The American journal of medicine
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
An attachable silver-impregnated cuff for prevention of infection with central venous catheters: a prospective randomized multicenter trial.
Percutaneously inserted central venous catheters are widely used. Catheter-related bacteremia or fungemia is the most frequent serious complication of these catheters. In an attempt to reduce the frequency of such infections, a subcutaneous cuff constructed of a biodegradable collagen matrix impregnated with bactericidal silver was developed. Our goal was to assess, in a multicenter clinical trial, the effectiveness of this cuff in preventing catheter-related infection. ⋯ This novel, silver-impregnated, attachable cuff can substantially reduce the incidence of catheter-related infection with most percutaneously inserted central venous catheters, can extend the time catheters can be left in place safely, and can prove cost-beneficial.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Analgesic efficacy of piroxicam in the treatment of postoperative pain.
Two randomized, double-blind, single-dose studies were conducted to assess the analgesic efficacy and safety of piroxicam for the treatment of moderate or severe postoperative pain. Study 1 evaluated the analgesic efficacy of piroxicam 20 mg compared with that of codeine sulfate 60 mg and placebo. A final patient population of 149 subjects rated pain intensity and pain relief at one half hour and one hour following treatment and then hourly for six hours, with a global assessment made at the completion of 24 hours. ⋯ In addition, effects of piroxicam 20 mg had a significantly longer duration than aspirin. Similarly, piroxicam 20 mg had a significantly longer time to remedication compared with aspirin and placebo. The results of these studies provide evidence in support of the longer duration of analgesic efficacy of piroxicam compared with codeine or aspirin in patients with postoperative pain.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
A double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing three single-dose regimens of piroxicam with ibuprofen in patients with primary dysmenorrhea.
Sixty-eight women with primary dysmenorrhea were randomly assigned to one of five four-times-daily treatment groups for a minimum of three days and a maximum of five days. Three of the groups received different initial single-daily doses of piroxicam, which were followed on each treatment day with placebo for the second through fourth doses, namely, piroxicam 20 mg daily for five days (piroxicam 20 mg for five days); piroxicam 40 mg on Day 1, followed by piroxicam 20 mg on Days 2 through 5 (piroxicam 40 mg for one day); and piroxicam 40 mg on Days 1 and 2, followed by piroxicam 20 mg on Days 3 through 5 (piroxicam 40 mg for two days). The fourth group received ibuprofen 400 mg four times per day, and the fifth group received placebo four times per day. ⋯ A significantly smaller percentage of patients treated with piroxicam 40 mg for two days required supplemental medication as compared with those treated with piroxicam 20 mg for five days (p = 0.035) and patients treated with placebo (p = 0.010). A greater amount of overall relief was obtained by patients treated with piroxicam 40 mg for two days compared with patients treated with piroxicam 40 mg for one day (p = 0.041) and placebo-treated patients (p = 0.001). It was concluded that single daily doses of piroxicam 20 mg and 40 mg were as effective as ibuprofen, 400 mg four times per day, for the relief of primary dysmenorrhea.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Guiding individual decisions: a randomized, controlled trial of decision analysis.
In early 1983, all 1,280 faculty and resident physicians at one hospital who were eligible to be vaccinated against hepatitis B were divided randomly into three groups: Group 1 physicians received general information about the risks and benefits of alternative vaccine decisions; Group 2 physicians were additionally invited to provide personal information for an individualized decision analysis (12.6 percent responded); and Group 3 physicians, who served as controls, were not contacted. In one year's follow-up, 20 percent of physicians were screened for hepatitis B antibody or vaccinated. ⋯ Group assignment remained significantly associated with vaccine decisions after analyzing results by the "intention to treat" principle, and after adjusting for training status, exposure to blood and blood products, and pre-study intentions about the vaccine. Despite the low overall vaccine acceptance rate, it is concluded that individualized decision analysis can influence the clinical decisions taken by knowledgeable and interested patients.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
A randomized trial of dexamethasone and acetazolamide for acute mountain sickness prophylaxis.
Forty-seven climbers participated in a double-blind, randomized trial comparing acetazolamide 250 mg, dexamethasone 4 mg, and placebo every eight hours as prophylaxis for acute mountain sickness during rapid, active ascent of Mount Rainier (elevation 4,392 m). Forty-two subjects (89.4 percent) achieved the summit in an average of 34.5 hours after leaving sea level. At the summit or high point attained above base camp, the group taking dexamethasone reported less headache, tiredness, dizziness, nausea, clumsiness, and a greater sense of feeling refreshed (p less than or equal to 0.05). ⋯ These drug side effects probably obscured the previously established prophylactic effects of acetazolamide for acute mountain sickness. Separate analysis of an acetazolamide subgroup that did not experience side effects at low elevations revealed a prophylactic effect of acetazolamide similar in magnitude to the dexamethasone effect but lacking the euphoric effects of dexamethasone. This study demonstrates that prophylaxis with dexamethasone can reduce the symptoms associated with acute mountain sickness during active ascent and that acetazolamide can cause side effects that may limit its effectiveness as prophylaxis against the disease.