[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"leadSponsorName\":\"Oman Medical Speciality Board\",\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:":219},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,7,0,[8,55,79,106,139,164,192],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":15,"eligibilityCriteria":16,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":20,"enrollmentInfo":21,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":25,"briefSummary":27,"conditions":28,"keywords":32,"overallStatus":42,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":43,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":44,"startDateStruct":47,"completionDateStruct":49,"leadSponsor":51,"locationsCount":54},"100611703","aescin-based-herbal-extract-reparil-for-postoperative-sequelae-after-mandibular-third-molar-surgery-100611703",false,"NCT07244029","Aescin-Based Herbal Extract (Reparil) for Postoperative Sequelae After Mandibular Third Molar Surgery","Evaluation of Aescin-Based Herbal Extracts for Managing Postoperative Sequelae Following Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Surgery: A Randomized, Single-Blind, Controlled Trial","Reparil","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients indicated for surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.\n\nAge between 18 and 40 years.\n\nImpacted mandibular third molars with similar anatomical position and difficulty level as classified by Pell and Gregory and Pederson scoring.\n\nHealthy individuals (ASA I-II) with no significant systemic illness.\n\nWilling to provide written informed consent and attend all follow-up visits (Day 2 and Day 7 post-surgery).\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Recent use (within three weeks preoperatively) of anti-inflammatories, corticosteroids, or antibiotics.\n\nKnown allergies or hypersensitivity to Aescin, Ibuprofen, rescue medications, or local anesthetics.\n\nPregnant or lactating women.\n\nPatients with contraindications to NSAIDs (e.g., asthma, bleeding disorders, chronic kidney disease, active peptic ulcer, or cardiovascular disease).\n\nRecent use of substances that may affect surgery or interact with study drugs (e.g., contraceptives, alcohol, or tobacco).\n\nSurgical time exceeding 30 minutes or cases with intraoperative complications requiring non-study medications.",true,"ALL","18 Years","40 Years",{"count":22,"type":23},100,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[26],"NA","This randomized, single-blind, controlled clinical trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Aescin-based herbal extract (Reparil®) compared with Ibuprofen in managing postoperative sequelae following surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars. A total of 100 participants aged 18-40 years will be enrolled at the Dental Center, Medical City Hospital for Military and Security Services (MCMSS), Al Khoud, Oman. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either Reparil® (Aescin 20 mg, three times daily for five days) or Ibuprofen (400 mg, three times daily for five days) following standardized third molar extraction procedures. Postoperative outcomes including pain (VAS), facial swelling (3D facial scanner), and mouth opening (digital caliper) will be assessed preoperatively, on day 2, and day 7 post-surgery. The study aims to determine whether Aescin offers comparable analgesic and anti-edematous effects to Ibuprofen with fewer adverse events.",[29,30,31],"Postoperative Pain","Facial Swelling","Trismus",[33,34,15,35,36,37,38,39,40,41],"Aescin","Escin","Ibuprofen","Herbal anti-inflammatory","Postoperative sequelae","Third molar extraction","Oral surgery","Phytotherapeutic agents","Pain management","RECRUITING","2026-01-13",{"date":45,"type":46},"2026-01-15","ACTUAL",{"date":48,"type":46},"2026-01-01",{"date":50,"type":23},"2026-09-30",{"name":52,"class":53},"Oman Medical Speciality Board","OTHER_GOV",1,{"id":56,"slug":57,"hasResults":11,"nctId":58,"briefTitle":59,"officialTitle":59,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":60,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":18,"minAge":61,"maxAge":62,"enrollmentInfo":63,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":65,"briefSummary":66,"conditions":67,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":70,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":71,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":72,"startDateStruct":74,"completionDateStruct":76,"leadSponsor":78,"locationsCount":54},"100605757","study-comparing-atomizerd-midazolam--fentanyl-and-dexmedomidine-for-procedural-sedation-in-adult-and-pediatric-patient-2-to-60-years-old-100605757","NCT07166666","Study Comparing Atomizerd Midazolam & Fentanyl and Dexmedomidine for Procedural Sedation in Adult and Pediatric Patient (2 to 60 Years Old)","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* inclusion criteria:\n\n  1. Patients aged 2 to 60 years.