Dataset Information

Lacrimal dilator-facilitated incisionless vs. standard sub-Tenon's block: a randomized, prospective and non-inferiority comparative study.

ABSTRACT:

Background/objectives

Standard sub-Tenon's block (STB) involves incision (dissection) of conjunctiva and Tenon's capsule with the help of blunt scissors and forceps, insertion of a blunt sub-Tenon's cannula under the Tenon's capsule and injection of local anaesthetic agent. STB is frequently associated with minor complications such as chemosis and postoperative subconjunctival haemorrhage but rare sight and life-threatening complications. To reduce these minor complications, several variations of incisionless STB have been described however, there are no comparative data. One such incisionless STB involves the use of lacrimal dilator which is easily available in the operating theatre. We compared incisionless lacrimal dilator-facilitated with the standard STB for effectiveness, chemosis, and postoperative subconjunctival haemorrhage.

Subjects/methods

After obtaining ethical approval, patients scheduled to undergo elective phacoemulsification cataract surgery were enroled to receive incisionless lacrimal dilator-facilitated STB (Group LD) or a standard STB using Wescott scissors and blunt forceps (Group WS). All patients received 3 mL 2% lidocaine without any adjuvant. No sedation was administered. Demographics of the patients, duration of the procedure, analgesia, akinesia, duration of the procedure intraoperative chemosis, and postoperative subconjunctival haemorrhage were compared.

Results

Both groups were comparable for demographic data, duration of the procedure, analgesia, and akinesia (p > 0.05). The severity of chemosis and postoperative subconjunctival haemorrhage were significantly lower in Group LD (n = 32) in comparison to Group WS (n = 31) (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Incisionless lacrimal dilator-facilitated STB decreases intraoperative chemosis and postoperative conjunctival haemorrhage in comparison to standard STB. Analgesia and akinesia are comparable in both techniques.

SUBMITTER: Coban-Karatas M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8225894 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Falls are the leading cause of fatal and nonfatal injuries among older adults. Studies showed that older adults can reduce the risk of falls after participation in an unexpected perturbation-based balance training (PBBT), a relatively novel approach that challenged reactive balance control. This study aims to investigate the effect of the practice schedule (i.e., contextual interference) on reactive balance function and its transfer to proactive balance function (i.e., voluntary step execution test and Berg balance test). Our primary hypothesis is that improvements in reactive balance control following block PBBT will be not inferior to the improvements following random PBBT. Methods and Analysis: This is a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Fifty community-dwelling older adults (over 70 years) will be recruited and randomly allocated to a random PBBT group (n = 25) or a block PBBT group (n = 25). The random PBBT group will receive eight training sessions over 4 weeks that include unexpected machine-induced perturbations of balance during hands-free treadmill walking. The block PBBT group will be trained by the same perturbation treadmill system, but only one direction will be trained in each training session, and the direction of the external perturbations will be announced. Both PBBT groups (random PBBT and block PBBT) will receive a similar perturbation intensity during training (which will be customized to participant's abilities), the same training period, and the same concurrent cognitive tasks during training. The generalization and transfer of learning effects will be measured by assessing the reactive and proactive balance control during standing and walking before and after 1 month of PBBT, for example, step and multiple steps and fall thresholds, Berg balance test, and fear of falls. The dependent variable will be rank transformed prior to conducting the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to allow for nonparametric analysis. Discussion: This research will explore which of the balance retraining paradigms is more effective to improve reactive balance and proactive balance control in older adults (random PBBT vs. block PBBT) over 1 month. The research will address key issues concerning balance retraining: older adults' neuromotor capacities to optimize training responses and their applicability to real-life challenges. Clinical Trial Registration: Helsinki research ethics approval has been received (Soroka Medical Center approval #0396-16-SOR; MOH_2018-07-22_003536; www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04455607).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Brief interventions (BIs) delivered in primary care have been shown to be effective in reducing risky drinking, but implementation is limited. Facilitated access to a digital application offers a novel alternative to face-to-face intervention, but its relative effectiveness is unknown. METHODS:Primary care-based, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial comparing general practitioner (GP) facilitated access to an interactive alcohol reduction website (FA) with face-to-face BI for risky drinking. Patients screening positive on the short Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) were invited to participate in the trial. Assessment at baseline, 3 months and 12 months was carried out using AUDIT and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. FINDINGS:58 participating GPs approached 9080 patients of whom 4529 (49.9%) logged on, 3841 (84.8%) undertook screening, 822 (21.4%) screened positive and 763 (19·9%) were recruited. 347 (45.5%) were allocated to FA and 416 (54.5%) to BI. At 3 months, subjects in FA group with an AUDIT score of ?8 reduced from 95 (27.5%) to 85 (26.8%) while those in BI group increased from 123 (20.6%) to 141 (37%). Differences between groups were principally due to responses to AUDIT question 10. Analysis of primary outcome indicated non-inferiority of FA compared with BI, and prespecified subgroup analysis indicated benefits for older patients and those with higher levels of computer literacy and lower baseline severity. Additional analyses undertaken to take account of bias in response to AUDIT question 10 failed to support non-inferiority within the prespecified 10% boundary. INTERPRETATION:Prespecified protocol-driven analyses of the trial indicate that FA is non-inferior to BI; however, identified bias in the outcome measure and further supportive analyses question the robustness of this finding. It is therefore not possible to draw firm conclusions from this trial, and further research is needed to determine whether the findings can be replicated using more robust outcome measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01638338; Results.

