PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed2026

The Statistical Fragility of Saline Nasal Irrigation for Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the statistical fragility of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating high-volume saline nasal irrigation (SNI) for rhinosinusitis using fragility analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched for RCTs published between May 1976 and January 2026. REVIEW METHODS: This study was reported as per PRISMA guidelines. RCTs that compared high-volume SNI to non-irrigation standard care for acute, recurrent, or chronic rhinosinusitis, and reported ≥ 1 dichotomous outcome, were included. Fragility index (FI), the minimum number of event reversals needed to alter statistical significance, and fragility quotient (FQ), FI normalized to sample size, were calculated for statistically significant dichotomous outcomes. Reverse FI (rFI) and reverse FQ (rFQ) were calculated for non-significant outcomes. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included, yielding 38 dichotomous outcomes. Eight outcomes (21.1%) were statistically significant. The overall combined median FI was 5 (FQ 0.062), with similar FI values between significant and non-significant outcomes. In over one-fifth of outcomes, loss to follow-up exceeded FI. Analysis of principal dichotomous outcomes from studies demonstrated a median FI of 6 (FQ 0.092), with five of eight (62.5%) outcomes non-significant. CONCLUSION: RCTs evaluating SNI for rhinosinusitis exhibit moderate-to-high statistical fragility, with small outcome changes capable of reversing study conclusions. Because fragility analysis was limited to dichotomous outcomes while many primary endpoints were continuous, our findings should be interpreted as complementary rather than comprehensive appraisals of RCTs. Future RCTs with larger sample sizes, reduced bias, and pre-specified fragility considerations are needed to better define the clinical role of SNI.

Rhinosinusitis↗
PubMed1992

Comparing the effectiveness of behavioral treatment for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting when administered by oncologists, oncology nurses, and clinical psychologists.

Adequate control of side effects during medical treatment of cancer increases patient compliance and quality of life. Antiemetic drugs are not an effective treatment for the one in three cancer patients on chemotherapy who experience anticipatory nausea and vomiting (ANV); the behavioral treatment of systematic desensitization has been found effective for ANV when delivered by clinical psychologists. This study examined the effectiveness of systematic desensitization when delivered by medical personnel versus clinical psychologists. Seventy-two consecutive cancer patients with ANV were randomly assigned to no-treatment control or to systematic desensitization from 5 behaviorally trained clinical psychologists, 6 clinical oncologists, or 10 oncology nurses. The treatment was found effective in reducing anticipatory nausea, anticipatory vomiting, posttreatment nausea, and posttreatment vomiting compared to control patients, with no significant differences in effectiveness found between clinical psychologists and oncology staff. Although medical personnel should not engage patients in psychotherapy or other interventions that cannot be completed successfully, they can treat patients effectively with systematic desensitization and should be encouraged to learn and use this and other behavioral intervention techniques to benefit total patient care.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Adrenergic agents: clinical trials and experiences.

Beta-adrenergic blocking agents constitute first-line therapy for hypertension in many countries of the world. Comparative trials have been extensive in duration and have included large numbers of patients. Still, the desired cardioprotective effect of beta blockers has yet to be established. Their antiatherosclerotic effect has been noted in several animal experiments. Confirming evidence is needed before the clinical relevance of this effect can be evaluated, but these studies point to a potential therapeutic effect that may be immensely important in the future. Beta blockers can reverse left ventricular hypertrophy secondary to hypertension, but it remains to be shown that regression of left ventricular hypertrophy will reduce the associated risks.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1992

Modern treatment of lymphoedema. II. The benzopyrones.

