Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

NCT number NCT06416462
Other study ID # 6.296.354
Secondary ID
Status Not yet recruiting
Phase N/A
First received
Last updated
Start date July 30, 2024
Est. completion date December 30, 2024

Study information

Verified date October 2023
Source University of Nove de Julho
Contact Raquel Agnelli Mesquita-Ferrari, PhD
Phone +55 (11) 2633-9000
Email raquel.mesquita@gmail.com
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Diabetic foot ulcer affects 10.5% of the Brazilian/world population, compromising the quality of life of these patients and burdening the public health system. Studies show that antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) accelerates its repair, however, there is not enough evidence for decision-making in clinical practice, which prevents this treatment from being used on a large scale. Controlled and randomized clinical studies are needed to increase the level of evidence on this subject, promoting the improvement of the quality of life of people affected by diabetic foot ulcers. The aim of this study is to analyze the action of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy on the quality of the wound and tissue repair process using the Bates-Jensen scale in people affected by diabetic foot wounds.


Description:

Diabetic foot ulcer affects 10.5% of the Brazilian/world population, compromising the quality of life of these patients and burdening the public health system. Studies show that antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) accelerates its repair, however, there is not enough evidence for decision-making in clinical practice, which prevents this treatment from being used on a large scale. Controlled and randomized clinical studies are needed to increase the level of evidence on this subject, promoting the improvement of the quality of life of people affected by diabetic foot ulcers. The aim of this study is to analyze the action of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy on the quality of the wound and tissue repair process using the Bates-Jensen scale in people affected by diabetic foot wounds. A clinical, controlled, randomized and double-blind study will be carried out. Patients will be randomized (1:1) into 2 groups: (1) experimental (n= 45) - standard care from the Polyclinic wound sector + aPDT and (2) control (n= 45) - standard care + simulation of use aPDT with equipment off). All patients will be seen three times a week, with 10 sessions of aPDT or simulation performed by the same operator. A cluster with an average radiant power of 100 mW, radiant energy per emitter of 6 J/cm² of red light (wavelength 660 nm) will be used. The research will be carried out in a Municipal Health Center in the city of Rio de Janeiro. Patients affected by neuropathic wounds of the diabetic foot, assisted by the Programmatic Care Health Coordination will be included 5.1. The initial assessment will consist of collecting data from medical records to establish the sociodemographic and clinical profile of patients affected by diabetic foot injuries.) by a researcher blinded to the interventions. This scale assesses the size of the lesion, depth, borders, detachment, type of necrotic tissue, amount of necrotic tissue, type of exudate, amount of exudate, skin color around the wound, perilesional tissue edema, perilesional tissue hardening, granulation tissue, epithelialization. As secondary outcomes: the sensitivity of the foot will be evaluated, through neurological evaluation with tuning fork and monofilament, the instrument for assessing quality of life - Diabetes-21, the Wagner Scale, the evaluation of the degree of ischemia by the Fontaine scale and Runtherford, the WiFi and Taxonomy Nursing Outcomes Classification scale that assesses skin integrity. Data from this research will be collected after approval by the ethics committee of Universidade Nove de Julho and the City Hall of Rio de Janeiro.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Not yet recruiting
Enrollment 90
Est. completion date December 30, 2024
Est. primary completion date November 30, 2024
Accepts healthy volunteers No
Gender All
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria: - both sexes - chronic wounds originating from the neuropathic diabetic foot - contaminated lesions - total score obtained on the Bates-Jensen scale between 13 and 60 - who submits all requested exams Exclusion Criteria: - wounds with etiologies that are not related to the diabetic foot - ischemic diabetic foot who has an ankle-brachial index with a value between 0.7 and 1.3. - glycated hemoglobin greater than 8%.