Project description:BackgroundA dose of 30 mg/kg of azithromycin is recommended for treatment of yaws, a disease targeted for global eradication. Treatment with 20 mg/kg of azithromycin is recommended for the elimination of trachoma as a public health problem. In some settings, these diseases are co-endemic. We aimed to determine the efficacy of 20 mg/kg of azithromycin compared with 30 mg/kg azithromycin for the treatment of active and latent yaws.MethodsWe did a non-inferiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial in children aged 6-15 years who were recruited from schools in Ghana and schools and the community in Papua New Guinea. Participants were enrolled based on the presence of a clinical lesion that was consistent with infectious primary or secondary yaws and a positive rapid diagnostic test for treponemal and non-treponemal antibodies. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either standard-dose (30 mg/kg) or low-dose (20 mg/kg) azithromycin by a computer-generated random number sequence. Health-care workers assessing clinical outcomes in the field were not blinded to the patient's treatment, but investigators involved in statistical or laboratory analyses and the participants were blinded to treatment group. We followed up participants at 4 weeks and 6 months. The primary outcome was cure at 6 months, defined as lesion healing at 4 weeks in patients with active yaws and at least a four-fold decrease in rapid plasma reagin titre from baseline to 6 months in patients with active and latent yaws. Active yaws was defined as a skin lesion that was positive for Treponema pallidum ssp pertenue in PCR testing. We used a non-inferiority margin of 10%. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02344628.FindingsBetween June 12, 2015, and July 2, 2016, 583 (65·1%) of 895 children screened were enrolled; 292 patients were assigned a low dose of azithromycin and 291 patients were assigned a standard dose of azithromycin. 191 participants had active yaws and 392 had presumed latent yaws. Complete follow-up to 6 months was available for 157 (82·2%) of 191 patients with active yaws. In cases of active yaws, cure was achieved in 61 (80·3%) of 76 patients in the low-dose group and in 68 (84·0%) of 81 patients in the standard-dose group (difference 3·7%; 95% CI -8·4 to 15·7%; this result did not meet the non-inferiority criterion). There were no serious adverse events reported in response to treatment in either group. The most commonly reported adverse event at 4 weeks was gastrointestinal upset, with eight (2·7%) participants in each group reporting this symptom.InterpretationIn this study, low-dose azithromycin did not meet the prespecified non-inferiority margin compared with standard-dose azithromycin in achieving clinical and serological cure in PCR-confirmed active yaws. Only a single participant (with presumed latent yaws) had definitive serological failure. This work suggests that 20 mg/kg of azithromycin is probably effective against yaws, but further data are needed.FundingCoalition for Operational Research on Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapy (IO) has become a standard of care for treating various types of metastatic cancers and has significantly improved clinical outcome. With the exception of metastatic melanoma in complete response for which treatment can be stopped at 6 months, these treatments are currently administered until either disease progression for some IO, 2 years for others, or unacceptable toxicity. However, a growing number of studies are reporting maintenance of response despite discontinuation of therapy. There is currently no evidence of a dose effect of IO in pharmacokinetic studies. Maintaining efficacy despite a reduction in treatment intensity by decreasing the frequency of administration in patients with highly selected metastatic cancer, is the hypothesis evaluated in the MOIO study.Method/designThis non-inferiority, randomized phase III study aims to compare the standard regimen to a 3 monthly regimen of variousIO drugs in adult patients with metastatic cancer in partial (PR) or complete response (CR) after 6 months of standard IO dosing (except melanoma in CR). This is a French national study conducted in 36 centers. The main objective is to demonstrate that the efficacy of a three-monthly administration is not unacceptably less efficacious than a standard administration. Secondary objectives are cost-effectiveness, quality of life (QOL), anxiety, fear of relapse, response rate, overall survival and toxicity. After 6 months of standard IO, patients with partial or complete response will be randomized 1:1 between standard IO or a reduced intensity dose of IO, administered every 3 months. The randomization will be stratified on therapy line,, tumor type, IO type and response status. The primary endpoint is the hazard ratio of progression-free survival. With a planned study duration of 6 years, including 36 months enrolment time, 646 patients are planned to demonstrate with a statistical level of evidence of 5% that the reduced IO regimen is non-inferior to the standard IO regimen, with a relative non-inferiority margin set at 1.3.DiscussionShould the hypothesis of non-inferiority with an IO reduced dose intensity be validated, alternate scheduling could preserve efficacy while being cost-effective and allowing a reduction of the toxicity, with an increase in patient's QOL.Trial registrationNCT05078047.

