Comparative Evaluation of Osteopathy Treatment Efficacy in Pain Support After Breast Surgery in Oncology
NCT ID: NCT01403168
Last Updated: 2015-06-29
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
TERMINATED
NA
28 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2011-04-30
2015-04-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The purpose of the study is to assess the efficacy of osteopathy after breast surgery.
80 patients will be enrolled, 40 per arm. Patients will be randomized at inclusion and will be followed during one year.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Impact of Osteopathy on Pain After Breast Cancer Surgery
NCT02621437
Acupressure for Pain and Opioid Use Among Breast Cancer Patients
NCT03655600
Effects of Diet and Osteopathy on Quality of Life and Inflammation in Breast Cancer Patients Under Hormonal Therapy
NCT06164119
Osteopathy and Prevention of Gastrointestinal Side Effects in Women Treated for Breast Cancer
NCT02840890
Mechanical Stimulation on Pain Level and Functional Discomfort After Breast Cancer Surgery
NCT04202640
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
osteopathy + conventional analgesic treatments
OSTEOPATHY + conventional analgesic treatments
5 sessions for osteopathy are planned and will start in the 15 days following the enrollment.
The conventional analgesic treatments will be administered in the 15 days following the enrollment.
conventional analgesic treatments
Conventional analgesic treatments
These treatments will be administered in the 15 days following the enrollment. Dose and frequence will depend on patients.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
OSTEOPATHY + conventional analgesic treatments
5 sessions for osteopathy are planned and will start in the 15 days following the enrollment.
The conventional analgesic treatments will be administered in the 15 days following the enrollment.
Conventional analgesic treatments
These treatments will be administered in the 15 days following the enrollment. Dose and frequence will depend on patients.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* pain (median VAS \>=3 on the week prior to inclusion)
* mastectomy or tumorectomy with axillary dissection \<= 12 months
* PS \<=2
* able to write, understand and read French
* signed informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
* immediate breast reconstruction
* history of cognitive or psychiatric troubles
18 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Centre Leon Berard
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Gisele CHVETZOFF, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Centre Leon Berard
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Centre Leon Berard
Lyon, , France
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Fassoulaki A, Patris K, Sarantopoulos C, Hogan Q. The analgesic effect of gabapentin and mexiletine after breast surgery for cancer. Anesth Analg. 2002 Oct;95(4):985-91, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200210000-00036.
Ivens D, Hoe AL, Podd TJ, Hamilton CR, Taylor I, Royle GT. Assessment of morbidity from complete axillary dissection. Br J Cancer. 1992 Jul;66(1):136-8. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1992.230.
Jung BF, Ahrendt GM, Oaklander AL, Dworkin RH. Neuropathic pain following breast cancer surgery: proposed classification and research update. Pain. 2003 Jul;104(1-2):1-13. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00241-0. No abstract available.
Labreze L, Dixmerias-Iskandar F, Monnin D, Bussieres E, Delahaye E, Bernard D, Lakdja F. [Postmastectomy pain syndrome evidence based guidelines and decision trees]. Bull Cancer. 2007 Mar;94(3):275-85. French.
Dirks J, Fredensborg BB, Christensen D, Fomsgaard JS, Flyger H, Dahl JB. A randomized study of the effects of single-dose gabapentin versus placebo on postoperative pain and morphine consumption after mastectomy. Anesthesiology. 2002 Sep;97(3):560-4. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200209000-00007.
Eija K, Tiina T, J NP. Amitriptyline effectively relieves neuropathic pain following treatment of breast cancer. Pain. 1996 Feb;64(2):293-302. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(95)00138-7.
Attal N, Cruccu G, Haanpaa M, Hansson P, Jensen TS, Nurmikko T, Sampaio C, Sindrup S, Wiffen P; EFNS Task Force. EFNS guidelines on pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Eur J Neurol. 2006 Nov;13(11):1153-69. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01511.x.
Vick DA, McKay C, Zengerle CR. The safety of manipulative treatment: review of the literature from 1925 to 1993. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 1996 Feb;96(2):113-5. doi: 10.7556/jaoa.1996.96.2.113.
Ernst E. Manipulation of the cervical spine: a systematic review of case reports of serious adverse events, 1995-2001. Med J Aust. 2002 Apr 15;176(8):376-80. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2002.tb04459.x.
Licht PB, Christensen HW, Hoilund-Carlsen PF. Is cervical spinal manipulation dangerous? J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2003 Jan;26(1):48-52. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2003.42.
Vickers A, Zollman C. ABC of complementary medicine. The manipulative therapies: osteopathy and chiropractic. BMJ. 1999 Oct 30;319(7218):1176-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7218.1176. No abstract available.
Noll DR, Degenhardt BF, Stuart M, McGovern R, Matteson M. Effectiveness of a sham protocol and adverse effects in a clinical trial of osteopathic manipulative treatment in nursing home patients. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2004 Mar;104(3):107-13. No abstract available.
Hayes NM, Bezilla TA. Incidence of iatrogenesis associated with osteopathic manipulative treatment of pediatric patients. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2006 Oct;106(10):605-8.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
OSTEOPATHIE
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.