The benzo-pyrones reduce all high-protein oedemas, including lymphoedema and elephantiasis, by increasing the numbers of macrophages and their normal proteolysis. Thus they remove the excess protein, and thereby the oedema which is caused by it. They also remove the stimulus it provides for chronic inflammation and fibrosis, and its action as a culture medium for bacteria. Coumarin (5,6 benzo-[alpha]-pyrone, 56 BaP) and oxerutins (HR, O(beta-hydroxy-ethyl)-rutosides) have been used in many clinical trials on a variety of high-protein oedemas. Four such trials are summarised here: on lymphoedema and elephantiasis (from many causes in Australia, and filaritic in India and China). The drugs reduced these much more slowly than adequate physical therapy, but they did reduce them. About half the excess volume was removed over six months in the Australian trials. In India and China similar rates were achieved with lymphoedema, but elephantiasis reduced at a slower rate. The benzo-pyrones convert a slowly worsening condition into a slowly improving one. No compression garments are necessary. In addition, the drugs considerably reduce the number of attacks of secondary acute infection, reduce the deformities of elephantiasis and considerably improve the patients' comfort and mobility. They may be taken orally, or applied topically, have very low toxicities and only few, minor side-effects. They are useful in many other forms of high-protein oedema, and improve the results of physical therapy for lymphoedema.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed2026

Effectiveness of Topical Huzhang Sanhuang with Standard Nursing for Chemotherapy-Induced Phlebitis: Randomized Controlled Study.

Chemotherapy-induced phlebitis (CIP) is a common complication of peripheral intravenous chemotherapy that can cause pain, local inflammation, treatment interruption, and diminished quality of life. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of the topical Huzhang Sanhuang (HZSH) formula, combined with standard nursing care, in managing CIP. Ninety-four hospitalized patients with CIP (grade I or higher) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either topical HZSH formula plus standard nursing care (experimental group, n = 47) or 50% magnesium sulfate wet dressing plus standard nursing care (control group, n = 47) for 14 days. Prespecified outcomes included phlebitis grade, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), symptom resolution time, and safety indicators. By Day 14, patients in the experimental group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in phlebitis severity than those in the control group (risk ratio for grade &#x2265; II, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.87; P = 0.012). The experimental group also showed significantly larger reductions in VAS pain scores, hs-CRP levels, and IL-6 concentrations (all P < 0.01). Kaplan-Meier analysis further demonstrated faster resolution of multiple local symptoms in the experimental group. Treatment adherence was high in both groups, and no serious adverse events or major safety concerns were observed. These findings indicate that the topical HZSH formula, combined with standard nursing care, is a safe and effective integrative nursing intervention that accelerates clinical recovery, alleviates local symptoms, and reduces the inflammatory burden in patients with chemotherapy-induced phlebitis.

Humans↗
PubMed1992

Antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiothoracic operations. Meta-analysis of thirty years of clinical trials.

Antistaphylococcal penicillins and first-generation cephalosporins have traditionally been the prophylactic antibiotics of choice for patients undergoing cardiothoracic operations. Recently published studies have claimed improved outcomes with respect to postoperative wound infection when second-generation cephalosporins were used for prophylaxis. The purpose of this study was to critically review the infectious outcomes of prospective, randomized, and controlled studies of cardiothoracic surgery prophylaxis by means of meta-analytic techniques. For each of 28 studies meeting the meta-analysis entry criteria, odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated to compare the prophylactic efficacy of the antibiotic regimens. Odds ratios were then pooled, and a summary odds ratio was calculated for each pairing of antibiotic treatments. Placebo-controlled trials of cardiothoracic prophylaxis demonstrated a consistent benefit to the administration of antibiotic prophylaxis, with an approximate fivefold reduction in wound infection rate. The second-generation cephalosporins, cefamandole and cefuroxime, performed better than cefazolin, with an approximate one and one-half-fold reduction in wound infection rate. Administration of prophylaxis beyond 48 hours was not associated with improved infectious outcomes.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed2026

