Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

NCT number NCT04744675
Other study ID # 20200600-01H
Secondary ID
Status Not yet recruiting
Phase Phase 4
First received
Last updated
Start date March 2021
Est. completion date March 2023

Study information

Verified date February 2021
Source Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
Contact Katherine Reilly, MSc
Phone (613) 562 5800
Email kreilly@ohri.ca
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Background Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is characterized by intense pain and loss of function, and associated with motor, trophic, sudomotor, and/or vasomotor changes of the affected extremity. CRPS of the upper extremity is seen frequently in our electrodiagnostic, neurology, and musculoskeletal clinics and occurs in up to one-third of patients who have undergone common surgical procedures, such as carpal tunnel release or release of Dupuytren's contracture. To date, there is a limited understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of CRPS. As a consequence, few effective treatment options are available. Peripheral nerve blocks have proven to be successful in reducing pain for several musculoskeletal and neurologic conditions. These blocks could be an opportunity for blocking somatic and autonomic sensory fibers that are thought to contribute to CRPS. In a small exploratory study, we found that peripheral nerve blocks in the upper extremity (suprascapular and median nerves) resulted in a 56% and 37% pain reduction in the shoulder and hand two weeks after injection, respectively, and were well-tolerated in patients with CRPS. While this was highly encouraging, large randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) are necessary to demonstrate effectiveness and safety of nerve blocks for this population before this treatment is accepted into clinical practice. This proposal aims to demonstrate the feasibility of performing such a RCT. Objective To evaluate the feasibility of performing a placebo-controlled RCT assessing the efficacy and safety of peripheral nerve blocks (suprascapular, median, and ulnar nerves) for reducing pain in patients with CRPS. This is a phase IV feasibility study that will test the critical elements necessary for performing a RCT. Methods We will recruit participants (≥18 years old) from The Ottawa Hospital, Bruyère Continuing Care (Elisabeth Bruyère Hospital, St-Vincent Hospital), and Providence Care Hospital (Kingston, ON), meeting the well-established clinical Budapest criteria for upper extremity CRPS and having a visual analog scale (VAS) pain score of at least 40 mm (to avoid flooring effect). Participants will be block-randomized by the Ottawa Methods Centre to receive injections of either A) intervention (suprascapular, median, and ulnar nerves) with bupivacaine and triamcinolone acetonide, or B) placebo (saline). All participants will receive standard care for CRPS. Feasibility outcomes will focus on crucial methodologic aspects for the future RCT, including: (1) level of recruitment, (2) rate of acceptance from eligible patients to the randomization procedure, (3) blinding efficacy, (4) degree of patient retention, (5) rate of data completion, and (6) rate of adverse events for both the placebo and intervention groups. Outcome measures will be evaluated within 1 hour, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months post-injection.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Not yet recruiting
Enrollment 50
Est. completion date March 2023
Est. primary completion date October 2022
Accepts healthy volunteers No
Gender All
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria: 1. Able to provide signed and dated informed consent form 2. Male or female, aged =18 years old 3. Satisfy the Budapest Criteria for upper extremity CRPS 4. A VAS score of at least 40 mm in the upper extremity to avoid flooring effect for injection-related pain reduction Exclusion Criteria: 1. Uncontrolled hypertension (>180/110) 2. Sepsis 3. Bleeding diathesis 4. Active cancer 5. Brachial plexus injuries 6. Neurological language deficits precluding participation 7. Mini mental state examination score < 23 8. Acute mental illness (An acute mental illness is characterized by clinically significant symptoms of any metal health illness that requires immediate treatment. The physician making the recommendation to be part of the study. If the patient exhibits symptoms of any mental health illness that is not being treated by either the recommending physician or another member of the patient's care team the patient will not be recommended to participate in the study) 9. Patients who are pregnant or breastfeeding

Study Design


Intervention

Drug:
Triamcinolone Acetonide 40mg/mL
Triamcinolone acetonide is a synthetic glucocorticoid corticosteroid with marked anti-inflammatory action, in a sterile aqueous suspension suitable for intramuscular, intra-articular, and intrabursal injection.
Saline Injection
Saline is a buffer solution commonly used in biological research. It is a water-based salt solution containing disodium hydrogen phosphate, sodium chloride and, in some formulations, potassium chloride and potassium dihydrogen phosphate. The buffer helps to maintain a constant pH. The osmolarity and ion concentrations of the solutions match those of the human body.