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Intervention

Procedure:
antimicrobial photodynamic therapy
When starting the research, all wounds, regardless of the study group, will be cleaned with 0.9% saline solution (SF0.9%), using a 40x12 needle and a 500ml bottle of SF0.9%, in order to maintain pressure. for equal cleaning of all wounds and a hydrofiber plate with silver was used as standard coverage. Experimental group (n=45): When starting the intervention, all services in both groups will follow the cleaning standard described previously. In the aPDT group, 1% methylene blue will be used as a photosensitizer applied with the aid of a syringe (with a pre-irradiation time of 5 minutes), 6 J of laser will be applied.

Locations

Country Name City State
Brazil Raquel Agnelli Mesquita-Ferrari São Paulo SP

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
University of Nove de Julho

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Brazil, 

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Bates-Jensen Wound Assesment Tool The Bates-Jensen Scale is an effective tool for wound assessment. In its current version, it includes 13 characteristics to be evaluated: size, depth, edges, undermining, type of necrotic tissue, amount of necrotic tissue, exudate type, exudate amount, skin color around the wound, perilesional tissue edema, perilesional tissue induration, granulation tissue, and epithelialization.
Each item on the scale is scored from 1 to 5:
minimum values indicate the best wound condition,
maximum values represent the worst condition.
The total score is obtained by summing all the items and can range from 13 to 65 points, with HIGHER scores indicating WORSE wound conditions.
Before the intervention
Primary Bates-Jensen Wound Assesment Tool The Bates-Jensen Scale is an effective tool for wound assessment. In its current version, it includes 13 characteristics to be evaluated: size, depth, edges, undermining, type of necrotic tissue, amount of necrotic tissue, exudate type, exudate amount, skin color around the wound, perilesional tissue edema, perilesional tissue induration, granulation tissue, and epithelialization.
Each item on the scale is scored from 1 to 5:
minimum values indicate the best wound condition,
maximum values represent the worst condition.
The total score is obtained by summing all the items and can range from 13 to 65 points, with HIGHER scores indicating WORSE wound conditions.
First day after intervention
Primary Bates-Jensen scale The Bates-Jensen Scale is an effective tool for wound assessment. In its current version, it includes 13 characteristics to be evaluated: size, depth, edges, undermining, type of necrotic tissue, amount of necrotic tissue, exudate type, exudate amount, skin color around the wound, perilesional tissue edema, perilesional tissue induration, granulation tissue, and epithelialization.
Each item on the scale is scored from 1 to 5:
minimum values indicate the best wound condition,
maximum values represent the worst condition.
The total score is obtained by summing all the items and can range from 13 to 65 points, with HIGHER scores indicating WORSE wound conditions.
Third day after intervention
Primary Bates-Jensen scale The Bates-Jensen Scale is an effective tool for wound assessment. In its current version, it includes 13 characteristics to be evaluated: size, depth, edges, undermining, type of necrotic tissue, amount of necrotic tissue, exudate type, exudate amount, skin color around the wound, perilesional tissue edema, perilesional tissue induration, granulation tissue, and epithelialization.
Each item on the scale is scored from 1 to 5:
minimum values indicate the best wound condition,
maximum values represent the worst condition.
The total score is obtained by summing all the items and can range from 13 to 65 points, with HIGHER scores indicating WORSE wound conditions.
Fifth day after intervention
Primary Bates-Jensen scale The Bates-Jensen Scale is an effective tool for wound assessment. In its current version, it includes 13 characteristics to be evaluated: size, depth, edges, undermining, type of necrotic tissue, amount of necrotic tissue, exudate type, exudate amount, skin color around the wound, perilesional tissue edema, perilesional tissue induration, granulation tissue, and epithelialization. Each item on the scale is scored from 1 to 5, where 1 indicates the best wound condition, and 5 represents the worst condition. The total score is obtained by summing all the items and can range from 13 to 65 points, with higher scores indicating worse wound conditions. Tenth day after intervention
Secondary Diabetes-21 instrument Evaluate the effect of aPDT on quality of life using the Diabetes-21 instrument Before the intervention