Project description:BackgroundTransdiagnostic Cognitive Behavior Therapy (TCBT) manuals delivered in individual format have been reported to be just as effective as traditional diagnosis specific CBT manuals. We have translated and modified the "The Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders" (UP-CBT) for group delivery in Mental Health Service (MHS), and shown effects comparable to traditional CBT in a naturalistic study. As the use of one manual instead of several diagnosis-specific manuals could simplify logistics, reduce waiting time, and increase therapist expertise compared to diagnosis specific CBT, we aim to test the relative efficacy of group UP-CBT and diagnosis specific group CBT.Methods/designThe study is a partially blinded, pragmatic, non-inferiority, parallel, multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) of UP-CBT vs diagnosis specific CBT for Unipolar Depression, Social Anxiety Disorder and Agoraphobia/Panic Disorder. In total, 248 patients are recruited from three regional MHS centers across Denmark and included in two intervention arms. The primary outcome is patient-ratings of well-being (WHO Well-being Index, WHO-5), secondary outcomes include level of depressive and anxious symptoms, personality variables, emotion regulation, reflective functioning, and social adjustment. Assessments are conducted before and after therapy and at 6 months follow-up. Weekly patient-rated outcomes and group evaluations are collected for every session. Outcome assessors, blind to treatment allocation, will perform the observer-based symptom ratings, and fidelity assessors will monitor manual adherence.DiscussionThe current study will be the first RCT investigating the dissemination of the UP in a MHS setting, the UP delivered in groups, and with depressive patients included. Hence the results are expected to add substantially to the evidence base for rational group psychotherapy in MHS. The planned moderator and mediator analyses could spur new hypotheses about mechanisms of change in psychotherapy and the association between patient characteristics and treatment effect.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02954731 . Registered 25 October 2016.