Risk factors for leg wound infection after conventional and no-touch vein harvesting: insights from a multicentre randomised trial.
ClinicalTrials.gov: ID NCT03501303.
Humans↗
SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Mobile health apps improve Health-Related Quality of Life in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus by enhancing medication adherence: A multicentre randomised controlled trial with mediation analysis.
AIMS: This study evaluated whether a gamified mHealth application (CareAide®) improves Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) and whether this effect is mediated by medication adherence. METHODS: Prespecified secondary analysis of the T2DM cohort from a 6-month multicentre RCT (NCT06068309; N = 663; three Malaysian hospitals). Participants were randomised 1:1 to standard care or CareAide®. Adherence (MMAS-8), EQ-5D-5L utility (Malaysian value set), and AQoL-6D were assessed at baseline and 6 months. Simple mediation analysis (PROCESS Model 4; 5000 bootstraps) adjusted for baseline HRQoL. RESULTS: CareAide® significantly predicted higher MMAS-8 scores (mean difference +1.756; d = 1.638; p < 0.001). Higher MMAS-8 scores significantly predicted improved AQoL-6D utility (b = 0.024; p < 0.001). The direct effect on AQoL-6D was non-significant (p = 0.248). Bootstrapped indirect effect confirmed full mediation via AQoL-6D (0.042; 95% CI [0.024, 0.060]). A sensitivity analysis adjusting for baseline HbA1c confirmed full mediation (indirect = 0.034; 95% CI [0.015, 0.052]; n = 563). EQ-5D-5L utility showed a significant direct between-group difference at 6 months (p = 0.012) but did not operate as a mediation outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Medication adherence fully mediates the AQoL-6D HRQoL benefit of a gamified mHealth intervention in T2DM, as confirmed by both the primary and HbA1c-adjusted sensitivity analyses. These findings support integration of behaviourally informed digital adjuncts into routine primary diabetes care.
Humans↗
Effect of cognitive enhancement therapy for early course schizophrenia on gray matter volume: A confirmatory multisite randomized clinical trial.
BACKGROUND: Cognitive Enhancement Therapy (CET) is an evidence-based cognitive remediation intervention for early course schizophrenia with established benefits for cognition. CET may protect against broad temporolimbic gray matter volume loss associated with cognitive improvement, but this finding has yet to be replicated. This research reexamined if CET protects against temporolimbic gray matter volume loss in an independent and larger multisite early course sample, and if this neuroprotective effect predicts cognitive and social adjustment improvement. METHODS: Ninety-nine participants with early course schizophrenia completed MRI, cognitive, and social adjustment assessments at baseline, 9 (mid-treatment), and 18 (end of treatment) months. Linear mixed-effects models examined the differential impact of CET (n = 56) compared to Enriched Supportive Therapy (n = 43) on temporolimbic gray matter volume in regions-of-interest (ROIs) that previously demonstrated CET-related neuroprotection (primary ROIs), as well as frontotemporal ROIs outlined in the first trial (secondary ROIs). RESULTS: The right rostral anterior cingulate was the only primary ROI to demonstrate a significant group × time interaction, but was unrelated to cognitive and social adjustment change. No secondary ROIs exhibited a differential treatment effect. CONCLUSION: This confirmatory trial did not recapitulate the observed broad pattern of CET-related temporolimbic gray matter volume neuroprotection. Consistent with the larger literature demonstrating limited evidence of cognitive remediation effects on the brain in schizophrenia, these findings underscore the need for continued investigation of CET-related changes with other neuroimaging modalities, especially given its established cognitive benefits. Such information is critical for cognitive remediation optimization based on validated therapeutic mechanisms.
Humans↗
Continuous Intravenous Lidocaine for Refractory Cancer Pain in Palliative Care: A Multicenter Feasibility Study.
ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility and tolerability of continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain receiving palliative care, and to explore its potential impact on pain outcomes in real-world clinical conditions.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled feasibility study in palliative care units to evaluate continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain. Patients were randomized to receive lidocaine (5 mg/kg/day, increased to 8 mg/kg/day if pain reduction was <30% after 24 h) or placebo for 48 h. Pain intensity was assessed using the Numeric Pain Intensity Scale, with a clinically meaningful response defined as a ≥30% reduction from baseline at 40 min. Secondary outcomes included pain evolution over time, neuropathic pain, symptom burden, and tolerability.ResultsThirty-five patients were included in the final analysis (18 lidocaine, 17 placebo). No significant difference was observed between lidocaine and placebo for the primary endpoint or for secondary pain outcomes. Reductions in pain intensity were observed in both groups. In the lidocaine group, 61% of patients required dose escalation to 8 mg/kg/day. Continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion was generally well tolerated, with mostly mild adverse events and no unexpected toxicity.ConclusionIn this multicenter feasibility study, continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful analgesic benefit over placebo. As the planned sample size was not reached, the study was underpowered. These findings highlight the challenges of randomized trials in palliative care and may inform future feasibility-oriented designs.