Locations

Country Name City State
Canada Elisabeth Bruyere Hospital Ottawa Ontario
Canada The Ottawa Hospital Ottawa Ontario

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Canada, 

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Recruitment Number of participants who are successfully recruit into the study. Week -2
Primary Randomization Number of participants who accept being randomized into either the intervention or placebo treatment arms and receive the injection accordingly. Week 0
Primary Blinding - Participant The participants will be asked which arm they believe they are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 0
Primary Blinding - Participant The participants will be asked which arm they believe they are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 2
Primary Blinding - Participant The participants will be asked which arm they believe they are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 6
Primary Blinding - Participant The participants will be asked which arm they believe they are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 12
Primary Blinding - Interventionist The interventionist will be asked which arm they believe the participant is are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 0
Primary Blinding - Physiotherapist The physiotherapist will be asked which arm they believe the participant is are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 2
Primary Blinding - Physiotherapist The physiotherapist will be asked which arm they believe the participant is are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 6
Primary Blinding - Physiotherapist The physiotherapist will be asked which arm they believe the participant is are part of and this response will be compared to their actual group allocation. The level of agreement between the actual group allocation and the guess provided will be compared using Bang's blinding index, we will consider blinding effective if the index is between -0.2 and 0.2 (zero being perfect blinding). Week 12
Primary Retention The percentage of participants who remained in the study for the entire duration of their planned involvement. Week 12
Primary Data completion The percentage of participants who complete all of the study questionnaires Week 12
Primary Rate of Adverse events We will track adverse events the participants experience Week 12
Secondary Pain - Visual Analog Scale We will track the pain experienced by the participants on a visual analog scale. The lowest score is 0 the highest score is 10. A higher value indicates a higher amount of pain experienced by the participant Week -2
Secondary Pain - Visual Analog Scale We will track the pain experienced by the participants on a visual analog scale. The lowest score is 0 the highest score is 10. A higher value indicates a higher amount of pain experienced by the participant Week 0 - Immediately before injection
Secondary Pain - Visual Analog Scale We will track the pain experienced by the participants on a visual analog scale. The lowest score is 0 the highest score is 10. A higher value indicates a higher amount of pain experienced by the participant Week 0 - Immediately after injection
Secondary Pain - Visual Analog Scale We will track the pain experienced by the participants on a visual analog scale. The lowest score is 0 the highest score is 10. A higher value indicates a higher amount of pain experienced by the participant Week 2
Secondary Pain - Visual Analog Scale We will track the pain experienced by the participants on a visual analog scale. The lowest score is 0 the highest score is 10. A higher value indicates a higher amount of pain experienced by the participant Week 6
Secondary Pain - Visual Analog Scale We will track the pain experienced by the participants on a visual analog scale. The lowest score is 0 the highest score is 10. A higher value indicates a higher amount of pain experienced by the participant Week 12
Secondary Pain - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 4 and the highest possible score is 30, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Pain - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 4 and the highest possible score is 30, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Pain - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 4 and the highest possible score is 30, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Pain - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 4 and the highest possible score is 30, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Pain - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 4 and the highest possible score is 30, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
Secondary Pain - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Pain - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Pain - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Pain - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Pain - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
Secondary Disease Severity - Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Severity Score These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 17, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Disease Severity - Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Severity Score These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 17, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Disease Severity - Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Severity Score These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 17, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Disease Severity - Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Severity Score These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 17, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Disease Severity - Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Severity Score These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 17, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