\n  2. Patients undergoing EM procedures requiring sedation.\n\nExclusion criteria:\n\n1. Patients with contraindications to any of the sedation agents being studied.\n2. Patients with a history of adverse reactions or allergies to the study medications.\n3. Drug interactions: Patients taking certain medications that may interact adversely with the study medications.\n4. Drug Abuser\n5. Pregnancy and breastfeeding\n6. Patients with significant cardiovascular or respiratory compromise.\n7. Patients with nasal disorder (nasal trauma, epistaxis)\n8. Patients unable to provide informed consent or those with cognitive impairment.\n9. Patients who are \\\u003C 2 year of age or \\> 60 year of age.\n10. Patient underwent procedure sedation for imaging","2 Years","60 Years",{"count":64,"type":23},128,[26],"To evaluate the depth of sedation, as well as onset, and recovery times, satisfaction of sedation , adverse events associated with Atomized Midazolam \\& Fentanyl and Dexmedetomidine during procedural sedation in a diverse population spanning from 2 to 60 years old at these three prominent Omani healthcare facilities.",[68,69],"Sedation","Analgesia Assessment","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2025-09-08",{"date":73,"type":46},"2025-09-10",{"date":75,"type":23},"2025-09-01",{"date":77,"type":23},"2026-10-01",{"name":52,"class":53},{"id":80,"slug":81,"hasResults":11,"nctId":82,"briefTitle":83,"officialTitle":84,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":85,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":86,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":88,"briefSummary":89,"conditions":90,"keywords":92,"overallStatus":70,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":98,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":99,"startDateStruct":101,"completionDateStruct":103,"leadSponsor":105,"locationsCount":4},"100601884","comparative-efficacy-of-iv-parecoxib-vs-lidocaine-in-reducing-propofol-injection-pain-100601884","NCT07116304","Comparative Efficacy of IV Parecoxib vs Lidocaine in Reducing Propofol Injection Pain","Comparative Efficacy of Intravenous Parecoxib Versus Lidocaine in Reducing Propofol Injection Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adult patients, ≥18 years\n* ASA grading I-II\n* Patients undergoing elective surgical procedures across all surgical specialties.\n* Can speak Arabic or English\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Difficulty in communicating.\n* Liver Cirrhosis patients\n* Renal failure or creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≤ 10umol\u002FL,\n* Known Lidocaine, parecoxib and\u002For propofol allergy.\n* patients who are not using propofol for an induction.\n* Any known contraindication to propofol, parecoxib or lidocaine. (this will include renal failure or cirrhosis of the liver as noted above)\n* Patients refusing to be involved in the study.\n* ASA(American society of anaesthesia) grading 3-6.\n* Any patient that IV access cannot be established in the dorsum of the hand.\n* Pregnant women.\n* Patients with chronic pain disorders.\n* Patients who received any form of analgesia within the last hour.",{"count":87,"type":23},30,[26],"Propofol is the most popular IV anaesthetic agent used for induction, however one of its known side effects is causing pain on injection, the gold standard method in preventing this pain is using lidocaine prior to injecting propofol. multiple drugs have been investigated to reduce the aforementioned pain, however there has been no study comparing lidocaine to parecoxib, an NSAID.",[91],"Preventing Propofol Pain on Injection",[93,94,95,96,97],"randomised controlled trial","parecoxib","propofol","NSAIDs","pain on injection","2025-08-08",{"date":100,"type":46},"2025-08-11",{"date":102,"type":23},"2025-08-01",{"date":104,"type":23},"2026-12-30",{"name":52,"class":53},{"id":107,"slug":108,"hasResults":11,"nctId":109,"briefTitle":110,"officialTitle":111,"acronym":112,"eligibilityCriteria":113,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":114,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":115,"briefSummary":117,"conditions":118,"keywords":122,"overallStatus":70,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":102,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":133,"startDateStruct":134,"completionDateStruct":136,"leadSponsor":138,"locationsCount":4},"100601589","phase-2-nebulized-ketamine-plus-standard-care-vs-standard-care-alone-in-moderate-to-severe-asthma-exacerbations-100601589","NCT07112456","Nebulized Ketamine Plus Standard Care vs. Standard Care Alone in Moderate to Severe Asthma Exacerbations","Nebulized Ketamine Plus Standard Care vs. Standard Care Alone in Moderate to Severe Asthma Exacerbations: A Randomized Clinical Trial (KET-AIR Trial)","KET-AIR","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Adults aged 18 years or older presenting to the Emergency Department with a clinical diagnosis of moderate to severe asthma exacerbation based on SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) criteria.