter than traditional visits (38.8 vs 43.7 min, P<.001). The travel cost per rural individual (292/402, 73%) was €249, and estimated lost income was €234 per visit. The travel cost in the urban area (110/402, 27%) was €6, and estimated lost income was €117 per visit. The median traveling distance for rural patients was 526 km (range 1892 km), and the median traveling time was 7.8 hours (range 27.3 hours). Rural patients had a longer waiting time than urban patients (64 vs 47 days, P=.001), and fewer women were referred from rural areas (P=.04). Rural women reported higher pain scores than urban women (P=.005).ConclusionOur study shows that telemedicine is an accepted, feasible, time-saving, and cost-saving alternative to traditional specialist consultations for nonacute headaches.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02270177; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02270177 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6hmoHGo9Q).
| S-EPMC4906238 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Migraine headaches are the most common acute and recurrent headaches. Current treatment of a migraine headache consists of multiple medications for control and prevention of recurrent attacks. Global emergence of alternative medicine led us to examine the efficacy of cupping therapy plus serkangabin syrup in the treatment of migraine headaches. MATERIALS AND METHODS:This study was a randomized, controlled, open-label, comparative efficacy trial. We randomly assigned patients with migraine into cupping therapy plus serkangabin group (30 patients) and conventional treatment group (30 patients). An investigator assessed the severity of headache, frequency of attacks in a week and duration of attacks per hour in 5 visits (at the end of 2 weeks, 1, 3 and 6 months). Generalized estimating equations approach was used to analyze repeated measures data to compare outcomes in both groups. RESULTS:Average age for cupping therapy group and conventional treatment group were 31.7 (±7.6) and 32.6 (±12.7) years, respectively (P = 0.45). After treatment for 2 weeks; and 1, 3 and 6 months, severity of headache (P = 0.80), frequency of migraine attacks (P = 0.63) and duration of attacks per hours (P = 0.48) were similar in conventional and cupping groups but these symptoms were decreased in each group during the study (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION:There was no significant difference between cupping plus serkangabin therapy and conventional treatment in the treatment and prophylaxis of migraine. The alternative therapy may be used in cases of drug intolerance, no medication response, and in primary care.
| S-EPMC4333520 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practices designed for large urban clinics are not necessarily portable into smaller isolated clinics. Implementing practice-based collaborative care for depression in smaller primary care clinics presents unique challenges because it is often not feasible to employ on-site psychiatrists. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the Telemedicine Enhanced Antidepressant Management (TEAM) study was to evaluate a telemedicine-based collaborative care model adapted for small clinics without on-site psychiatrists. DESIGN: Matched sites were randomized to the intervention or usual care. PARTICIPANTS: Small VA Community-based outpatient clinics with no on-site psychiatrists, but access to telepsychiatrists. In 2003-2004, 395 primary care patients with PHQ9 depression severity scores > or = 12 were enrolled, and followed for 12 months. Patients with serious mental illness and current substance dependence were excluded. MEASURES: Medication adherence, treatment response, remission, health status, health-related quality of life, and treatment satisfaction. RESULTS: The sample comprised mostly elderly, white, males with substantial physical and behavioral health comorbidity. At baseline, subjects had moderate depression severity (Hopkins Symptom Checklist, SCL-20 = 1.8), 3.7 prior depression episodes, and 67% had received prior depression treatment. Multivariate analyses indicated that intervention patients were more likely to be adherent at both 6 (odds ratio [OR] = 2.1, p = .04) and 12 months (OR = 2.7, p = .01). Intervention patients were more likely to respond by 6 months (OR = 2.0, p = .02), and remit by 12 months (OR = 2.4, p = .02). Intervention patients reported larger gains in mental health status and health-related quality of life, and reported higher satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative care can be successfully adapted for primary care clinics without on-site psychiatrists using telemedicine technologies.
| S-EPMC2305730 | biostudies-other
Project description:The overall aim was to investigate the effects of low and high dose vitamin D supplementation on genome-wide gene expression and how this is modulated by genetic variation. We adopted a functional genomics approach to analyse study participants in the BEST-D clinical trial (placebo, low dose or high dose supplementation over a 12-month treatment period).
