CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03720119Updated Apr 12, 2023Results posted

Multicentre Observational Study on the Wound Pain Relief Properties of ORTODERMINA®

An observational study in Wound Healing Disorder, sponsored by SOFAR S.p.A.. Completed at 2 sites in Italy. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-04-12.

Sponsored by SOFAR S.p.A. · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
78
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Acute pain may occur due to trauma, surgery, infection, disruption of blood circulation or when there is tissue injury. It can be managed using analgesics and conduction anaesthesia, which may be preferable because of superior pain control and fewer side effects. Lidocaine hydrochloride is used topically to relieve itching, burning and pain from skin inflammation. This multicentric observational study is aimed to evaluate the relief gained with lidocaine hydrochloride (ORTODERMINA®) on wound pain in patients with painful wounds and to collect safety information on this treatment.

Read the detailed description

Acute pain can be managed using analgesics and conduction anaesthesia which may be preferable because of superior pain control and fewer side effects. In this contest, lidocaine hydrochloride (ORTODERMINA®) plays an important role in pain management during wound healing. The properties of ORTODERMINA® and its ability to maintain an adequate level of active drug over the lesion allow a persistent anaesthetic effect. ORTODERMINA® is a drug for topical application in the form of cream, with a high safety profile. However, although the incidence of adverse effects with Lidocaine Ointment 5% is quite low, caution should be exercised, particularly when employing large amounts, since the incidence of adverse effects is directly proportional to the total dose of local anaesthetic agent administered.

This multicentric observational study is aimed to evaluate the relief gained with ORTODERMINA® on wound pain in patients with painful wounds and to collect safety information on this treatment.

02

Conditions studied

  • Wound Healing Disorder

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • wound healing
  • pain
  • lidocaine
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

A sample size of 70 evaluable patients is needed to test the hypothesis of an improvement in wound pain relief and a reduction in pain intensity, assuming a standardized effect size equal to 0.35, for a one-tailed test with a 5% significance level and a 90% power. A 10% of attrition rate is expected; therefore, a total number of patients to be enrolled is 78.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age >18 years
  • Patients with painful exuding wounds >1 cm2 that includes painful exuding ulcers and pressure ulcers grade II [according to National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) classification]
  • Patients available and able to return to the study site for the scheduled visits
  • Patients who gave written informed consent to take part into the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with ulcer infected, discoloured, odorous, pressure ulcer grade I, III, or IV (according to NPUAP classification)
  • Diabetic foot ulcer
  • Patients with contraindication or known allergy to drug's components
  • Patients with known severe allergies manifested by a history of anaphylaxis, or history or presence of severe multiple allergies
  • Patients who are pregnant or lactating.
  • Patients with vascular disorders (mainly arteriopathies)
  • Patients known as alcohol or drug abusers.
  • Patients currently participating in a clinical study
04

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
78 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Interventions

  • DrugLidocaine Hydrochloride

    As per clinical practice, a local treatment with ORTODERMINA® over a 14-day period (once a day) was prescribed. ORTODERMINA® contains 5% of lidocaine hydrochloride.

    Also known as: ORTODERMINA®

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change of Pain Relief From Baseline to the End of Treatment Using the 5-point Visual Rating Scale (VRS)

    The evaluation of wound pain relief was based on a 5-point Visual Rating Scale (0 = none improvement; 4 = total relief). Patients recorded the VRS score every day of treatment in their diary. The improvement in the pain relief was defined as a VRS scores at end of treatment significantly greater than 0.

    Time frame: Every day for 15 days

  2. Change of Pain Intensity From Baseline to the End of Treatment Using the 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)

    The evaluation of the pain intensity was based on a 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS score from 0= no pain to 10= the most intense pain imaginable). Patients recorded the NPRS score every day of treatment in their diary. The improvement in the pain intensity is defined as a decrease in NPRS scores from baseline to the end of treatment.

    Time frame: Every day for 15 days

Secondary outcomes

  1. Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

    Evaluation of incidence and severity of AEs and SAEs in all patients entered in the study

    Time frame: 15 days, starting from informed consent signature up to the end of the study

06

Results

Posted Nov 7, 2019
Limitations and caveats
There are not limitations or caveats to be reported for this clinical investigation.