Effectiveness of the DASH diet versus alternative dietary interventions for hypertension management: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet is widely recommended for blood pressure control; however, its comparative effectiveness relative to other structured dietary interventions remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of the DASH diet versus alternative dietary interventions on blood pressure and cardiometabolic outcomes in adults. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Multiple databases were searched from inception to February 2026. Eligible studies included adults with elevated blood pressure or hypertension comparing the DASH diet with other dietary interventions or usual care. Continuous outcomes were pooled using random-effects models and expressed as mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: A total of 22 randomized controlled trials were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 10 were included in the meta-analysis. The DASH diet did not demonstrate a statistically significant advantage over comparator diets in reducing systolic blood pressure (MD = 1.30; 95% CI: -1.54 to 4.14) or diastolic blood pressure (MD = 0.21; 95% CI: -3.72 to 4.14), with substantial heterogeneity observed across studies. Significant effects were identified for selected cardiometabolic outcomes, including reductions in urinary sodium excretion (MD = -32.89; 95% CI: -62.76 to -3.01), LDL cholesterol (MD = -8.59; 95% CI: -14.64 to -2.54), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (MD = -0.49; 95% CI: -0.52 to -0.46), as well as an increase in urinary potassium excretion (MD = 11.76; 95% CI: 4.08 to 19.44). The certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low across outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The DASH diet was not superior to other dietary interventions in reducing blood pressure; however, it demonstrated consistent benefits in selected cardiometabolic parameters. Given the overall low certainty of evidence and substantial heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. Future research should focus on well-designed trials with standardized outcomes and longer follow-up to clarify comparative effectiveness.

Humans↗
PubMed1992

Clinical research in osteoarthritis: design and results of short-term and long-term trials with disease-modifying drugs.

Putative disease-modifying drugs are usually clinically used in osteoarthritis with two main aims: not only stopping or reducing the cartilage degenerative process after a long-term treatment, but also controlling the symptoms of the disease within a few days or weeks, thus avoiding or diminishing the use of symptomatic medications. Due to the difficulties of implementing the first aim, the latter aim was more often investigated, even if most often with inadequate study design and insufficient numbers of patients. We have recently carried out three double-blind, controlled, parallel groups, randomized, 4-6 week trials of glucosamine sulphate versus placebo or the NSAID ibuprofen on a total of 606 gonarthrosic out-patients. Movement limitation and pain were scored according to the Lequesne index, and the efficacy goals were strictly pre-determined. Access to other medications was not allowed. Glucosamine was significantly more effective than placebo, while no difference was detected in comparison with the NSAID (p < 0.025 and p = 0.77, respectively: Fisher's two-tailed exact test). On the other hand, glucosamine was as well tolerated as placebo, while the percentage of patients suffering adverse drug reactions was higher in the ibuprofen group (37% vs 7%: p < 0.001). Long-term trials are in progress and several aspects are to be considered in their design: they must be double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, continued for a period of years and (most importantly) with the careful use of imaging and biochemical techniques capable of generating objective evaluation criteria.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2026

Ibuprofen versus acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in pediatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of their efficacy.

