There are about 13446 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Belgium. The country of the clinical trial is determined by the location of where the clinical research is being studied. Most studies are often held in multiple locations & countries.
Background and Goal of Study Labor pain remains an area where different analgesia options are looked for, more specifically non-pharmacological remedies are popular. Hypnosis and virtual reality (VR) have been studied with encouraging results. However, until now, the combination of VR and hypnosis (VRH) has not been assessed during labor, although it has shown promising results in other acute pain areas. The VRH4L study will evaluate the efficacy of Virtual Reality Hypnosis (VRH) in reducing pain during labor. Hypnosis is delivered as a standardized therapeutic intervention through virtual reality, using a digital sedation software (AQUA ®, Oncomfort SA). For this prospective, interventional parallel group, monocentric randomized controlled trial full term women who were planned for an induction of labor at the St-Jean Hospital in Brussels from March to May 2021 were included. Women with complicated pregnancies and patients with contraindications to VR were excluded. Patients were randomized in two arms. In the VRH group the patients received a 30-minute session of virtual reality hypnosis when in active labor and had access to standard care. Patients in the control group received only standard care. Primary outcome was the difference in post intervention pain score between the two arms. Secondary outcomes were the difference in pain score 30 minutes after the intervention, vital signs correlated to pain, satisfaction of the experience, interaction with the midwife and prevalence of side effects. Data was analyzed using the student's T test.
Over the last few decades the fast technical and medical progress poses a significant challenge to doctors, who are asked to find the right balance between life-prolonging and palliative care. Previous studies suggest that doctors (unconsciously) prefer to remain prognostically uncertain rather than to gather the information that is required to reduce uncertainty and to effectively timely take decisions in the team for the benefit of the patient. To obtain all that information, the doctor in charge of the patient needs to empower clinicians to speak up while guarantying a safe environment. However, creating a safe climate which enhances inter-professional shared decision-making for the benefit of the patient requires specific self-reflective and empowering leadership skills (including the management of group dynamics in the interdisciplinary team). The aim of this study is to investigate whether coaching doctors in self-reflective and empowering leadership, and in the management of team dynamics with regard to adult hospitalized patients potentially receiving excessive treatment during 4 months 1) improves ethical decision-making (primary objective) and 2) reduces the burden on patients, relatives, clinicians and the society (secondary objective). The improvement in quality of ethical decision-making will be assessed objectively via the incidence of written do-not-intubate and -resuscitate orders (first primary endpoint) in patients potentially receiving excessive treatment and subjectively via the ethical decision-making climate questionnaire that will be filled out by the team (second primary endpoint). In line with the DISPROPRICUS study, patients potentially receiving excessive treatment will be defined as patients who are perceived as receiving excessive treatment by two or more different clinicians in charge of the patient. The probability of being alive, at home with a good quality of life one year after admission was only 7% in patients potentially receiving excessive treatment in this study. Therefore, perceptions of excessive treatment by two or more clinicians are used in this study as a signal to initiate (self-)reflection in team about the quality of care that is provided to the patient and whether the treatment is in balance with the medical condition of the patient and the patient's goal of care .
This study aims to examine the dose-response relationship of an online adaptive cognitive control training on depressive symptomatology and rumination. Participants will be randomized over six groups, each receiving a different dose (0, 1, 5, 10, 15 or 20 sessions) of a cognitive control training in remitted depressed patients. An adaptive Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task will be used as cognitive control training.
Nowadays migraine is conceptualized as a continuum, with at the one hand episodic migraine (EM) and at the other hand chronic migraine (CM) (1). The general aim of the study is to determine where exactly in this continuum central sensitization (CS) appears. Recent studies support the presence of CS in migraine patients (2,3), but controversial evidence exists about where in the continuum exactly CS appears. Some studies determined no differences in sings of CS between EM and CM (4,5), whether other research indicate a clear difference between EM and CM (6-8). However a significant difference in CS parameters could be determined between a patient group (EM or CM) and a healthy control group (3,4,8). In addition, CS appears to be present during the migraine attack (2). In this research, the presence of signs of CS will be determined in between headache phases. The primary outcome measure is identification of CS by PPT, QST, TS, CPM and CSI. Secondary outcome measures are the outcome of the MIDAS, HADS and EUROLIGHT.
Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is the endogenous pain relief mechanism responsible for the "pain-inhibits-pain" phenomenon. This mechanism can be activated experimentally, and its efficiency evaluated by experimental pain tests. According to the "pain-inhibits-pain" principle, during such an experimental testing paradigm, a painful test stimulus is typically applied, followed by a conditioning stimulus. The effect of the conditioning stimulus on the test stimulus is examined to determine whether or not the conditioning stimulus elicits an inhibitory effect. With this study, the investigators want to examine in pain-free adults whether and to what extend the efficacy of CPM is influenced by 1) attention (focus versus distraction), 2) intrinsic expectations (pain reduction versus no change versus pain increase) with regard to pain due to the CPM paradigm used, and 3) the order of application of the test stimulus and conditioning stimulus (sequential versus parallel paradigm).
Transposition of great vessels are usually corrected by an arterial switch operation. This operation is often done during the first week of life as surgical delays lead to deconditioned left ventricle. On the other hand early surgery carries also risks as neonatal physiology may have problems adapting to an intervention under cardiopulmonary bypass, possible pulmonary hypertension. Arterial switch operation between 2008 and 2020 done at our center will be reviewed. Primary outcome will be mortality or severe postoperative morbidity. Patients will be divided in 2 groups according to the presence or absence of the primary outcome. After propensity score matching, they will be analysed according to the timing of operation.
This study will evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of three different doses of NBI-921352 versus placebo in adults with focal onset seizures
The main goal of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a Future-oriented Group training aimed at reducing suicidality in adults. This will test the effectiveness by studying the effect on suicidal ideation and related outcomes, compared to Treatment As Usual. Participants will also be asked to evaluate the group training. The study is a multicentre randomized controlled trial conducted in out-patient Flemish mental healthcare facilities.
The main goal of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness ofMindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy aimed at reducing suicidality in adults. This will test the effectiveness by studying the effect on suicidal ideation and related outcomes, compared to Treatment As Usual. The study is a multicentre randomized controlled trial conducted in out-patient Flemish mental healthcare facilities.
Retrospective single center analyses of COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between 01/02/2020 and 31/07/2021.