Secondary Function - Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 100, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Function - Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 100, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Function - Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 100, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Function - Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 100, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Function - Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 0 and the highest possible score is 100, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
Secondary Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 8 and the highest possible score is 40, and a higher score indicates a better outcome. Week -2
Secondary Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 8 and the highest possible score is 40, and a higher score indicates a better outcome. Week 0
Secondary Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 8 and the highest possible score is 40, and a higher score indicates a better outcome. Week 2
Secondary Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 8 and the highest possible score is 40, and a higher score indicates a better outcome. Week 6
Secondary Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 8 and the highest possible score is 40, and a higher score indicates a better outcome. Week 12
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 16 and the highest possible score is 80, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 16 and the highest possible score is 80, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 16 and the highest possible score is 80, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 16 and the highest possible score is 80, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29 Profile V2 These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 16 and the highest possible score is 80, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Emotional and Psychological Function - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
Secondary Quality of Life - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Quality of Life - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Quality of Life - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Quality of Life - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Quality of Life - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
Secondary Total Score - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 5 and the highest possible score is 25, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week -2
Secondary Total Score - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 5 and the highest possible score is 25, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 0
Secondary Total Score - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 5 and the highest possible score is 25, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 2
Secondary Total Score - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 5 and the highest possible score is 25, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 6
Secondary Total Score - EQ-5D-5L These outcomes will allow us to better understand the holistic effect of the intervention. The lowest possible score is 5 and the highest possible score is 25, and a higher score indicates a worse outcome. Week 12
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Active, not recruiting NCT04066933 - Forms of Cervical Brachial Syndrome Treated With Plasma Concentrate Enriched for A2M
Completed NCT04597866 - Treatment of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, a Long-term Follow-up
Completed NCT04060875 - Research Protocol for Karuna Labs Inc.: Safety and Efficacy of Virtual Reality Graded Motor Imagery for Chronic Pain
Terminated NCT01954888 - Impact of the Ultrasound-guided Approach on the Efficiency and Safety of the Stellate Ganglion Block in Chronic Pain N/A
Terminated NCT00689585 - Safety and Efficacy Study of Ethosuximide for the Treatment of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) Phase 2
Recruiting NCT00377468 - Effect of Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol on the Prevention of Chronic Pain in Patients With Acute CRPS (ETIC-Study) Phase 2
Recruiting NCT05787119 - Benefit of Augmented Reality Mirror Therapy in Addition to Conventional Management in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome of the Upper Extremity N/A
Recruiting NCT05523934 - Retrospective Analysis of capsaïcin Patch in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome
Recruiting NCT04732325 - Sensory Testing of Multiple Forms of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Pain N/A
Completed NCT03174249 - Exposure Therapy Combined With Cortical Interventions for CRPS-II N/A
Recruiting NCT06033456 - Combining Stellate Ganglion and T2 and T3 Radiofrequency Ablation on Post-mastectomy Complex Regional Pain Syndrome N/A
Recruiting NCT04144972 - Closed-Loop Deep Brain Stimulation for Refractory Chronic Pain N/A
Completed NCT02490436 - Novel Treatment Option for Neuropathic Pain Phase 2
Withdrawn NCT03316066 - Comparison of Volumes of Local Anesthetics on the Efficiency and Safety of Stellate Ganglion Block for CRPS of the Arm N/A
Recruiting NCT05491499 - Assessing the Impact of Exercise Based Intensive Interdisciplinary Pain Treatment (IIPT) on Endogenous Pain Modulation in Youth With Chronic Pain Syndromes
Completed NCT03291197 - Tolerability of Suprascapular and Median Nerve Blocks for the Treatment of Shoulder-hand Syndrome Phase 4
Recruiting NCT05034835 - Impact of Compression Garments on Pain in Patients With Complex Regional Pain Syndrome of the Upper Limbs. N/A
Completed NCT05696587 - Physical and Psychological Changes in CRPS Patients Undergoing Multimodal Rehabilitation N/A
Recruiting NCT02957240 - Graded Motor Imagery for Women at Risk for Developing Type I CRPS Following Closed Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures N/A
Terminated NCT00891397 - Pregabalin Versus Placebo as an Add on for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CPRS) of the Upper Limb Managed by Stellate Ganglion Block (The PREGA Study) N/A