Humans↗
A stent-plus-irrigation protocol after adolescent hypospadias repair: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether a stent-plus-irrigation protocol reduces complication rates following hypospadias repair in adolescents compared with catheter drainage alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicentre randomised controlled trial, adolescents (Tanner Stage II-V) undergoing hypospadias repair were randomly assigned to either a stent-plus-irrigation group or a catheter-drainage group. The catheter-drainage group received standard urethral catheter drainage alone, whereas the stent-plus-irrigation group received an additional small-calibre urethral stent positioned within the reconstructed urethra and twice-daily saline irrigation. The primary outcome was the overall postoperative complication rate; secondary outcomes included urinary function and cosmetic outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 172 adolescents were assessed for eligibility, with 150 participants (75 in the stent-plus-irrigation group and 75 in the catheter-drainage group) included in the final analysis. Compared with the catheter-drainage group, the stent-plus-irrigation group demonstrated a significantly lower overall complication rate (risk ratio [RR] 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.56; P < 0.001), urethral fistula rate (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.14-0.51; P < 0.001), and surgical site infection (SSI) rate (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21-0.87; P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: A postoperative stent-plus-irrigation protocol was associated with lower rates of postoperative complications, particularly urethral fistula and SSI, compared with catheter drainage alone after adolescent hypospadias repair. Because the intervention included both an additional urethral stent and saline irrigation, the independent contribution of irrigation cannot be determined in this two-arm trial.
Humans↗
Rationale, design, and experiences from the vanguard phase of the bariatric surgery for the reduction of cardiovascular events (BRAVE) trial.
BACKGROUND: Observational studies suggest that metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS) reduces mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with obesity, but adequately powered randomized trials (RCTs) are lacking. The Bariatric Surgery for the Reduction of Cardiovascular Events (BRAVE) trial was designed to address this evidence gap. METHODS: BRAVE is an investigator-initiated, multi-center, open-label RCT with blinded endpoint adjudication comparing MBS vs guideline-based medical weight management (MWM) in adults with obesity and high-risk cardiovascular disease (CVD). Eligible participants have a body-mass index ≥35 kg/m² or ≥30 kg/m² with type 2 diabetes or age >55 years, and prior myocardial infarction (MI), coronary intervention, heart failure (HF), atrial fibrillation (AF) with elevated CHA₂DS₂-VASc score, cerebrovascular disease, or peripheral arterial disease. Participants are randomized 1:1 to MBS (sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, or duodenal switch) or MWM, which includes dietary, behavioral, and pharmacologic therapies. The primary outcome is the composite of all-cause death, MI, stroke, HF events, coronary revascularization, AF hospitalization, and renal events. A vanguard phase of 200 participants was implemented to optimize recruitment and logistics. RESULTS: As of October 2025, 2,514 individuals have been screened from 17 centers in Canada, Brazil, Italy and Spain, with 444 entered MBS work-up, and 200 have been randomized. The randomized cohort (mean age 59.8 years; 37% female; mean BMI 44.0 kg m⁻²) has high burden of hypertension (82%), diabetes (45%), coronary artery disease (44%), HF (39%), and AF (48%). Recruitment barriers were identified and addressed through targeted education and enhanced patient engagement. CONCLUSIONS: BRAVE is the first large RCT evaluating whether MBS safely reduces major cardiovascular events compared with medical therapy in high-risk patients with obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05531474.
Humans↗
Perspectives of participating neurologists and study nurses - Mixed-methods process evaluation of a web-based program for relapse management in multiple sclerosis (POWER@M2).