2018-04-21 | E-MTAB-6246 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:BackgroundThe burden of time is often the primary reason why patients discontinue their treatment. Telemedicine may help patients adhere to treatment by offering convenience.ObjectiveThis study examined the efficacy and safety of telemedicine for the management of hypertension in Japan.MethodsPatients with uncomplicated hypertension were recruited through web advertising between November 2015 and February 2017. They were then screened, stratified by office systolic blood pressure (SBP), and randomized into two groups: usual care (UC) and telemedicine. The telemedicine group used a 3G network-attached home blood pressure (BP) monitoring device, consulted hypertension specialists from an academic hospital through web-based video visits, and received prescription medication by mail for 1 year. The UC group used the same BP monitoring device but was managed using self-recorded BP readings, which included their diary entries and office BP taken in a community practice setting.ResultsInitial screening was completed by 99 patients, 54% of whom had untreated hypertension. Baseline BP was similar between the groups, but the weekly average SBP at the end of the 1-year study period was significantly lower in the telemedicine group (125, SD 9 mmHg vs 131, SD 12 mmHg, respectively; P=.02). SBP in the telemedicine group was 3.4 mmHg lower in the morning and 5.8 mmHg lower in the evening. The rate of SBP control (135 mmHg) was better in the telemedicine group (85.3% vs 70.0%; P=.01), and significant adverse events were not observed.ConclusionsWe present evidence suggesting that antihypertensive therapy via home BP telemonitoring and web-based video visits achieve better BP control than conventional care and is a safe treatment alternative that warrants further investigation.Trial registrationUMIN-CTR UMIN000025372; https://tinyurl.com/47ejkn4b.
| S-EPMC8441608 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of intracameral mydriatic solution, as compared to preoperative topical mydriatics, in patients undergoing manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) under peribulbar anesthesia. To assess the sustainability of intracameral mydriasis in MSICS by monitoring pupil size at specific junctures during the surgery.This trial recruited 127 patients, who underwent MSICS under peribulbar block. Mydriasis in topical group was achieved with preoperative topical dilating drops while patients in intracameral group were taken up for surgery without dilation, and mydriasis was achieved intraoperatively with intracameral solution. Pupil sizes were measured serially, at six different junctures during surgery. Time duration of surgery, any intraoperative complications and first postoperative day visual acuity, corneal edema score, and anterior chamber inflammation score were noted in all patients.Mean pupil size just before peribulbar block was 7.3 mm in topical group and 3.3 mm in intracameral group (P < 0.001). Mean pupil size in intracameral group increased to 7.3 mm 30 s after injecting intracameral dilating solution. Mean pupil size in both groups progressively reduced, reaching 5.5 mm (topical group) and 6.2 mm (intracameral group) just before intraocular lens implantation (P = 0.001), and measured 5.1 mm and 5.5 mm, respectively, at the end of surgery (P = 0.048). On first postoperative day, there was no significant difference in distribution of corneal edema scores, AC inflammation scores, and in median logMAR visual acuity between the two groups.MSICS can be performed effectively and safely utilizing intracameral mydriatic solution, without the use of preoperative dilating drops.CTRI/2016/06/007036.