Participant flow

Patients were recruited from January 27, 2015 to March 05, 2018 in three Italian hospitals in Pisa and Trieste

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneSingle Cohort
Started78
Completed69
Not completed9

Outcome measures

PrimaryChange of Pain Relief From Baseline to the End of Treatment Using the 5-point Visual Rating Scale (VRS)

The evaluation of wound pain relief was based on a 5-point Visual Rating Scale (0 = none improvement; 4 = total relief). Patients recorded the VRS score every day of treatment in their diary. The improvement in the pain relief was defined as a VRS scores at end of treatment significantly greater than 0.

Time frame:
Every day for 15 days
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Change of Pain Relief From Baseline to the End of Treatment Using the 5-point Visual Rating Scale (VRS)
ParticipantsSingle Cohort
Day 2 — None relief3
Day 2 — Mild23
Day 2 — Moderate28
Day 2 — A lot20
Day 2 — Complete relief3
Day 3 — None relief2
Day 3 — Mild24
Day 3 — Moderate30
Day 3 — A lot18
Day 3 — Complete relief2
Day 4 — None relief3
Day 4 — Mild24
Day 4 — Moderate31
Day 4 — A lot15
Day 4 — Complete relief4
Day 5 — None relief5
Day 5 — Mild17
Day 5 — Moderate39
Day 5 — A lot11
Day 5 — Complete relief4
Day 6 — None relief6
Day 6 — Mild21
Day 6 — Moderate33
Day 6 — A lot9
Day 6 — Complete relief4
Day 7 — None relief5
Day 7 — Mild16
Day 7 — Moderate35
Day 7 — A lot9
Day 7 — Complete relief5
Day 8 — None relief7
Day 8 — Mild18
Day 8 — Moderate25
Day 8 — A lot15
Day 8 — Complete relief5
Day 9 — None relief5
Day 9 — Mild22
Day 9 — Moderate22
Day 9 — A lot14
Day 9 — Complete relief3
Day 10 — None relief10
Day 10 — Mild16
Day 10 — Moderate22
Day 10 — A lot16
Day 10 — Complete relief3
Day 11 — None relief10
Day 11 — Mild16
Day 11 — Moderate20
Day 11 — A lot14
Day 11 — Complete relief4
Day 12 — None relief12
Day 12 — Mild14
Day 12 — Moderate20
Day 12 — A lot14
Day 12 — Complete relief5
Day 13 — None relief16
Day 13 — Mild10
Day 13 — Moderate20
Day 13 — A lot14
Day 13 — Complete relief4
Day 14 — None relief14
Day 14 — Mild11
Day 14 — Moderate20
Day 14 — A lot12
Day 14 — Complete relief3
Day 15 — None relief13
Day 15 — Mild13
Day 15 — Moderate15
Day 15 — A lot13
Day 15 — Complete relief4
PrimaryChange of Pain Intensity From Baseline to the End of Treatment Using the 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)

The evaluation of the pain intensity was based on a 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS score from 0= no pain to 10= the most intense pain imaginable). Patients recorded the NPRS score every day of treatment in their diary. The improvement in the pain intensity is defined as a decrease in NPRS scores from baseline to the end of treatment.

Time frame:
Every day for 15 days
Reported as:
Mean · Score on a scale
Change of Pain Intensity From Baseline to the End of Treatment Using the 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Score on a scaleSingle Cohort
NPRS score of Day 16.7 ± 1.90
NPRS score of Day 25.4 ± 1.91
NPRS score of Day 35.0 ± 2.09
NPRS score of Day 44.7 ± 2.17
NPRS score of Day 54.1 ± 2.16
NPRS score of Day 63.9 ± 2.2
NPRS score of Day 73.6 ± 2.05
NPRS score of Day 83.6 ± 2.22
NPRS score of Day 93.6 ± 2.22
NPRS score of Day 103.4 ± 2.28
NPRS score of Day 113.2 ± 2.40
NPRS score of Day 123.2 ± 2.40
NPRS score of Day 133.3 ± 2.48
NPRS score of Day 143.0 ± 2.27
NPRS score of Day 152.8 ± 2.23
Statistical analysis
  • Single Cohort · Dunnett's post-hoc test · p = 0.0001 (The calculated P-Value represents the repeated measurement/Day (all times versus Day 1)) · Day effect f: 27.83
SecondaryIncidence and Severity of Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)

Evaluation of incidence and severity of AEs and SAEs in all patients entered in the study

Time frame:
15 days, starting from informed consent signature up to the end of the study
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
ParticipantsSingle Cohort
0 adverse event65
1 adverse event8
2 adverse events1
3 adverse events2
4 adverse events1
5 adverse events1