BACKGROUND: Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease of the central nervous system and the leading cause of disability in young adults. In Germany, 90% of relapses are treated with high-dose intravenous glucocorticoids, despite limited evidence for long-term benefit and international preference for oral administration. Time constraints often hinder informed decision-making. The multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) POWER@MS2 (N = 160, 2020-2023), conducted at 18 German MS-centres, aimed to promote self-determined relapse management through a complex intervention (dialogue-based decision aid, nurse-led webinar, online-chat). OBJECTIVE: While RCTs demonstrate effectiveness, process evaluations are essential to understand implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors. This study explored healthcare professionals' experiences and attitudes toward implementing relapse self-management and self-medication in clinical practice. METHODS: A mixed-methods process evaluation followed the UK Medical Research Council- framework. Quantitative data were collected via validated questionnaires at up to three time points and analysed descriptively. Interview guides were developed based on these results. Qualitative data from neurologist and study nurse interviews were thematically analysed. Results were triangulated using a joint display. RESULTS: Data were collected from 55 neurologists and 17 study nurses (quantitative) and from 7 neurologists and 4 nurses (qualitative) (2020-2024). Most neurologists opposed routine steroid use, reserving it for severe relapses. Some voiced concerns about self-management, but informed patients were generally viewed as capable of safe self-medication. Study nurses gave mixed feedback on the intervention, citing overload and improved guidance. CONCLUSION: Clinicians showed openness toward implementing the intervention. Enhancing accessibility and addressing specific concerns may support broader adoption.
Humans↗
Risk factors for loss of skeletal muscle mass in patients with chronic kidney disease on a low-protein diet.
OBJECTIVES: A low-protein diet (LPD) is recommended for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) to prevent a further decline in renal function. However, its impact on muscle mass in these patients remains unclear. This study investigated the risk factors for loss of muscle mass in patients with CKD on an LPD. METHODS: Eighty-four patients with predialysis CKD (59 men, mean age 61.9 ± 11.5 y) who participated in a multicenter randomized controlled trial initiated in 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. We collected data on baseline blood and urine tests, body composition, and dietary records at the start and end of the observation period. We evaluated muscle mass using the skeletal muscle index (SMI) and analyzed risk factors for a decrease in SMI during the 24-wk observation period, using logistic regression analysis. Variables with an association (P < 0.1) in univariate analysis, as well as age, sex, use of low-protein rice, and changes in protein intake, were subjected to multivariate analysis. RESULTS: SMI decreased in 50 patients (59.5%) during the observation period. Multivariate analysis identified significant associations of the SMI with serum albumin at baseline (odds ratio 0.11, 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.52, P = 0.004) and changes in energy intake while on the LPD (odds ratio 3.39, 95% confidence interval 1.00-11.43, P = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for reduced SMI in patients with CKD on an LPD were malnutrition when initiating the LPD and reduced energy intake during its implementation. Clinicians should optimize nutritional status before initiation of an LPD and ensure adequate energy intake throughout treatment.
Humans↗
Effects of Adding Incentive Spirometry to Hospital-Based Cardiovascular Rehabilitation on Pulmonary Complications, Hospital Length of Stay, and Clinical-Functional Recovery After Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study investigated the effects of combining incentive spirometry with cardiac rehabilitation compared with cardiac rehabilitation alone on postoperative pulmonary complications, clinical-functional recovery, and hospital length of stay in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial was conducted from May 2019 to October 2023 in two hospitals, including 46 inpatients undergoing cardiac surgery. Participants were assigned to incentive spirometry plus cardiac rehabilitation or cardiac rehabilitation alone. Both interventions were performed twice daily; spirometry used a volume-oriented device, and rehabilitation followed a seven-step protocol (2-4 METs). Outcomes included postoperative pulmonary complications, functional capacity (6-min walk test), handgrip strength, respiratory muscle function, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The incentive spirometry associated with cardiac rehabilitation group had a longer extracorporeal circulation time (98 ± 26 min) than the cardiac rehabilitation group (76 ± 1; p = 0.008). Both groups showed a postoperative decline in respiratory muscle strength, and walking distance (MD: -64.37 m; 95% CI: [-24.1; -104.6]; d = 0.71), with no difference in postoperative pulmonary complications and handgrip strength. The incentive spirometry associated with cardiac rehabilitation group did not significantly differ on postoperative hospital stay compared with the cardiac rehabilitation group (MD: -1 day; 95% CI: [-4.71; 2.71]; d = -0.19). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, no additional benefit was observed with the addition of incentive spirometry to cardiac rehabilitation compared with cardiac rehabilitation alone. No significant differences were detected between groups in postoperative pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay, or clinical-functional recovery among individuals undergoing cardiac surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (REBEC) under the number RBR-8tsjf97.
Aged↗