\n2. PEFR between 33% and 75% of predicted value or personal best, as measured using a peak flow meter.\n3. Stable vital signs as deemed by the treating physician\n4. Alert and oriented, able to understand the study purpose and provide informed consent.\n5. Not requiring immediate advanced airway intervention, including intubation or emergency non-invasive ventilation.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Known hypersensitivity or allergy to ketamine or any component of the nebulized solution.\n2. History of psychosis, schizophrenia, or other severe uncontrolled psychiatric disorders.\n3. Uncontrolled hypertension, defined as systolic BP \\> 180 mmHg or diastolic BP \\> 110 mmHg on two consecutive readings at least 5 minutes apart, despite initial ED management.\n4. Hemodynamic instability, including persistent hypotension (SBP \\\u003C 90 mmHg) or tachyarrhythmias requiring urgent treatment.\n5. Significant chronic lung disease, including:\n\n   * COPD with frequent exacerbations or baseline FEV₁ \\\u003C 50% predicted\n   * Interstitial lung disease (ILD)\n   * Clinically significant bronchiectasis with baseline productive cough or infection\n6. Pregnancy or currently breastfeeding.\n7. Home BiPAP use or requirement for non-invasive ventilation (e.g., BiPAP\u002FCPAP) during the ED visit (Note: isolated home CPAP for sleep apnea without daytime symptoms is acceptable).\n8. Current intubation or imminent need for mechanical ventilation based on clinical judgment.\n9. Severe cardiac disease, including decompensated heart failure, recent myocardial infarction (\\\u003C6 weeks), or known severe valvular disease.\n10. Any other medical, surgical, or psychiatric condition that in the opinion of the investigator would place the patient at undue risk from study participation or interfere with the interpretation of study results.",{"count":22,"type":23},[116],"PHASE2","The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if nebulized ketamine helps treat moderate to severe asthma attacks in adults in the emergency department. It will also learn about the safety of ketamine when inhaled through a nebulizer.\n\nThe main questions it aims to answer are:\n\n* Does nebulized ketamine improve breathing more than standard treatment alone?\n* What side effects, if any, do participants experience after receiving nebulized ketamine?\n\nResearchers will compare nebulized ketamine to a placebo (a saltwater mist with no medication) to see how well it works and how safe it is.\n\nParticipants will:\n\n* Receive either nebulized ketamine or a placebo mist, along with standard asthma treatment\n* Have their breathing checked before and after treatment using a peak flow meter\n* Be monitored for 60 minutes and have their symptoms, vital signs, and any side effects recorded",[119,120,121],"Asthma Acute","Asthma Attack","Asthma Exacerbations",[123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132],"Asthma","Asthma, Severe","Asthma Exacerbation","Emergency Treatment","Ketamine","Ketamine, Nebulized","Bronchodilator Agents","Randomized Controlled Trial","Peak Expiratory Flow Rate","Safety and Efficacy",{"date":98,"type":46},{"date":135,"type":23},"2026-09-01",{"date":137,"type":23},"2029-08-31",{"name":52,"class":53},{"id":140,"slug":141,"hasResults":11,"nctId":142,"briefTitle":143,"officialTitle":144,"acronym":145,"eligibilityCriteria":146,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":147,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":149,"briefSummary":151,"conditions":152,"keywords":154,"overallStatus":70,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":156,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":157,"startDateStruct":159,"completionDateStruct":161,"leadSponsor":163,"locationsCount":4},"100540367","phase-3-analgesic-effect-of-parecoxib-versus-morphine-in-scd-patients-presenting-to-the-emergency-department-100540367","NCT06315920","Analgesic Effect of Parecoxib Versus Morphine in SCD Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department","Parecoxib Versus Morphine in Acute Pain Management for Sickle Cell Disease Patients in Emergency Department: a Randomized Controlled Trial.","PASC","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* An adult (\\>18 years) sickle cell disease patient presents with moderate-severe vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC) to the ED.