UNLABELLED: Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the most widely used analgesics in pediatric practice for the management of acute mild-to-moderate pain. Despite their widespread use, the comparative analgesic efficacy of these two agents in children remains a subject of ongoing debate, with existing evidence largely derived from heterogeneous clinical settings and small individual trials. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials comparing the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen in pediatric populations with acute mild-to-moderate pain. A systematic literature search was conducted up to May 2026 in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-Children and Adolescents (PRISMA-C) 2026 reporting guideline. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing ibuprofen with acetaminophen in children and adolescents (defined as individuals aged 0 to&#x2009;<&#x2009;18&#xa0;years) with acute pain, reporting at least one extractable efficacy outcome. Continuous outcomes were synthesized as standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) using random-effects models; dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Eight randomized controlled trials enrolling 1325 participants were included. Three pediatric trials contributed to the primary continuous pain outcome meta-analysis (n&#x2009;=&#x2009;196 analyzable participants), yielding a pooled SMD of&#x2009;-&#x2009;0.28 (95% CI&#x2009;-&#x2009;0.57 to 0.00; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.052; I2&#x2009;=&#x2009;0%), indicating a small effect favoring ibuprofen that did not reach conventional statistical significance. Given the small number of contributing studies (k&#x2009;=&#x2009;3), the I2 statistic should be interpreted with caution as it has limited power to detect heterogeneity in this context. For the dichotomous pain freedom outcome (2 trials, n&#x2009;=&#x2009;114), no significant difference was observed (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.53-1.99; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.93; I2&#x2009;=&#x2009;0%). A prespecified sensitivity analysis including an adult soft-tissue injury trial attenuated the pooled effect toward the null (SMD&#x2009;-&#x2009;0.15, 95% CI&#x2009;-&#x2009;0.38 to 0.09; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.23; I2&#x2009;=&#x2009;36.6%). Narrative synthesis of additional studies generally demonstrated comparable analgesic efficacy between the two agents across postoperative and outpatient pediatric settings. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as low for both primary outcomes, primarily due to imprecision and indirectness. CONCLUSION: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials does not demonstrate a superiority of ibuprofen over acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in children. Both agents appear to provide clinically meaningful analgesia across heterogeneous pediatric pain settings. The clinical choice between agents should be guided by individual patient factors, including contraindications to NSAIDs, the inflammatory nature of the pain etiology, and patient-specific characteristics. The low certainty of evidence underscores the need for adequately powered, methodologically rigorous trials to definitively establish the comparative efficacy of these two analgesics in the pediatric population. WHAT IS KNOWN: &#x2022; Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the two most widely used non-opioid analgesics for acute mild-to-moderate pain in children, and both are recommended as first-line agents by major international guidelines. &#x2022; Prior meta-analyses in mixed pediatric-adult populations have suggested a modest analgesic advantage of ibuprofen over acetaminophen, but pediatric-specific evidence has remained limited and methodologically heterogeneous. WHAT IS NEW: &#x2022; This systematic review and meta-analysis, restricted to randomized controlled trials in pediatric populations, found that ibuprofen showed a small effect favoring pain reduction compared with acetaminophen (SMD&#x2009;-&#x2009;0.28, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.052), although this did not reach conventional statistical significance. &#x2022; The analgesic advantage of ibuprofen may be more pronounced in pain etiologies with a significant inflammatory component (e.g., fractures). At the same time, both agents appear broadly equivalent in most other acute pediatric pain settings, supporting individualized analgesic selection based on clinical context and patient-specific factors.

Humans↗
PubMed1992

Quality of life in treatment of hypertension. A metaanalysis of clinical trials.

A metaanalysis was performed to determine the effects on quality of life (QL) in hypertension as reported in published clinical trials of antihypertensive drug therapy. All studies included compared active treatment to baseline (placebo or no treatment) with the patients as their own control and used blinded, randomized trials. Change was measured by self and/or interviewer-assisted evaluation, standardized psychomotor/cognitive tests, or sleep laboratory observations. After an exhaustive literature search (1970 to 1990), nine published trials of 27 population groups (n = 1620) using 14 drugs from six pharmacological groups met selection criteria and were analyzed for five QL constructs: sexual function, sleep, psychomotor, general well-being, and mood. Small positive effect size (d) improvement with treatment was seen for sleep (d = 0.106), psychomotor (d = 0.283), general well-being (d = 0.139), and mood (d = 0.167) while no effect could be determined for sexual function (d = -0.030) based on 95% confidence intervals. Either a comparably small improvement with treatment or no effect was seen among various pharmacological drug groups; no negative effect with treatment was identified. A larger positive effect could be postulated if the drug choice was individualized to the patient rather than randomized as in clinical trial methodology. Although none of the drug groups had a clearly superior effect, a more frequent positive effect with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers was seen for all constructs. Narrower demographics and smaller sample sizes may have biased similar positive effects in calcium-channel blockers and diuretics.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1992

Analysis of randomized and nonrandomized patients in clinical trials using the comprehensive cohort follow-up study design.

In clinical research, randomized trials are widely accepted as the definitive method of evaluating the efficacy of therapies. The random assignment of patients to their treatment ensures the internal validity of the comparison of new treatments with controls. An assessment of the external validity of trial results can best be achieved by comparing the study population to the population of patients who met the eligibility criteria but did not consent to randomization. A part of the data of the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS), in which coronary artery bypass surgery is compared to conventional medical therapy in patients with coronary artery disease, is used to illustrate a strategy of multivariate analysis of randomized and nonrandomized patients which allows an investigation of both internal and external validity. The method used Cox's proportional hazards regression model with inclusion of covariates for randomization status and corresponding interactions in addition to the usual covariates for treatment and the important prognostic factors.

Cohort Studies↗