Secondary Diabetes-21 instrument Evaluate the effect of aPDT on quality of life using the Diabetes-21 instrument First day after intervention
Secondary Diabetes-21 instrument Evaluate the effect of aPDT on quality of life using the Diabetes-21 instrument Third day after intervention
Secondary Diabetes-21 instrument Evaluate the effect of aPDT on quality of life using the Diabetes-21 instrument The fifth day after intervention
Secondary Diabetes-21 instrument Evaluate the effect of aPDT on quality of life using the Diabetes-21 instrument Tenth day after intervention
Secondary Wagner Scale Classify the diabetic foot wound with the Wagner Scale Before the intervention
Secondary Wagner Scale Classify the diabetic foot wound with the Wagner Scale First day after intervention
Secondary Wagner Scale Classify the diabetic foot wound with the Wagner Scale Third day after intervention
Secondary Wagner Scale Classify the diabetic foot wound with the Wagner Scale Fifth day after intervention
Secondary Wagner Scale Classify the diabetic foot wound with the Wagner Scale Tenth day after intervention
Secondary WiFi scale Assess the risk of amputation using the WiFi scale Before the intervention
Secondary WiFi scale Assess the risk of amputation using the WiFi scale First day after intervention
Secondary WiFi scale Assess the risk of amputation using the WiFi scale Third day after intervention
Secondary WiFi scale Assess the risk of amputation using the WiFi scale Fifth day after intervention
Secondary WiFi scale Assess the risk of amputation using the WiFi scale Tenth day after intervention
Secondary Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Assess skin integrity using the Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Before the intervention
Secondary Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Assess skin integrity using the Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy First day after intervention
Secondary Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Assess skin integrity using the Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Third day after intervention
Secondary Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Assess skin integrity using the Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Fifth day after intervention
Secondary Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Assess skin integrity using the Nursing Outcomes Classification Taxonomy Tenth day after intervention
Secondary Runtherford Scale for ischemia evaluation Rutherford et al. (1997) also base their classification on the degree of ischemia, with some differences in the parameters assessed: asymptomatic (0); mild claudication (1); moderate claudication (2); severe claudication (3); ischemic pain at rest (4); minor tissue loss (5); major tissue loss (6). The higher value corresponds to the worst result. Before the intervention
Secondary Runtherford Scale for ischemia evaluation Rutherford et al. (1997) also base their classification on the degree of ischemia, with some differences in the parameters assessed: asymptomatic (0); mild claudication (1); moderate claudication (2); severe claudication (3); ischemic pain at rest (4); minor tissue loss (5); major tissue loss (6). The higher value corresponds to the worst result. First day after intervention
Secondary Runtherford Scale for ischemia evaluation Rutherford et al. (1997) also base their classification on the degree of ischemia, with some differences in the parameters assessed: asymptomatic (0); mild claudication (1); moderate claudication (2); severe claudication (3); ischemic pain at rest (4); minor tissue loss (5); major tissue loss (6). The higher value corresponds to the worst result. Third day after intervention
Secondary Runtherford Scale for ischemia evaluation Rutherford et al. (1997) also base their classification on the degree of ischemia, with some differences in the parameters assessed: asymptomatic (0); mild claudication (1); moderate claudication (2); severe claudication (3); ischemic pain at rest (4); minor tissue loss (5); major tissue loss (6). The higher value corresponds to the worst result. Fifth day after intervention
Secondary Runtherford Scale for ischemia evaluation Rutherford et al. (1997) also base their classification on the degree of ischemia, with some differences in the parameters assessed: asymptomatic (0); mild claudication (1); moderate claudication (2); severe claudication (3); ischemic pain at rest (4); minor tissue loss (5); major tissue loss (6). The higher value corresponds to the worst result. Tenth day after intervention
Secondary protective sensitivity of the feet Assess the protective sensitivity of the feet through the monofilament and tuning fork test Before the intervention