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Non-VOC Pain (e.g. Acute chest syndrome, sequestration, septic arthritis, Etc.)\n* Weight less than 50 KG\n* Recurrent visits \\> one visit\u002F week\n* Opioids within 24hrs\n* NSAIDs within 24hrs\n* Contraindications to NSAIDs (e.g. allergy, Asthma, CKD, pregnancy, Etc.)\n* Lactating mothers\n* Visited another health institution within 24hrs",{"count":148,"type":23},226,[150],"PHASE3","Introduction: This study focuses on the treatment of painful crises in Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) patients using Paracoxib, a non-opioid, compared to Morphine. It addresses the need for alternative medications that reduce opioid dependency while providing effective analgesia.\n\nObjectives:\n\nPrimary: Evaluate the analgesic effect of Paracoxib versus Morphine in SCD vaso-occlusive crises.\n\nSecondary: Reduce opioid use\u002Fdependence, decrease the length of hospital stays, and monitor side effects related to Paracoxib.\n\nMethodology: A double-blinded randomized controlled trial, conducted in a tertiary care emergency department. The study includes adult SCD patients with moderate to severe crises, excluding non-VOC pain, certain medications, and specific medical conditions. The sample size is 226 patients, split equally into two groups.\n\nIntervention: Patients receive either Morphine or Paracoxib, with periodic assessment of vital signs and pain. Additional Morphine is administered if required. Data collection and analysis are meticulously planned.\n\nExpected Outcomes: Improvement in SCD pain management, reduction in opioid usage, and potential benefits in terms of hospital stays and patient satisfaction.",[153],"Sickle-Cell Disease with Crisis",[155],"SCD, Parecoxib , Opioids","2025-03-17",{"date":158,"type":46},"2025-03-20",{"date":160,"type":23},"2026-05-01",{"date":162,"type":23},"2028-07-01",{"name":52,"class":53},{"id":165,"slug":166,"hasResults":11,"nctId":167,"briefTitle":168,"officialTitle":169,"acronym":170,"eligibilityCriteria":171,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":172,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":174,"briefSummary":175,"conditions":176,"keywords":179,"overallStatus":70,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":184,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":185,"startDateStruct":187,"completionDateStruct":189,"leadSponsor":191,"locationsCount":54},"100537307","phase-3-oral-bisoprolol-vs-iv-diltiazem-in-atrial-fibrillation-or-flutter-with-rapid-ventricular-rate-100537307","NCT06276127","Oral Bisoprolol Vs IV Diltiazem in Atrial Fibrillation or Flutter With Rapid Ventricular Rate.","Oral Bisoprolol Versus Intravenous Diltiazem in the Management of Atrial Fibrillation or Flutter With Rapid Ventricular Rate in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial","BisoAF","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* ≥ 18 years old.\n* Atrial fibrillation (RVR) or Atrial flutter on electrocardiogram.\n* Heart rate \\>120 beats\u002Fmin\n* Stable patient with stable vital signs (Defined as having a SBP \\>110 mmHg, oxygen saturation \\> 94% on room air or with a simple face mask, a respiratory rate within normal limits, being conscious and oriented, and not having any concurrent life-threatening conditions such as myocardial infarction (MI) or Class IV heart failure).\n* Mentally competent patient who can understand and sign the consent form.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Acute myocardial infarction.\n* Known congenital and acquired valvular defects.\n* Pre-excitation syndromes.\n* Ventricular rate \\> 220beats\u002Fmin.\n* Administration of AV nodal blocking agents within the previous 24 h (beta blockers, non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, digoxin and amiodarone or receiving regular maintains oral dose).\n* Allergy to either bisoprolol or diltiazem.\n* Severe hepatic and renal failure.\n* Pregnancy \u002F breastfeeding.\n* A history of cocaine or methamphetamine use within 24 hours before arrival.\n* Known Asthmatic.",{"count":173,"type":23},60,[150],"INTRODUCTION: The study focuses on comparing the effectiveness of oral Bisoprolol, a beta-1 adrenergic receptor blocker, against intravenous Diltiazem, a calcium channel blocker, in treating rapid atrial fibrillation or flutter with rapid ventricular response in an emergency setting. This research aims to fill the gap in empirical evidence regarding the use of oral Bisoprolol for these conditions, potentially offering a convenient, evidence-based alternative for patient management in emergency departments where established protocols are lacking.