Dataset Information

Comparing Articaine brands: A randomized non-inferiority controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The substitution of reference drugs for similar, new or existing drugs in the market is a dilemma present in daily dental procedures. In order to decide whether or not to adopt a new drug in relation to the reference, a clinical trial can provide the necessary evidence.

Methods

A total of 179 healthy volunteers (18-25 years) requiring extraction of mandibular third molars completed the study. Subjects were randomized into 4 groups: right, left, Arteek-SP and Septanest. Allocations consisted of 4% Articaine hydrochloride with 1:10000 epinephrine. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial was to determine whether the test drug Arteek-SP was noninferior by a margin of 10% in the proportion of patients with total absence of pain, compared to the reference drug Septanest in the extraction of mandibular third molars using inferior alveolar nerve blocks. Secondary outcomes included, hemodynamic parameters, volume (mL), pain scores assessed during one visit and reported postoperative discomfort assessed during 8 days. Noninferiority was declared if total absence of pain for both groups was equal to 0.9, with a significance level of 5% (P < 0.05) and power at 90% (β = 0.1) at 95% confidence level.

Results

Arteek-SP was applied during the first surgery to 90 volunteers (50.28%) and Septanest was applied to 89 subjects (49.72%). Less than 10% difference was identified, in the proportion of patients with total absence of tooth pain P < 0.05 and in the gum P < 0.1, at 95% CI, when Arteek-SP was applied first in comparison with Septanest, establishing noninferiority.

Conclusion

The clinical performance of the test drug Arteek-SP is noninferior to the reference drug Septanest. They can be considered interchangeable in terms of cost or convenience.

Registration

ClinicalTrials.org, number NCT4166890.

SUBMITTER: Arboleda-Toro D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8233148 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Internet-based interventions moderated by community nurses have the potential to improve support offered to new mothers, many of whom now make extensive use of the Internet to obtain information about infant care. However, evidence from population-based randomized controlled trials is lacking. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to test the non-inferiority of outcomes for mothers and infants who received a clinic-based postnatal health check plus nurse-moderated, Internet-based group support when infants were aged 1-7 months as compared with outcomes for those who received standard care consisting of postnatal home-based support provided by a community nurse. METHODS:The design of the study was a pragmatic, preference, non-inferiority randomized control trial. Participants were recruited from mothers contacted for their postnatal health check, which is offered to all mothers in South Australia. Mothers were assigned either (1) on the basis of their preference to clinic+Internet or home-based support groups (n=328), or (2) randomly assigned to clinic+Internet or home-based groups if they declared no strong preference (n=491). The overall response rate was 44.8% (819/1827). The primary outcome was parenting self-competence, as measured by the Parenting Stress Index (PSI) Competence subscale, and the Karitane Parenting Confidence Scale scores. Secondary outcome measures included PSI Isolation, Interpersonal Support Evaluation List-Short Form, Maternal Support Scale, Ages and Stages Questionnaire-Social-Emotional and MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory (MCDI) scores. Assessments were completed offline via self-assessment questionnaires at enrolment (mean child age=4.1 weeks, SD 1.3) and again when infants were aged 9, 15, and 21 months. RESULTS:Generalized estimating equations adjusting for post-randomization baseline imbalances showed that differences in outcomes between mothers in the clinic+Internet and home-based support groups did not exceed the pre-specified margin of inferiority (0.25 of a SD) on any outcome measure at any follow-up assessment, with the exception of MCDI scores assessing children's language development at 21 months for randomized mothers, and PSI Isolation scores at 9 months for preference mothers. CONCLUSION:Maternal and child outcomes from a clinic-based postnatal health check plus nurse-moderated Internet-based support were not inferior to those achieved by a universal home-based postnatal support program. Postnatal maternal and infant support using the Internet is a promising alternative to home-based universal support programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number (ANZCTR): ACTRN12613000204741; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=363712&isReview=true (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6rZeCJ3k1).

