Randomized controlled trial

About: Randomized controlled trial is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 119828 publications have been published within this topic receiving 4861808 citations. The topic is also known as: RCT & randomized control trial.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement on Inpatient Glycemic Control

Abstract: People with diabetes are more likely to be hospitalized and to have longer durations of hospital stay than those without diabetes. A recent survey estimated that 22% of all hospital inpatient days were incurred by people with diabetes and that hospital inpatient care accounted for half of the 174 billion USD total U.S. medical expenditures for this disease (1). These findings are due, in part, to the continued expansion of the worldwide epidemic of type 2 diabetes. In the U.S. alone, there are ∼1.6 million new cases of diabetes each year, with an over all prevalence of 23.6 million people (7.8% of the population, with one-fourth of the cases remaining undiagnosed). An additional 57 million American adults are at high risk for type 2 diabetes (2). Although the costs of illness-related stress hyperglycemia are not known, they are likely to be considerable in light of the poor prognosis of such patients (3–6). There is substantial observational evidence linking hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients (with or without diabetes) to poor outcomes. Cohort studies as well as a few early randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have suggested that intensive treatment of hyperglycemia improved hospital outcomes (5–8). In 2004, this evidence led the American College of Endocrinology (ACE) and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), in collaboration with the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and other medical organizations, to develop recommendations for treatment of inpatient hyperglycemia (9). In 2005, the ADA added recommendations for treatment of hyperglycemia in the hospitalto itsannual Standards of Medical Care (10). Recommendations from the ACE and the ADA generally endorsed tight glycemic control in critical care units. For patients in general medical and surgical units, where RCT evidence regarding treatment targets was lacking, glycemic goals similar to those advised for outpatients were advocated (9, …

A pilot study and randomized controlled trial of the mindful self-compassion program.

Abstract: Objectives The aim of these two studies was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Mindful Self-Compassion (MSC) program, an 8-week workshop designed to train people to be more self-compassionate. Methods Study 1 was a pilot study that examined change scores in self-compassion, mindfulness, and various wellbeing outcomes among community adults (N = 21; mean [M] age = 51.26, 95% female). Study 2 was a randomized controlled trial that compared a treatment group (N = 25; M age = 51.21; 78% female) with a waitlist control group (N = 27; M age = 49.11; 82% female). Results Study 1 found significant pre/post gains in self-compassion, mindfulness, and various wellbeing outcomes. Study 2 found that compared with the control group, intervention participants reported significantly larger increases in self-compassion, mindfulness, and wellbeing. Gains were maintained at 6-month and 1-year follow-ups. Conclusions The MSC program appears to be effective at enhancing self-compassion, mindfulness, and wellbeing.

Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Abstract: Cardiovascular disease (CVD), which comprises heart attacks (myocardial infarction), angina and strokes, is ranked as the number one cause of mortality and is a major cause of morbidity world wide. High blood cholesterol is linked to CVD events and is an important risk factor. Reducing high blood cholesterol, is thus an important way to reduce the chances of suffering a CVD event. Statins - cholesterol lowering drugs - (e.g. simvastatin, pravastatin, atorvastatin) are the first-choice treatments. Since the early statin randomised controlled trials were reported in the 1990s, several reviews of the effects of statins have been published highlighting their benefits particularly in people with a past history of CVD. Benefits include a reduction in CVD events. Statins have also been shown to reduce the risk of a first event in otherwise healthy individuals at high risk of CVD (primary prevention) but information on possible hazards has not been reported fully. The aim of this updated systematic review is to assess the effects, both in terms of benefits and harms of statins, for the primary prevention of CVD. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE until 2011. We found 18 randomised controlled trials with 19 trial arms (56,934 patients) dating from 1994 to 2008. All were randomised control trials comparing statins with usual care or placebo. The mean age of the participants was 57 years (range 28 - 97 years), 60.3% were men, and of the eight trials that reported on ethnicity, 85.9 % were Caucasian. Duration of treatment was a minimum one year and with follow-up of a minimum of six months. All-cause mortality and fatal and non-fatal CVD events were reduced with the use of statins as was the need for revascularisation (the restoration of an adequate blood supply to the heart) by means of surgery (coronary artery bypass graft ) or by angioplasty (PTCA). Of 1000 people treated with a statin for five years, 18 would avoid a major CVD event which compares well with other treatments used for preventing cardiovascular disease. Taking statins did not increase the risk of serious adverse effects such as cancer. Statins are likely to be cost-effective in primary prevention.