| S-EPMC5549410 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background/Aims:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a controlled release, once-daily formulation of mosapride (UI05MSP015CT) in patients with functional dyspepsia (FD). Methods:Patients with FD were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either UI05MSP015CT (15 mg once a day, study group) or mosapride (5 mg three times a day, control group) and corresponding placebo for 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was a change in the gastrointestinal symptom score (GIS) evaluated at enrollment and after 4 weeks. Secondary endpoints were changes in the Nepean Dyspepsia Index-Korean version (NDI-K), rate of satisfactory symptom relief, and rate of adverse events. Results:A total of 138 patients were enrolled (female, 73.9%; mean age, 44.0±15.4 years). After excluding patients who violated the study protocol, 59 and 58 patients from the study and control groups, respectively, were included in the per-protocol analysis. No difference was observed in drug compliance between the control and study groups (97.07%±4.52% vs 96.85%±6.05%, p=0.870). Changes in GIS scores were -9.69±6.44 and -10.01±5.92 in the study and control groups. The mean difference in GIS change between groups was 0.33 (95% confidence interval, -1.75 to 2.41), demonstrating non-inferiority of UI-05MSP015CT (p=0.755). The rate of satisfactory symptom relief was not different between the study and control groups (39.0% vs 56.9%, p=0.053). No differences in change in NDI-K score (14.3 vs 16.9, p=0.263) or rates of adverse events (12.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.062) were observed between the study and control groups. Conclusions:Once-daily mosapride is not inferior to conventional mosapride in efficacy and is safe in patients with FD.
| S-EPMC6143453 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States and worldwide, and most tobacco users begin smoking in adolescence. Although advances have yielded efficacious pharmacotherapies to complement smoking cessation counseling in adults, far less progress has been made in addressing tobacco use in adolescence. Objective:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of varenicline tartrate for smoking cessation in adolescents and young adults. Design, Setting, and Participants:This 2-group randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind intention-to-treat clinical trial enrolled a volunteer sample of treatment-seeking adolescent and young adult cigarette smokers (n?=?157) aged 14 to 21 years at an outpatient clinical site in Charleston, South Carolina, from August 15, 2012, to October 20, 2017. Follow-up was completed on January 25, 2018. Data were analyzed from March 19, 2018, to August 11, 2018, with further revisions completed April 10, 2019. Interventions:Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a 12-week course of varenicline (n?=?77) or placebo (n?=?80). All participants received weekly smoking cessation counseling. Main Outcomes and Measures:The preselected primary efficacy outcome was urine cotinine level-confirmed 7-day abstinence at the end of treatment. Secondary efficacy outcomes included weekly abstinence throughout active treatment, abstinence at posttreatment follow-up visits, and time to first 7-day abstinence. The primary safety outcome was the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events. Results:A total of 157 participants were enrolled (94 male [59.9%]; mean [SD] age, 19.1 [1.5] years). The varenicline and placebo groups did not differ in the primary outcome of cotinine-confirmed self-reported 7-day abstinence at the end of treatment (varenicline group, 4 of 45 [8.9%]; placebo group, 4 of 45 [8.9%]; risk ratio [RR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.29-2.99; P?=?.96). However, among secondary outcomes, the varenicline group achieved self-reported earlier abstinence of at least 7 days (hazard ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.12-3.27) and demonstrated higher rates of self-reported weekly abstinence during the full course of treatment (RR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.09-2.99; P?=?.02) and at posttreatment follow-up (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.01-3.28; P?=?.02). Study medication was generally well tolerated, and treatment-emergent adverse events did not differ between groups (any adverse events, 55 [71.4%] in the varenicline group vs 60 [75.0%] in the placebo group; RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.79-1.15; P?=?.61). Conclusions and Relevance:When added to weekly cessation counseling for adolescent cigarette smokers, varenicline, compared with placebo, was well tolerated but did not improve end-of-treatment abstinence. However, varenicline may hasten abstinence and yield improvements in posttreatment abstinence outcomes. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01509547.
