[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"leadSponsorName\":\"Udayana University\",\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:":186},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,6,0,[8,47,77,105,129,157],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":18,"enrollmentInfo":19,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":23,"briefSummary":25,"conditions":26,"keywords":28,"overallStatus":34,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":35,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":36,"startDateStruct":39,"completionDateStruct":41,"leadSponsor":43,"locationsCount":46},"100650610","dry-needling-and-low-level-laser-microcurrent-electrical-stimulation-for-myofascial-pain-syndrome-100650610",false,"NCT07750392","Dry Needling and Low-Level Laser Microcurrent Electrical Stimulation for Myofascial Pain Syndrome","The Role of Dry Needling Therapy and Low-Level Laser Microcurrent Electrical Stimulation on Serum Levels of Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-α) and Malondialdehyde (MDA) in Myofascial Pain Syndrome","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Participants must meet all of the following criteria:\n\nAdults aged 20 to 45 years. Clinical diagnosis of acute upper trapezius myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) with symptom duration of less than 1 month.\n\nPresence of at least one active myofascial trigger point in the upper trapezius muscle confirmed by physical examination according to accepted diagnostic criteria (palpable taut band, hypersensitive trigger point, reproduction of the patient's typical pain, and\u002For local twitch response).\n\nModerate or greater neck pain (Numerical Pain Rating Scale \\[NPRS\\] ≥4). Willing and able to provide written informed consent and comply with study procedures.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Participants meeting any of the following criteria will be excluded:\n\nPrevious dry needling or LL MCES treatment for the current episode of myofascial pain.\n\nChronic myofascial pain syndrome (symptom duration ≥1 month). Current use of systemic corticosteroids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or other medications that may significantly influence inflammatory biomarkers within the washout period specified in the protocol.\n\nPrevious surgery, fracture, or significant trauma involving the neck or shoulder region.\n\nCervical radiculopathy, cervical myelopathy, fibromyalgia, inflammatory arthritis, or other neurological or musculoskeletal disorders that could explain the symptoms.\n\nLocal skin infection, open wound, or other contraindications to dry needling or LL MCES.\n\nBleeding disorders, anticoagulant therapy, or other contraindications to needling.\n\nPregnancy or breastfeeding. Active malignancy, autoimmune disease, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, acute infection, or other systemic inflammatory conditions.\n\nHistory of severe psychiatric illness or inability to complete study assessments.\n\nParticipation in another interventional clinical trial within the previous 30 days.","ALL","20 Years","45 Years",{"count":20,"type":21},80,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[24],"NA","This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of dry needling and Low-Level Laser Microcurrent Electrical Stimulation (LL MCES) in patients with acute upper trapezius myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) by assessing both biological and clinical outcomes. Specifically, it investigates whether these interventions reduce serum levels of the inflammatory biomarker tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and the oxidative stress biomarker malondialdehyde (MDA), while also improving pain intensity and neck-related disability. The study seeks to address the current knowledge gap regarding the relationship between changes in inflammatory and oxidative stress biomarkers and clinical improvement following these non-pharmacological treatments. The primary research question is: Do dry needling and LL MCES reduce serum TNF-α and MDA levels and improve clinical outcomes in patients with acute upper trapezius myofascial pain syndrome?\n\nParticipants will:\n\nBe randomly assigned to receive dry needling, LL MCES, combined dry needling and LL MCES, or sham dry needling.\n\nReceive treatment according to the assigned intervention protocol. Undergo blood sampling before and after the intervention to measure serum TNF-α and MDA levels.\n\nComplete assessments of pain intensity using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and neck-related disability using the Neck Disability Index (NDI) before and after treatment.