\n\nMETHOD: This study is a randomized controlled trial targeting patients who present to the emergency room with symptomatic atrial fibrillation or flutter and rapid ventricular response requiring intervention. Participants will be split into two groups and undergo continuous monitoring of vital signs and regular electrocardiograms to ensure safety and document any adverse effects. The primary focus is on patient safety while evaluating the efficacy of the treatments.\n\nAIM: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral bisoprolol in treating atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter with rapid ventricular response in an emergency department setting.\n\nPRIMARY OJECTIVES: The primary efficacy outcome will be evaluated by achieving a HR\\\u003C110 beats per minute or a decrease ≥20% of baseline HR at 60 minutes. The primary safety outcome measures are HR \\\u003C 60 bpm and SBP \\\u003C 95 mm Hg.\n\nSECONDARY OBJECTIVES: The use of Rescue medication, proportion of patients who required hospitalization, worsening of heart failure or pulmonary oedema, side effect of medication ( dizziness, headaches, gastrointestinal symptoms)\n\nPATEINT POPULATION: Adults (18 and older) presenting to the emergency department at Sultan Qaboos University Hospital with symptomatic atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter with rapid ventricular response requiring treatment.\n\nINTERVENTION: A single oral dose of 5 mg Bisoprolol (maximum dose of 5 mg) or a single intravenous dose of Diltiazem at 0.25 mg\u002Fkg (to a maximum dose of 30 mg).\n\nCLINICAL MEASURMENT: Heart rate recorded every 15 minutes up to the 90-minute mark, with a 12-lead ECG performed every 30 minutes.\n\nOUTCOME: For therapy to be considered effective, patients must achieve a ventricular rate ≤110\u002Fmin or experience a drop-in ventricular rate of at least 20% at 60 minutes.",[177,178],"Atrial Fibrillation With Rapid Ventricular Response","Atrial Flutter With Rapid Ventricular Response",[180,181,182,183],"Bisoprolol","AF","Diltiazem","Atrial flutter","2025-03-11",{"date":186,"type":46},"2025-03-14",{"date":188,"type":23},"2025-04",{"date":190,"type":23},"2027-06",{"name":52,"class":53},{"id":193,"slug":194,"hasResults":11,"nctId":195,"briefTitle":196,"officialTitle":196,"acronym":197,"eligibilityCriteria":198,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":62,"enrollmentInfo":199,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":201,"briefSummary":202,"conditions":203,"keywords":205,"overallStatus":42,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":211,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":212,"startDateStruct":214,"completionDateStruct":216,"leadSponsor":218,"locationsCount":54},"100484340","phase-3-comparison-of-efficacy-of-metoclopramide--promethazine-and-prochloroperazine-in-the-treatment-of-vertigo-100484340","NCT05586763","Comparison of Efficacy of Metoclopramide , Promethazine and Prochloroperazine in the Treatment of Vertigo.","BBPVOMSBAFH","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* □ Acute peripheral vertigo with nausea or vomiting (vas, visual analog scale \\>5) during their emergency department episode of care for which the attending physician recommending antiemetic, onset with in 3 days .\n\n  * Age( 18- 60).\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* • Age \\>60.\n\n  * Any organic brain disease (Clear central cause; \"malignancy with brain metastasis\".)\n  * History of epilepsy\n  * Pregnancy.\n  * Dementia, Parkinson's disease\n  * Abnormal vital signs\n  * Any known drug allergy to the study drugs\n  * Undergoing chemotherapy or radiotherapy\n  * Mechanical bowel obstruction or perforation, gastrointestinal bleeding\n  * Inability to understand study explanation or outcome measures (any reason)\n  * Patients who refused to participate study.",{"count":200,"type":23},90,[150],"Background: Vertigo as acute symptom seem to be one of most common presentation in ED, can be treated in ED with multiple medication . Objective: This study aimed to compare the therapeutic efficacy of metoclopramide, promethazine and prochloroperazine in patients presenting with signs and symptoms suggestive of acute peripheral vertigo to the ED . Methods: A 3-arm multi-center, randomized, triple-blind, controlled study comparing three treatments for acute vertigo in three medical centers : AlNahdha hospital Oman , Sohar Hospital Oman and AFH hospital Oman. Oman From February 2022 to August 2024.",[204],"Peripheral Vertigo",[206,207,208,209,210],"ED","vertigo","metoclopramide","promethazine","Prochlorperazine","2024-12-11",{"date":213,"type":46},"2024-12-16",{"date":215,"type":46},"2022-02-01",{"date":217,"type":23},"2024-12-30",{"name":52,"class":53},""]