Secondary protective sensitivity of the feet Assess the protective sensitivity of the feet through the monofilament and tuning fork test First day after intervention
Secondary protective sensitivity of the feet Assess the protective sensitivity of the feet through the monofilament and tuning fork test Third day after intervention
Secondary protective sensitivity of the feet Assess the protective sensitivity of the feet through the monofilament and tuning fork test Fifth day after intervention
Secondary protective sensitivity of the feet Assess the protective sensitivity of the feet through the monofilament and tuning fork test Tenth day after intervention
Secondary Fontaine Classification Fontaine et al. (1957) primarily rely on the degree of limb ischemia, evaluating the following parameters: asymptomatic (I); mild claudication (IIa); moderate to severe claudication (IIb); rest pain (III); gangrene or ulceration (IV). Before the intervention
Secondary Fontaine Classification Fontaine et al. (1957) primarily rely on the degree of limb ischemia, evaluating the following parameters: asymptomatic (I); mild claudication (IIa); moderate to severe claudication (IIb); rest pain (III); gangrene or ulceration (IV). First day after intervention
Secondary Fontaine Classification Fontaine et al. (1957) primarily rely on the degree of limb ischemia, evaluating the following parameters: asymptomatic (I); mild claudication (IIa); moderate to severe claudication (IIb); rest pain (III); gangrene or ulceration (IV). Third day after intervention
Secondary Fontaine Classification Fontaine et al. (1957) primarily rely on the degree of limb ischemia, evaluating the following parameters: asymptomatic (I); mild claudication (IIa); moderate to severe claudication (IIb); rest pain (III); gangrene or ulceration (IV). Fifth day after intervention
Secondary Fontaine Classification Fontaine et al. (1957) primarily rely on the degree of limb ischemia, evaluating the following parameters: asymptomatic (I); mild claudication (IIa); moderate to severe claudication (IIb); rest pain (III); gangrene or ulceration (IV). Tenth day after intervention
Secondary Vibration Sensation To assess vibratory sensitivity, a 128Hz tuning fork is applied to a bony area (e.g., elbow, clavicle, sternum, chin) to demonstrate the expected sensation. The participant then closes their eyes, and the tuning fork is applied with constant pressure to the dorsal side of the hallux's distal phalanx or another toe if the hallux is missing. If all phalanges are amputated, it's applied to the nearby area. The tuning fork is held in place until the participant reports the vibration has ceased. The test is repeated twice, with at least one "simulated" application where the tuning fork doesn't vibrate. A positive test result is when the participant correctly identifies vibration in at least two out of three applications, while a negative result is when they inaccurately identify vibration in two out of three applications, indicating a lack of vibratory sensitivity (IWGDF, 2019). Before the intervention
Secondary Vibration Sensation To assess vibratory sensitivity, a 128Hz tuning fork is applied to a bony area (e.g., elbow, clavicle, sternum, chin) to demonstrate the expected sensation. The participant then closes their eyes, and the tuning fork is applied with constant pressure to the dorsal side of the hallux's distal phalanx or another toe if the hallux is missing. If all phalanges are amputated, it's applied to the nearby area. The tuning fork is held in place until the participant reports the vibration has ceased. The test is repeated twice, with at least one "simulated" application where the tuning fork doesn't vibrate. A positive test result is when the participant correctly identifies vibration in at least two out of three applications, while a negative result is when they inaccurately identify vibration in two out of three applications, indicating a lack of vibratory sensitivity (IWGDF, 2019). First day after intervention
Secondary Vibration Sensation To assess vibratory sensitivity, a 128Hz tuning fork is applied to a bony area (e.g., elbow, clavicle, sternum, chin) to demonstrate the expected sensation. The participant then closes their eyes, and the tuning fork is applied with constant pressure to the dorsal side of the hallux's distal phalanx or another toe if the hallux is missing. If all phalanges are amputated, it's applied to the nearby area. The tuning fork is held in place until the participant reports the vibration has ceased. The test is repeated twice, with at least one "simulated" application where the tuning fork doesn't vibrate. A positive test result is when the participant correctly identifies vibration in at least two out of three applications, while a negative result is when they inaccurately identify vibration in two out of three applications, indicating a lack of vibratory sensitivity (IWGDF, 2019). Third day after intervention