\n\nAttend scheduled follow-up visits for clinical evaluation and outcome assessment.",[27],"Myofacial Pain Syndrome",[29,30,31,32,33],"myofascial","dry needling","laser","tnf-alpha","Malondialdehyde","RECRUITING","2026-08-05",{"date":37,"type":38},"2026-08-10","ACTUAL",{"date":40,"type":38},"2026-07-30",{"date":42,"type":21},"2027-02-28",{"name":44,"class":45},"Udayana University","OTHER",1,{"id":48,"slug":49,"hasResults":11,"nctId":50,"briefTitle":51,"officialTitle":52,"acronym":53,"eligibilityCriteria":54,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":55,"maxAge":56,"enrollmentInfo":57,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":59,"briefSummary":60,"conditions":61,"keywords":63,"overallStatus":34,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":69,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":70,"startDateStruct":72,"completionDateStruct":74,"leadSponsor":76,"locationsCount":46},"100636901","effect-of-lollipop-on-emergence-delirium-in-pediatric-patients-undergoing-general-anesthesia-100636901","NCT07571707","Effect of Lollipop on Emergence Delirium in Pediatric Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia","Effect of Lollipop on Emergence Delirium in Pediatric Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial","LOLLIPOP-ED","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Pediatric patients aged 2-6 years\n* Scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia with sevoflurane\n* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-II\n* Written informed consent obtained from parents or legal guardians\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Known allergy or contraindication to study-related procedures\n* Developmental delay or neurological disorders affecting behavior assessment\n* Use of sedative or psychoactive medications prior to surgery\n* History of emergence delirium or significant behavioral disorders\n* Intraoperative complications requiring deviation from standard anesthesia protocol","2 Years","6 Years",{"count":58,"type":21},66,[24],"This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of lollipop administration after surgery in reducing emergence agitation in pediatric patients undergoing anesthesia with sevoflurane at RS Ngoerah.\n\nEmergence agitation is a common condition in children after general anesthesia, characterized by restlessness, confusion, and distress during recovery. This study investigates whether providing a lollipop as a simple, non-pharmacological intervention can help reduce the incidence and severity of agitation.\n\nPediatric patients undergoing surgery with sevoflurane anesthesia will be observed postoperatively, and their level of agitation will be assessed using standardized evaluation methods. The results of this study are expected to provide a safe, practical, and easily applicable approach to improve postoperative recovery in children.",[62],"Emergence Agitation",[64,65,66,67,68],"Pediatric Anesthesia","Sevoflurane","Non pharmacological intervention","lollipop intervention","post operative agitation","2026-05-02",{"date":71,"type":38},"2026-05-06",{"date":73,"type":38},"2026-04-10",{"date":75,"type":21},"2026-07",{"name":44,"class":45},{"id":78,"slug":79,"hasResults":11,"nctId":80,"briefTitle":81,"officialTitle":82,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":83,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":84,"maxAge":85,"enrollmentInfo":86,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":88,"briefSummary":89,"conditions":90,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":96,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":97,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":98,"startDateStruct":100,"completionDateStruct":102,"leadSponsor":104,"locationsCount":46},"100603928","bfr-training-for-post-aclr-100603928","NCT07142889","BFR Training for Post ACLR","The Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction Training on Patellar Position, Muscle Morphology, and Lower Limb Function in Patients After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Ages 15-35 years old.\n* History of a unilateral ACL injury, underwent ACL reconstruction surgery more than 6 months ago, and completed rehabilitation with physiotherapy.\n* Adults participating in recreational or competitive sports at a minimum of level 3 on the Tegner Activity Scale.\n* No prior history of a grade 3 sprain\u002Fstrain injury to other tissues in the knee and foot.\n* No recurring knee injuries after the ACL reconstruction surgery.\n* Willing to be a research subject from start to finish by signing an informed consent form.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Hypertension, circulatory disorders, sickle cell anemia, obesity, diabetes, kidney disorders, venous thromboembolism, cancer, and tumors are contraindications for BFR application.\n* Experiencing a disability or being disabled.","15 Years","35 Years",{"count":87,"type":21},60,[24],"This randomized clinical trial is designed to compare three different rehabilitation methods for patients who have undergone anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The study aims to determine whether low-load blood flow restriction training (LL-BFRt) is more effective than high-load eccentric training (HL-Et) and a sham LL-BFRt in improving three key areas: patellar position, muscle morphology, and leg function.