Project description:BackgroundAdherence is key to the treatment success of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and prevention of community transmission. Directly observed therapy (DOT) is the recommended approach for the management of patients with MDR-TB. Uganda implements a health facility-based DOT approach where all patients diagnosed with MDR-TB report to the nearest private or public health facility for daily observation of ingesting their medicines by a health care provider. Directly observed therapy is very costly for both the patient and health care system. It follows the assumption that MDR TB patients have a history of poor adherence to TB treatment. But only 21% of MDR-TB patients notified globally and 1.4-12% notified in Uganda had been previously treated for TB. The shift to all oral treatment regimen for MDR-TB provides an opportunity for the exploration of self-administered therapy for this group of patients even with use of remotely operated adherence technology. We are conducting a non-inferiority open-label randomized controlled trial to compare adherence to MDR-TB treatment among patients on self-administered therapy (measured by Medication Events Monitoring System (MEMS) technology) with a control group on DOT.MethodsWe plan to enrol 164 newly diagnosed MDR-TB patients aged ≥ 8 years from three regional hospitals based in rural and urban Uganda. Patients with conditions that affect their dexterity and ability to operate the MEMS-operated medicine equipment will not be eligible to participate in the trial. Patients are randomized to either of the two study arms: self-administered therapy with adherence being monitored using MEMS technology (intervention arm) or health facility-based DOT (control arm) and will be followed up monthly. Adherence is measured by the number of days the medicine bottle is open to access medication as recorded by the MEMS software in the intervention arm and treatment complaint days as recorded in the TB treatment card in the control arm. The primary outcome is the comparison of adherence rates between the two study arms.DiscussionThe evaluation of self-administered therapy for patients with MDR-TB is important to inform cost-effective management strategies for these patients. The approval of all oral regimens for the treatment of MDR-TB provides an opportunity for innovations such as MEMS technology to support sustainable options for MDR-TB treatment adherence support in low-resource settings.Trial registrationPan African Clinical Trials Registry, Cochrane #PACTR202205876377808. Retrospectively registered on 13 May 2022.

Project description:IntroductionTraining Basic Life Support saves lives. However, current BLS training approaches are time-consuming and costly. Alternative cost-efficient and effective training methods are highly needed. The present study evaluated whether a video-feedback supported peer-guided Basic Life Support training approach achieves similar practical performance as a standard instructor-guided training in laypersons.MethodsIn a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, 288 first-year medical students were randomized to two study arms with different Basic Life Support training methods: 1) Standard Instructor Feedback (SIF) or 2) a Peer Video Feedback (PVF). Outcome parameters were objective data for Basic Life Support performance (compression depth and rate) from a resuscitation manikin with recording software as well as overall Basic Life Support performance and subjective confidence. Non-inferiority margins (Δ) for these outcome parameters and sample size calculation were based on previous studies with Standard Instructor Feedback. Two-sided 95% confidence intervals were employed to determine significance of non-inferiority.ResultsResults confirmed non-inferiority of Peer Video Feedback to Standard Instructor Feedback for compression depth (proportion difference PVF-SIF = 2.9%; 95% CI: -8.2% to 14.1%; Δ = -19%), overall Basic Life Support performance (proportion difference PVF-SIF = 6.7%; 95% CI: 0.0% to 14.3%; Δ = -27%) and subjective confidence for CPR performance (proportion difference PVF-SIF = -0.01; 95% CI: -0.18-0.17; Δ = -0.5) and emergency situations (proportion difference PVF-SIF = -0.02; 95% CI: -0.21-0.18; Δ = -0.5). Results for compression rate were inconclusive.DiscussionPeer Video Feedback achieves comparable results as standard instructor-based training methods. It is an easy-to-apply and cost-efficient alternative to standard Basic Life Support training methods. To improve performance with respect to compression rate, additional implementation of a metronome is recommended.