Secondary Vibration Sensation To assess vibratory sensitivity, a 128Hz tuning fork is applied to a bony area (e.g., elbow, clavicle, sternum, chin) to demonstrate the expected sensation. The participant then closes their eyes, and the tuning fork is applied with constant pressure to the dorsal side of the hallux's distal phalanx or another toe if the hallux is missing. If all phalanges are amputated, it's applied to the nearby area. The tuning fork is held in place until the participant reports the vibration has ceased. The test is repeated twice, with at least one "simulated" application where the tuning fork doesn't vibrate. A positive test result is when the participant correctly identifies vibration in at least two out of three applications, while a negative result is when they inaccurately identify vibration in two out of three applications, indicating a lack of vibratory sensitivity (IWGDF, 2019). Fifth day after intervention
Secondary Vibration Sensation To assess vibratory sensitivity, a 128Hz tuning fork is applied to a bony area (e.g., elbow, clavicle, sternum, chin) to demonstrate the expected sensation. The participant then closes their eyes, and the tuning fork is applied with constant pressure to the dorsal side of the hallux's distal phalanx or another toe if the hallux is missing. If all phalanges are amputated, it's applied to the nearby area. The tuning fork is held in place until the participant reports the vibration has ceased. The test is repeated twice, with at least one "simulated" application where the tuning fork doesn't vibrate. A positive test result is when the participant correctly identifies vibration in at least two out of three applications, while a negative result is when they inaccurately identify vibration in two out of three applications, indicating a lack of vibratory sensitivity (IWGDF, 2019). Tenth day after intervention
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Recruiting NCT04497805 - Clinical Study of ALLO-ASC-SHEET in Subjects With Diabetic Wagner Grade II Foot Ulcers Phase 2
Withdrawn NCT03675269 - Adjunctive Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) for Lower Extermity Diabetic Ulcer: N/A
Completed NCT04624516 - Effect of Self-foot Exercise on the Incidence of Plantar Foot Diabetic Ulcer Recurrence N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT06439667 - VIRTUALLY SUPERVISED TELE-EXERCISE PLATFORM FOR ACCELERATING PLANTAR WOUND HEALING
Recruiting NCT05608187 - Evaluating Safety and Biological Effect on Wound Healing of ILP100-Topical in Subjects With Diabetic Foot Ulcers Phase 2
Not yet recruiting NCT06437028 - Evaluating the Efficacy of Perinatal Membrane Allografts for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers. N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT06278935 - Lifestyle Tailored Offloading for Diabetic Foot Ulcers N/A
Withdrawn NCT05024656 - AmnioExcel® Plus vs SOC in the Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers N/A
Terminated NCT02202668 - Transcutaneous Raman Spectroscope (TRS) Analyses of Diabetic Foot Ulcers N/A
Completed NCT01951768 - Efficacy and Safety of Garamycin® Sponge in Diabetic Patients With a Moderate or Severe Foot Ulcer Infection Phase 4
Terminated NCT01966380 - Proof of Concept (Design Validation) in Patient With Hard to Heal Wounds Such as Pressure Ulcer, Diabetic Foot Ulcer and Leg Ulcer, Leia Phase 2
Completed NCT01657474 - Comparative Study of Two Application Regimens of Amniotic Membrane Wound Graft In the Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers N/A
Active, not recruiting NCT00389636 - TheraGauze™ Alone and Regranex®Gel 0.01% Plus TheraGauze™ in the Treatment of Wagner Stage I Diabetic Foot Ulcers N/A
Completed NCT01181440 - Dermagraft(R) for the Treatment of Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers Phase 3
Enrolling by invitation NCT05888259 - Plantar Pressure Distribution in Diabetic Foot Ulcer N/A
Completed NCT04054804 - Digital Foot Check by Using the D-Foot, a New Software
Not yet recruiting NCT05877378 - Efficacy of PICO Single-use System in Chronic Ulcers N/A
Recruiting NCT06037369 - The Short Message-based Customized Standardized N/A
Completed NCT03312595 - Clinical Outcomes After Treatment With RestrataTM Wound Matrix in Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFU) N/A
Recruiting NCT04564443 - A Unique Micro Water Jet Technology Device Versus Standard Debridement in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot N/A