\n\nStudy Design and Interventions\n\nParticipants will be randomly assigned to one of the three intervention groups. All groups will perform eccentric exercises, including single leg squats, single leg deadlifts, lateral step downs, and single leg calf raises. The key differences lie in the load and the use of blood flow restriction:\n\nLL-BFRt Group: Participants will train at 30% of their repetition maximum (RM) while a cuff restricts blood flow to 70% of their artery occlusion pressure (AOP).\n\nHL-Et Group: Participants will train at a higher intensity, using 70% of their repetition maximum (RM), with no blood flow restriction.\n\nSham LL-BFRt Group: Participants will perform the same exercises as the LL-BFRt group at 30% of their RM, but the cuff will not be inflated to a pressure that restricts blood flow.\n\nAfter the training period, the researchers will compare the outcomes across all three groups to see which method leads to the most significant improvements in patella position, muscle morphology, and leg function.",[91,92,93,94,95],"Blood Flow Restriction Training","Patella Position","Muscle Morphology","Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction","Leg Function","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2025-08-26",{"date":99,"type":38},"2025-08-27",{"date":101,"type":21},"2025-09-01",{"date":103,"type":21},"2026-09-01",{"name":44,"class":45},{"id":106,"slug":107,"hasResults":11,"nctId":108,"briefTitle":109,"officialTitle":110,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":111,"healthyVolunteers":112,"sex":16,"minAge":84,"maxAge":85,"enrollmentInfo":113,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":115,"briefSummary":116,"conditions":117,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":34,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":121,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":122,"startDateStruct":124,"completionDateStruct":126,"leadSponsor":128,"locationsCount":46},"100559655","bfr-training-on-muscle-morphology-100559655","NCT06566950","BFR Training on Muscle Morphology","Effectiveness of Blood Flow Restriction Training on Muscle Morphology and Prevention of Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Being between the ages of 15 and 35\n* Play level 1 sports (fight martial arts, basketball, futsal, and soccer) at least twice a week\n* Never experienced an Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome or ACL injury before\n* Never experienced a grade III sprain or strain\n* Consent to participate in the study until its conclusion and provide informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Having a tumor, cancer, vena thromboembolic disease, obesity, diabetes, hypertension, anemia, and renal failure\n* Disabilities or those who are disabled.",true,{"count":114,"type":21},75,[24],"This randomized clinical trial study compares high-load eccentric training (HL-Et), sham LL-BFRt, and low-load blood flow restriction (LL-BFRt) in sportsmen. The primary inquiries it seeks to address are:\n\nIs LL-BFR superior to HL-Et and sham LL-BFRt in terms of improving muscle morphology? Is LL-BFR a more effective Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome and ACL injury preventive than HL-Et and sham LL-BFRt?\n\nThe three intervention groups that will be randomly assigned to participants are LL-BFRt, sham LL-BFRt, and HL-Et. Participants are expected to carry out:\n\nParticipants in LL-BFRt will be required to perform LL eccentric training at 30% of their repetition maximum (RM) and 70% of their artery occlusion pressure (AOP). This training will include stairs, single leg squat, and single leg deadlift.\n\nParticipants in HL-Et will be required to perform LL eccentric training at 70% of their maximum number of repetitions (RM).\n\nIn order to determine whether muscular morphology and the prevention of Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome and ACL injury improve following the interventions and follow-up, researchers will compare LL-BFRt, sham LL-BFRt, and HL-Et.",[91,118,93,119,120],"Eccentric Training","Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome","Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries","2025-06-27",{"date":123,"type":38},"2025-06-29",{"date":125,"type":38},"2024-09-20",{"date":127,"type":21},"2025-11-20",{"name":44,"class":45},{"id":130,"slug":131,"hasResults":11,"nctId":132,"briefTitle":133,"officialTitle":133,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":134,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":135,"maxAge":136,"enrollmentInfo":137,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":139,"briefSummary":141,"conditions":142,"keywords":145,"overallStatus":96,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":149,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":150,"startDateStruct":152,"completionDateStruct":154,"leadSponsor":156,"locationsCount":46},"100573772","phase-4-efficacy-of-continuous-erector-spinae-plane-block-to-reduce-postoperative-pain-in-patients-undergoing-unilateral-thoracotomy-100573772","NCT06750627","Efficacy of Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block to Reduce Postoperative Pain in Patients Undergoing Unilateral Thoracotomy","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients of 21-65 years of age\n* Undergoing Unilateral Thoracotomy Operation\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with ASA Physical Status \\> III\n* Obese or Underweight Patients with BMI of less than 18.5 or more than 29.99\n* Patients with contraindications to be given local anesthesia drugs\n* Patients with contraindications to be given opioid drugs\n* Patients refused to participate","21 Years","65 Years",{"count":138,"type":21},30,[140],"PHASE4","The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block (ESPB) reduces postoperative pain in patients undergoing unilateral thoracotomy. It will also evaluate the safety and effectiveness of continuous ESPB. The total participants needed will be 30 persons. The main questions it aims to answer are:\n\n* Does continuous ESPB lower the intensity of postoperative pain compared to multimodal intravenous analgesia?\n* Does continuous ESPB increase the time to first analgesic request?\n* Does continuous ESPB reduce the amount of intravenous opioids required in the first 48 hours after surgery?\n* Does continuous ESPB improve the overall recovery quality within 48 hours post-surgery?\n\nParticipants will:\n\n* Receive continuous ESPB or multimodal intravenous analgesia after the surgery.\n* Undergo routine pain assessments, and recovery evaluations using tools like the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15).\n* Participate in follow-up visits for data collection on pain, opioid usage, and recovery quality.",[143,144],"Continuous Erector Spinae Plane Block","Unilateral Thoracotomy",[146,144,147,148],"Erector Spinae Plane Block","Regional Anesthesia","Continuous Peripheral Nerve Block","2024-12-28",{"date":151,"type":38},"2024-12-31",{"date":153,"type":21},"2025-01-01",{"date":155,"type":21},"2025-05-31",{"name":44,"class":45},{"id":158,"slug":159,"hasResults":11,"nctId":160,"briefTitle":161,"officialTitle":162,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":163,"healthyVolunteers":112,"sex":16,"minAge":164,"maxAge":136,"enrollmentInfo":165,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":167,"briefSummary":168,"conditions":169,"keywords":172,"overallStatus":34,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":178,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":179,"startDateStruct":181,"completionDateStruct":183,"leadSponsor":185,"locationsCount":46},"100566238","effectiveness-of-modified-thoracoabdominal-nerve-block-perichondrial-approach-m-tapa-in-laparoscopic-cholecystectomy-100566238","NCT06652581","Effectiveness Of Modified-Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA) In Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy","Effectiveness Of Modified-Thoracoabdominal Nerve Block Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA) Post-Operative Analgesia Compared To Intravenous Opioids In Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Patients","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patient 18-65 yeasr old\n2. IMT 17.5-30 kg\u002Fm2\n3. Patient with ASA I-II\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patient Refusal\n2. Local Infection\n3. Chronic Analgesia drug user","18 Years",{"count":166,"type":21},42,[24],"The Goal of this clinical trial is to determine the advantages of using Peripheral Nerve Block by injecting drugs under the skin on both sides of the abdomen in the upper abdominal area in patients undergoing laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Study participants will be divided into 2 groups, namely group P1 receiving Modified Thoracoabdominal Perichondrial Approach (M-TAPA) block anesthesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy and group P2 only receiving intravenous opioids postoperatively. Peripheral nerve blocks on both sides of the upper abdomen are expected to be able to prolong the duration of pain relief, reduce the pain scale, and the total dose of pain medication needed postoperatively. The injection of this peripheral nerve block drug will be carried out by an anesthesiologist. Researchers will continue to anticipate the occurrence of side effects that can occur with strict monitoring and emergency care standards. This study will last up to 24 hours after surgery.\n\nThe main question it aims to answer is:\n\nTo prove that the amount of postoperative intravenous opioid consumption with M-TAPA block is lower than the control group.",[170,171],"Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy","Peripheral Nerve Block",[173,174,171,175,176,177],"Analgesia","Laparoscopy Cholecystectomy","Pain management","Ultrasound","Postoperative Pain","2024-10-19",{"date":180,"type":38},"2024-10-22",{"date":182,"type":38},"2024-09-12",{"date":184,"type":21},"2024-11-13",{"name":44,"class":45},""]