The Evaluation of Effectiveness Between Empirical and Guided Therapy for Unexplained Non-Cardiac Chest Pain
Abstract
This is a prospective randomised clinical trial performed in a single center at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Kelantan, Malaysia. Participants will be randomly allocated into either the empirical group or guided group for 8 weeks.The effectiveness in relieving chest pain (frequency and severity) will assessed after 2 weeks and 8 weeks of therapy with Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Questionnaire (GERDQ) and Quality of Life Reflux and Dyspepsia (QOLRAD) questionnaire, and visual analogue scale (VAS) (score 1-10).
Conditions: Non Cardiac Chest Pain.
Primary outcome: Non-cardiac chest pain symptoms assessed by visual analog scale (VAS).
Enrollment: 68 participants.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 68 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Improving sleep quality leads to better mental health: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study
- A new aging measure captures morbidity and mortality risk across diverse subpopulations from NHANES IV: A cohort study
- Fruit, vegetable, and legume intake, and cardiovascular disease and deaths in 18 countries (PURE): a prospective cohort study
- Are noise and air pollution related to the incidence of dementia? A cohort study in London, England
- Long COVID symptoms and duration in SARS-CoV-2 positive children — a nationwide cohort study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.