View clinical trials related to Pain.
Filter by:This study sought to evaluate the vasomotor response in the pain referral area of healthy individuals, performing the same procedure with and without the experience of delayed onset muscle soreness.
Objective: to estimate the effect of virtual reality as a distracting technique against traditional distracting techniques in the vaccination procedure in the pediatric population. Design: randomized clinical trial. Field of study: the study will be carried out in the field of pediatric primary care nursing consultation, where the pediatric systematic vaccination is performed. Subjects to study: the sample will be made up of children from 3 to 14 years old who are punctured for immunization in the Fuensanta Health Center that belongs to the Department of Health Valencia-General Hospital. Variables: age, sex, family country of origin, years living in Spain, number of children of the nuclear family, order in the number of siblings, socioeconomic level, age of the caregiver that accompanies the child, affiliation / bond with the child . Group to which the subject belongs (intervention group vs. control group). Number of punctures received in the last year. Heart rate pre and post vaccination. Type of vaccine. Combination of several punctures in the query. Previous use of virtual reality. Level of pain and fear after puncture. Parent or legal guardian satisfaction. Data collection: it will be held at the Health Center on the same day as the vaccination prodecure. On the part of the nurse (heart rate, type of vaccine, combination of several punctures), the child (pain, fear) and the parents / legal guardian (satisfaction, sociodemographic). Data analysis: The descriptive analysis of the quantitative variables will be carried out through the calculation of means, typical deviations, medians, ranges, minimum and maximum values. Qualitative variables will be analyzed in absolute and relative frequencies. For the statistical inference analysis, the T-test analysis of mean difference or U-Mann Whitney (according to normal compliance) will be used. All analyzes will be performed with a 95% confidence interval.
Virtual Reality (VR) can be used during needle-related procedures in children with cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of VR during access the venous port with Huber needle-related pain, fear and anxiety of children and adolescents with cancer.
This is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, within-subject (split-face), multicenter, prospective study to investigate whether RHA® 4 with New Anesthetic Agent is non-inferior to RHA® 4 (with lidocaine) in terms of injection site pain felt by the subject during injection. At screening, the Treating Investigator (TI) evaluated subjects' NLF severity (using the Wrinkle Severity Rating Scale; WSRS) to confirm eligibility and to establish a pre-treatment score for assessing aesthetic improvement. At Visit 1, RHA® 4 With New Anesthetic Agent was administered in a random sequence (first or second injection) and side of the face (left or right) and RHA® 4 with lidocaine was administered to the other side. Study subjects and the TI injecting study devices were blinded. Immediately after injection of each side, subjects rated injection site pain experienced during injection using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Injection site pain in each side of the face was also assessed at 15, 30, 45 and 60 minutes post-injection. Safety evaluation consisted of AE assessments, a 30-day CTR (Common Treatment Response) diary and a follow-up call performed by the study site at 72 hours after injection. Subjects attended Visit 2 (30 days post-injection) where efficacy and safety assessments will be conducted. Subjects who present with an unresolved clinically significant device related AE at Visit 2 received the optional follow-up phone call no later than 30 days after Visit 2. If the clinically significant AE remained unresolved, the Investigator requested that the subject attended the optional in-clinic follow-up visit (i.e., Visit 3) within 5 working days. Follow-up of the clinically significant AE continued until the AE was resolved or the TI determines that additional follow-up was not necessary.
Untreated postpartum pain has been associated with increased risk of opioid use, postpartum depression and development of persistent pain. In this study the investigators will investigate whether a scheduled administration of analgesics is superior to administration of analgesics based on patient request following a vaginal delivery.
Study should determine if performing the less uncomfortable part of the exam (the perianal exam) results in less recalled discomfort if performed last vs. if performed first.
Exploring the use of virtual reality as a distracting intervention strategy for school-age children to receive intravenous placement in emergency department, and further understand the effectiveness of reducing pain and fear during the invasive procedure.
This study will test the quality of opioid-related physician care decisions using a patient-simulation based measurement and feedback approach that combines multiple-choice care decisions with real-time, personalized scoring and feedback. The cases and feedback have been designed to align with the latest CDC opioid guidelines. The study will also measure the impact of gaming-inspired competition and motivation, including a weekly leaderboard, to improve evidence-based care decisions. The quality of care decisions will be measured in the simulations and in a multiple-choice assessment administered before and after the patient simulations.
This is a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, within-subject (split-face), multicenter, prospective study to investigate whether RHA® Redensity with new anesthetic agent is non-inferior to RHA® Redensity with lidocaine in terms of injection site pain felt by the subject during injection. At screening, the Treating Investigator (TI) evaluated subjects' perioral rhytid severity (using the Perioral Rhytid Severity Rating Scale; PR-SRS) to confirm eligibility and to establish a pre-treatment score for assessing aesthetic improvement. At Visit 1, RHA® Redensity with new anesthetic agent was administered in a random sequence (first or second injection) and side of the mouth (left or right) and RHA® Redensity with lidocaine was administered to the other side. Study subjects and the TI injecting study devices were blinded. Immediately after injection of an upper perioral quadrant, subjects rated the injection site pain experienced during injection using a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Injection site pain in each side of the mouth was also assessed at 15, 30, 45 and 60 minutes after injection of the upper quadrant. Safety evaluation consisted of AE assessments, a 30-day CTR (Common Treatment Response) diary and a follow-up call performed by the study site at 72 hours after injection. Subjects attended Visit 2 (30 days post-injection) where efficacy and safety assessments were conducted. Subjects who presented with an unresolved clinically significant device related AE at Visit 2 received a optional follow-up phone call no later than 30 days after Visit 2. If the clinically significant AE remained unresolved, the Investigator requested that the subject attended the optional in-clinic follow-up visit (i.e., Visit 3) within 5 working days. Follow-up of the clinically significant AE continued until the AE was resolved or the TI determines that additional follow-up was not necessary.
A Phase 1, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Ascending Single and Multiple Oral Dose Study of the Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of XG005 in Healthy Volunteers.