| S-EPMC6802269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To demonstrate single abobotulinumtoxinA injection efficacy in lower limb vs placebo for adults with chronic hemiparesis and assess long-term safety and efficacy of repeated injections.In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, single-cycle study followed by a 1-year open-label, multiple-cycle extension, adults ?6 months after stroke/brain injury received one lower limb injection (abobotulinumtoxinA 1,000 U, abobotulinumtoxinA 1,500 U, placebo) followed by ?4 open-label cycles (1,000, 1,500 U) at ?12-week intervals. Efficacy measures included Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) in gastrocnemius-soleus complex (GSC; double-blind primary endpoint), physician global assessment (PGA), and comfortable barefoot walking speed. Safety was the open-label primary endpoint.After a single injection, mean (95% confidence interval) MAS GSC changes from baseline at week 4 (double-blind, n = 381) were as follows: -0.5 (-0.7 to -0.4) (placebo, n = 128), -0.6 (-0.8 to -0.5) (abobotulinumtoxinA 1,000 U, n = 125; p = 0.28 vs placebo), and -0.8 (-0.9 to -0.7) (abobotulinumtoxinA 1,500 U, n = 128; p = 0.009 vs placebo). Mean week 4 PGA scores were as follows: 0.7 (0.5, 0.9) (placebo), 0.9 (0.7, 1.1) (1,000 U; p = 0.067 vs placebo), and 0.9 (0.7, 1.1) (1,500 U; p = 0.067); walking speed was not significantly improved vs placebo. At cycle 4, week 4 (open-label), mean MAS GSC change reached -1.0. Incremental improvements in PGA and walking speed occurred across open-label cycles; by cycle 4, week 4, mean PGA was 1.9, and walking speed increased +25.3% (17.5, 33.2), with 16% of participants walking >0.8 m/s (associated with community mobility; 0% at baseline). Tolerability was good and consistent with the known abobotulinumtoxinA safety profile.In chronic hemiparesis, single abobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport Ipsen) administration reduced muscle tone. Repeated administration over a year was well-tolerated and improved walking speed and likelihood of achieving community ambulation.NCT01249404, NCT01251367.The double-blind phase of this study provides Class I evidence that for adults with chronic spastic hemiparesis, a single abobotulinumtoxinA injection reduces lower extremity muscle tone.
| S-EPMC5705248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIndividuals living with schizophrenia are affected by cardiometabolic, endocrine, and motor adverse effects of current antipsychotic medications. Lumateperone is a serotonin, dopamine, and glutamate modulator with the potential to treat schizophrenia with few adverse effects.ObjectiveTo examine the efficacy and safety of lumateperone for the short-term treatment of schizophrenia.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial was conducted from November 13, 2014, to July 20, 2015, with data analyses performed from August 13 to September 15, 2015. Patients with schizophrenia who were aged 18 to 60 years and were experiencing an acute exacerbation of psychosis were enrolled from 12 clinical sites in the United States.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1:1 (150 patients in each arm) to receive lumateperone tosylate, 60 mg; lumateperone tosylate, 40 mg (equivalent to 42 or 28 mg, respectively, of the active moiety lumateperone); or placebo once daily for 4 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresThe prespecified primary efficacy end point was mean change from baseline to day 28 in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score vs placebo. The key secondary efficacy measure was the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score. The PANSS subscale scores, social function, safety, and tolerability were also assessed.ResultsThe study comprised 450 patients (mean [SD] age, 42.4 [10.2] years; 346 [77.1%] male; mean [SD] baseline PANSS score, 89.8 [10.3]; mean [SD] baseline CGI-S score, 4.8 [0.6]). In the prespecified modified intent-to-treat efficacy analysis (n = 435), 42 mg of lumateperone met the primary and key secondary efficacy objectives, demonstrating a statistically significant improvement vs placebo from baseline to day 28 on the PANSS total score (least-squares mean difference [LSMD], -4.2; 95% CI, -7.8 to -0.6; P = .02; effect size [ES], -0.3) and the CGI-S (LSMD, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.5 to -0.1; P = .003; ES, -0.4). For 28 mg of lumateperone, the LSMD from baseline to day 28 was -2.6 (95% CI, -6.2 to 1.1; P = .16; ES, -0.2) on the PANSS total score and -0.2 (95% CI, -0.5 to 0.0; P = .02; ES, -0.3) on the CGI-S. Both lumateperone doses were well tolerated without clinically significant treatment-emergent motor adverse effects or changes in cardiometabolic or endocrine factors vs placebo.Conclusions and relevanceLumateperone demonstrated efficacy for improving the symptoms of schizophrenia and had a favorable safety profile.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02282761.
| S-EPMC6990963 | biostudies-literature