Adverse events

Collected over 15 days, from informed consent signature to the end of the study. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Single Cohort0/78 (0%)0/78 (0%)13/78 (16.7%)
Most frequent other events
Showing 10 of 11
Most frequent other events
EventSingle Cohort
PainMusculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders3/78
InfectionInfections and infestations3/78
PainGeneral disorders3/78
BURNING SENSATIONInjury, poisoning and procedural complications1/78
Stomach AcheGastrointestinal disorders1/78
PYODERMA GANGRENOSUMInfections and infestations1/78
COUGHInfections and infestations1/78
ACCIDENTAL FALL WITH FACIAL TRAUMAInjury, poisoning and procedural complications1/78
FEVERGeneral disorders1/78
HeartburnGastrointestinal disorders1/78

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Single Cohort
Mean62.4 ± 21.4
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Single Cohort
Female49
Male29
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Single Cohort
Hispanic or Latino78
Not Hispanic or Latino0
Unknown or Not Reported0
Type of wounds
Type of wounds(Participants)Single Cohort
Traumatic39
Pathological31
Surgical7
Geriatric1
Size of wounds
Size of wounds(cm)Single Cohort
Width5.99 ± 5.13
Length4.76 ± 3.35
Depth0.29 ± 0.29
Presence of exudate
Presence of exudate(Participants)Single Cohort
Present53
Not present23
Not defined2
Odour of wounds
Odour of wounds(Participants)Single Cohort
Absent78
Present0
Edges of wounds
Edges of wounds(Participants)Single Cohort
Regular40
Irregular18
Reactive11
Herythematous6
Not defined3

3 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • Azienda Ospedaliero Pisana
    Pisa, Italy
  • Ospedali Riuniti Trieste
    Trieste, Italy
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Phillips TJ. Chronic cutaneous ulcers: etiology and epidemiology. J Invest Dermatol. 1994 Jun;102(6):38S-41S. doi: 10.1111/1523-1747.ep12388556. PubMed 8006433 ↗
  • Dallam L, Smyth C, Jackson BS, Krinsky R, O'Dell C, Rooney J, Badillo C, Amella E, Ferrara L, Freeman K. Pressure ulcer pain: assessment and quantification. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 1995 Sep;22(5):211-5; discussion 217-8. doi: 10.1097/00152192-199509000-00007. PubMed 7550776 ↗
  • Vandenkerkhof EG, Hopman WM, Carley ME, Kuhnke JL, Harrison MB. Leg ulcer nursing care in the community: a prospective cohort study of the symptom of pain. BMC Nurs. 2013 Feb 6;12:3. doi: 10.1186/1472-6955-12-3. PubMed 23388350 ↗
  • Chase SK, Melloni M, Savage A. A forever healing: the lived experience of venous ulcer disease. J Vasc Nurs. 1997 Jun;15(2):73-8. doi: 10.1016/s1062-0303(97)90004-2. PubMed 9238945 ↗
  • Briggs M, Closs SJ. Patients' perceptions of the impact of treatments and products on their experience of leg ulcer pain. J Wound Care. 2006 Sep;15(8):333-7. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2006.15.8.26941. PubMed 17001939 ↗
  • Khaliq W, Alam S, Puri N. Topical lidocaine for the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):CD004846. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004846.pub2. PubMed 17443559 ↗
  • Santiago S, Ferrer T, Espinosa ML. Neurophysiological studies of thin myelinated (A delta) and unmyelinated (C) fibers: application to peripheral neuropathies. Neurophysiol Clin. 2000 Feb;30(1):27-42. doi: 10.1016/S0987-7053(00)88865-6. PubMed 10740794 ↗
  • Farrar JT, Young JP Jr, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole MR. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9. PubMed 11690728 ↗
  • Pocock SJ. Clinical trials with multiple outcomes: a statistical perspective on their design, analysis, and interpretation. Control Clin Trials. 1997 Dec;18(6):530-45; discussion 546-9. doi: 10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00008-1. PubMed 9408716 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Oct 23, 2015

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03720119
Lead sponsor
SOFAR S.p.A.
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Oct 25, 2018
Start date
Jan 27, 2015
Primary completion
Mar 5, 2018
Completion
Mar 5, 2018
Results posted
Nov 7, 2019
Last update
Apr 12, 2023

Study contacts

Marco Romanelli, MD
principal investigator · Azienda Ospedaliero, Universitaria Pisana
Elia Ricci, MD
study chair · Clinica San Luca, Torino

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion