Carpal TunnelNCT02071238
Factors Affecting Risk Recall in Open Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery
A study testing Pamphlet and Group Consultation in people with Carpal Tunnel, run by Michael Bezuhly at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
Understanding of an operation and its risks has been shown to give patients more realistic expectations, increase cooperation and result in higher satisfaction. Traditionally, informed consent for surgical procedures involve a discussion between the surgeon and the patient, but many patients easily forget the details… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Carpal Tunnel
- What is being tested?
- Pamphlet and Group Consultation
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 140 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- May 2014to Dec 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 16 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Referral to the Halifax Infirmary plastic surgery clinic for consultation for open carpal tunnel release
Who cannot join
- Age less than 16 years
- Inability to fluently communicate in English
- Discussion of additional procedures
- Prior open (not percutaneous) hand surgery
- Inability to give informed consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Understanding of an operation and its risks has been shown to give patients more realistic expectations, increase cooperation and result in higher satisfaction. Traditionally, informed consent for surgical procedures involve a discussion between the surgeon and the patient, but many patients easily forget the details of these talks. The investigators wish to investigate if providing a written pamphlet along with the standard oral discussion improves patients' ability to remember the details of the operation, improving the quality of the informed consent process.
In addition, we will test whether a group consultation format provides a model for large-volume, low-variation, low-urgency surgery without reducing ability to recall risks of surgery or overall satisfaction.
Read the detailed description
Objective of this study The investigators' study objectives are to see if additionally providing a written document along with the discussion of surgical risks improves risk recall for patient seen in consultation for open carpal tunnel release, and if this has any effect on overall satisfaction after the procedure.
To accomplish this goal, the investigators intend to provide patients with a written document outlining the same risks as are discussed in consultation and investigate if their recall of the risks is improved compared to patients who receive discussion alone. The investigators will also see whether risk recall is affected if patients participate in a group format informed consent discussion compared to a standard individual discussion. The investigators propose to do this as a two-part prospective randomized control trial of patients who are new referrals to the Halifax Infirmary Plastic Surgery Clinic.
Background The informed consent process The risks and benefits of an operation or procedure are typically discussed as part of the informed consent process for an initial surgical consultation. Informed consent is a legal requirement for surgery and is based on the components of disclosure, comprehension, competence and voluntary choice. Despite this, patients are often unable to recall the specific risks that were reviewed. Additionally, failure to understand the possible risks and failure of communication are more common reasons for patients to seek legal action. Patients have historically reported that they wished they had received more information about their operation prior to surgery.
Increased understanding of a procedure and its risks has been shown to give patients more realistic expectations, increase cooperation and result in higher satisfaction. Traditionally, obtaining informed consent for surgical procedures has involved an oral discussion, but this may be insufficient as oral information tends to be poorly retained.
Previous research in the field of otolaryngology has shown that written documentation in addition to oral discussion increases recall of both general knowledge of a procedure and of the specific risks of a procedure. Siau et al. (2010) found that this effect was even more pronounced for recall of the risks associated with the operation and that subjectively patients were found to be happy to have received a pamphlet and found it helpful. Early research into this subject in general surgery suggested that the optimal time to provide additional information regarding a procedure is at the time of the initial consultation or at least one week prior to surgery.
The investigators' research is important as it could show that providing a written document in conjunction with the standard oral discussion improves patients' risk recall in the informed consent process for open carpal tunnel surgery. In addition, the investigators wish to look into whether this in turn increases satisfaction with the procedure. Though past research has drawn a link between comprehension and satisfaction, very little research has been conducted specifically on this topic. In the future this research could be extended to other surgical practices.
Due to large volumes of patients requiring open carpal tunnel release, wait times following referral can vary from 30 to 151 days in Nova Scotia, with an average wait time of 59 days (Patient Access Registry NS, July-September 2013). While open carpal tunnel release surgery is a very brief procedure with an extremely low rate of post-operative complications (Ono et al., 2010), the presurgical consultation with each patient takes a large proportion of the time spent by both patient and surgeon addressing the disease. To address a similar problem involving extensive information required prior to surgery, the UHN breast reconstruction program in Toronto is in the process of piloting an educational group intervention, which includes seminar-style lectures and group discussion, in order to improve shared decision making in women undergoing post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (Platt et al., 2013). We seek to implement a similar program for patients scheduled to undergo open carpal tunnel release.
According to the Weiss model of medical stigma (Weiss et al., 2006), Carpal Tunnel Syndrome could be considered a disease with minimal stigma attached. As one would correspondingly expect, when offered the opportunity to participate in a group seminar style presurgical consult, many patients have expressed a positive opinion and willingness to participate.
If there are no differences between risk recall or general satisfaction in patients who are part of a group consultation compared to a traditional consult, group consultation may be a viable tool to shorten wait times for patients undergoing specific kinds of medical and surgical procedures.
Hypothesis The investigators are testing whether providing a written document in conjunction with the standard oral discussion improve patients' risk recall in the informed consent process for open carpal tunnel release and increase patients' subjective satisfaction with their operation. In addition, the investigators will test whether a group consultation format provides a model for large-volume, low-variation, low-urgency surgery without reducing ability to recall risks of surgery or overall satisfaction.
Patient Selection
The investigators study will be a two-part prospective randomized study, each of 100 consecutive patients being seen for open carpal tunnel release consultation at the Halifax Infirmary. Inclusion criteria will be:
The sample size was chosen based on previous studies investigating risk recall and a power calculation with the hypothesis of a mean of 4 items recalled, a standard deviation of 2.5 (alpha 0.05, beta 0.95), giving us a sample size given our hypothesis (n = 40 per study group).
- Conditions
- Carpal Tunnel
- Being tested
- Pamphlet, Group Consultation
- Keywords
- Carpal tunnel, Carpal tunnel release, Risk Recall, Patient satisfaction, Pamphlet, Brochure
- Medical subject headings
- Median Neuropathy, Patient Satisfaction
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PamphletBehavioural
Written pamphlet outlining the risks of surgery as discussed in consultation.
Group ConsultationBehavioural
Informed consent discussion in group-format
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Pamphlet | Experimental | Patient group that will receive a written pamphlet outlining the risks of surgery as discussed in consultation. Receives: Behavioral: Pamphlet |
| No pamphlet, individual | No intervention | Patient group that will not receive a written pamphlet outlining the risks of surgery as discussed in consultation. |
| Group Consultation | Experimental | Patient group that will receive informed consent discussion in a group-format. Receives: Behavioral: Group Consultation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of risks recalled
Number of risks discussed at time of initial visit that are remembered by the patient at a 2 week follow up phone call.
Measured: 2-3 weeks
Secondary outcomes (1)
Patient Satisfaction
Patients' perceived satisfaction, as measured by a visual-analogue scale rating their satisfaction with the procedure.
Measured: 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 Feb 2014 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2014
- Primary completionOct 2015
- Study completionDec 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Carpal TunnelStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 140 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Michael Bezuhly
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Michael Bezuhly, Nova Scotia Health Authority
- Investigators
- Michael Bezuhly, MD MSc SM, Principal investigator, 902-470-8168
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02071238
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CDHA-RS/2014-244
- Status last verified
- Jan 2016
- First submitted
- 21 Feb 2014
- Last updated
- 13 Jan 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Lavelle-Jones C, Byrne DJ, Rice P, Cuschieri A. Factors affecting quality of informed consent. BMJ. 1993 Apr 3;306(6882):885-90. doi: 10.1136/bmj.306.6882.885.
PubMed 8490411Nadeau DP, Rich JN, Brietzke SE. Informed consent in pediatric surgery: Do parents understand the risks? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Mar;136(3):265-9. doi: 10.1001/archoto.2010.5.
PubMed 20231645Schenker Y, Fernandez A, Sudore R, Schillinger D. Interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures: a systematic review. Med Decis Making. 2011 Jan-Feb;31(1):151-73. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10364247. Epub 2010 Mar 31.
PubMed 20357225Leclercq WK, Keulers BJ, Scheltinga MR, Spauwen PH, van der Wilt GJ. A review of surgical informed consent: past, present, and future. A quest to help patients make better decisions. World J Surg. 2010 Jul;34(7):1406-15. doi: 10.1007/s00268-010-0542-0.
PubMed 20372902Kessler TM, Nachbur BH, Kessler W. Patients' perception of preoperative information by interactive computer program-exemplified by cholecystectomy. Patient Educ Couns. 2005 Nov;59(2):135-40. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.10.009.
PubMed 16257617Siau D, List RJ, Hussin N, Woolford TJ. Do printed information leaflets improve recall of the procedure and risks in adult tonsillectomy? How we do it. Clin Otolaryngol. 2010 Dec;35(6):503-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2010.02227.x. No abstract available.
PubMed 21199416Hong P, Makdessian AS, Ellis DA, Taylor SM. Informed consent in rhinoplasty: prospective randomized study of risk recall in patients who are given written disclosure of risks versus traditional oral discussion groups. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009 Jun;38(3):369-74.
PubMed 19476770Ono S, Clapham PJ, Chung KC. Optimal management of carpal tunnel syndrome. Int J Gen Med. 2010 Aug 30;3:255-61. doi: 10.2147/ijgm.s7682.
PubMed 20830201Platt J, Baxter N, Jones J, Metcalfe K, Causarano N, Hofer SO, O'Neill A, Cheng T, Starenkyj E, Zhong T. Pre-consultation educational group intervention to improve shared decision-making in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2013 Jul 6;14:199. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-199.
PubMed 23829442Weiss MG, Ramakrishna J, Somma D. Health-related stigma: rethinking concepts and interventions. Psychol Health Med. 2006 Aug;11(3):277-87. doi: 10.1080/13548500600595053.
PubMed 17130065
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Jan 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Factors Affecting Risk Recall in Open Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02071238
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CDHA-RS/2014-244
- Conditions
- Carpal Tunnel
- Keywords
- Carpal tunnel, Carpal tunnel release, Risk Recall, Patient satisfaction, Pamphlet, Brochure
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 140 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Michael BezuhlyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- May 2014
- Primary completion
- Oct 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 25 Feb 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Understanding of an operation and its risks has been shown to give patients more realistic expectations, increase cooperation and result in higher satisfaction. Traditionally, informed consent for surgical procedures involve a discussion between the surgeon and the patient, but many patients easily forget the details of these talks. The investigators wish to investigate if providing a written pamphlet along with the standard oral discussion improves patients' ability to remember the details of the operation, improving the quality of the informed consent process.
In addition, we will test whether a group consultation format provides a model for large-volume, low-variation, low-urgency surgery without reducing ability to recall risks of surgery or overall satisfaction.
Detailed description
Objective of this study The investigators' study objectives are to see if additionally providing a written document along with the discussion of surgical risks improves risk recall for patient seen in consultation for open carpal tunnel release, and if this has any effect on overall satisfaction after the procedure.
To accomplish this goal, the investigators intend to provide patients with a written document outlining the same risks as are discussed in consultation and investigate if their recall of the risks is improved compared to patients who receive discussion alone. The investigators will also see whether risk recall is affected if patients participate in a group format informed consent discussion compared to a standard individual discussion. The investigators propose to do this as a two-part prospective randomized control trial of patients who are new referrals to the Halifax Infirmary Plastic Surgery Clinic.
Background The informed consent process The risks and benefits of an operation or procedure are typically discussed as part of the informed consent process for an initial surgical consultation. Informed consent is a legal requirement for surgery and is based on the components of disclosure, comprehension, competence and voluntary choice. Despite this, patients are often unable to recall the specific risks that were reviewed. Additionally, failure to understand the possible risks and failure of communication are more common reasons for patients to seek legal action. Patients have historically reported that they wished they had received more information about their operation prior to surgery.
Increased understanding of a procedure and its risks has been shown to give patients more realistic expectations, increase cooperation and result in higher satisfaction. Traditionally, obtaining informed consent for surgical procedures has involved an oral discussion, but this may be insufficient as oral information tends to be poorly retained.
Previous research in the field of otolaryngology has shown that written documentation in addition to oral discussion increases recall of both general knowledge of a procedure and of the specific risks of a procedure. Siau et al. (2010) found that this effect was even more pronounced for recall of the risks associated with the operation and that subjectively patients were found to be happy to have received a pamphlet and found it helpful. Early research into this subject in general surgery suggested that the optimal time to provide additional information regarding a procedure is at the time of the initial consultation or at least one week prior to surgery.
The investigators' research is important as it could show that providing a written document in conjunction with the standard oral discussion improves patients' risk recall in the informed consent process for open carpal tunnel surgery. In addition, the investigators wish to look into whether this in turn increases satisfaction with the procedure. Though past research has drawn a link between comprehension and satisfaction, very little research has been conducted specifically on this topic. In the future this research could be extended to other surgical practices.
Due to large volumes of patients requiring open carpal tunnel release, wait times following referral can vary from 30 to 151 days in Nova Scotia, with an average wait time of 59 days (Patient Access Registry NS, July-September 2013). While open carpal tunnel release surgery is a very brief procedure with an extremely low rate of post-operative complications (Ono et al., 2010), the presurgical consultation with each patient takes a large proportion of the time spent by both patient and surgeon addressing the disease. To address a similar problem involving extensive information required prior to surgery, the UHN breast reconstruction program in Toronto is in the process of piloting an educational group intervention, which includes seminar-style lectures and group discussion, in order to improve shared decision making in women undergoing post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (Platt et al., 2013). We seek to implement a similar program for patients scheduled to undergo open carpal tunnel release.
According to the Weiss model of medical stigma (Weiss et al., 2006), Carpal Tunnel Syndrome could be considered a disease with minimal stigma attached. As one would correspondingly expect, when offered the opportunity to participate in a group seminar style presurgical consult, many patients have expressed a positive opinion and willingness to participate.
If there are no differences between risk recall or general satisfaction in patients who are part of a group consultation compared to a traditional consult, group consultation may be a viable tool to shorten wait times for patients undergoing specific kinds of medical and surgical procedures.
Hypothesis The investigators are testing whether providing a written document in conjunction with the standard oral discussion improve patients' risk recall in the informed consent process for open carpal tunnel release and increase patients' subjective satisfaction with their operation. In addition, the investigators will test whether a group consultation format provides a model for large-volume, low-variation, low-urgency surgery without reducing ability to recall risks of surgery or overall satisfaction.
Patient Selection
The investigators study will be a two-part prospective randomized study, each of 100 consecutive patients being seen for open carpal tunnel release consultation at the Halifax Infirmary. Inclusion criteria will be:
The sample size was chosen based on previous studies investigating risk recall and a power calculation with the hypothesis of a mean of 4 items recalled, a standard deviation of 2.5 (alpha 0.05, beta 0.95), giving us a sample size given our hypothesis (n = 40 per study group).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Pamphlet | Experimental | Behavioral: PamphletPatient group that will receive a written pamphlet outlining the risks of surgery as discussed in consultation. |
| No pamphlet, individual | No intervention | –Patient group that will not receive a written pamphlet outlining the risks of surgery as discussed in consultation. |
| Group Consultation | Experimental | Behavioral: Group ConsultationPatient group that will receive informed consent discussion in a group-format. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Referral to the Halifax Infirmary plastic surgery clinic for consultation for open carpal tunnel release
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age less than 16 years
- Inability to fluently communicate in English
- Discussion of additional procedures
- Prior open (not percutaneous) hand surgery
- Inability to give informed consent
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| PamphletWritten pamphlet outlining the risks of surgery as discussed in consultation. | Behavioural | Pamphlet |
| Group ConsultationInformed consent discussion in group-format | Behavioural | Group Consultation |
Primary outcome
Number of risks recalled
Time frame: 2-3 weeks
Number of risks discussed at time of initial visit that are remembered by the patient at a 2 week follow up phone call.
1 secondary outcome
Patient Satisfaction
Time frame: 3 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Jan 2016.
- Background: PubMed 8490411Lavelle-Jones C, Byrne DJ, Rice P, Cuschieri A. Factors affecting quality of informed consent. BMJ. 1993 Apr 3;306(6882):885-90. doi: 10.1136/bmj.306.6882.885.
- Background: PubMed 20231645Nadeau DP, Rich JN, Brietzke SE. Informed consent in pediatric surgery: Do parents understand the risks? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010 Mar;136(3):265-9. doi: 10.1001/archoto.2010.5.
- Background: PubMed 20357225Schenker Y, Fernandez A, Sudore R, Schillinger D. Interventions to improve patient comprehension in informed consent for medical and surgical procedures: a systematic review. Med Decis Making. 2011 Jan-Feb;31(1):151-73. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10364247. Epub 2010 Mar 31.
- Background: PubMed 20372902Leclercq WK, Keulers BJ, Scheltinga MR, Spauwen PH, van der Wilt GJ. A review of surgical informed consent: past, present, and future. A quest to help patients make better decisions. World J Surg. 2010 Jul;34(7):1406-15. doi: 10.1007/s00268-010-0542-0.
- Background: PubMed 16257617Kessler TM, Nachbur BH, Kessler W. Patients' perception of preoperative information by interactive computer program-exemplified by cholecystectomy. Patient Educ Couns. 2005 Nov;59(2):135-40. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.10.009.
- Background: PubMed 21199416Siau D, List RJ, Hussin N, Woolford TJ. Do printed information leaflets improve recall of the procedure and risks in adult tonsillectomy? How we do it. Clin Otolaryngol. 2010 Dec;35(6):503-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2010.02227.x. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 19476770Hong P, Makdessian AS, Ellis DA, Taylor SM. Informed consent in rhinoplasty: prospective randomized study of risk recall in patients who are given written disclosure of risks versus traditional oral discussion groups. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009 Jun;38(3):369-74.
- Background: PubMed 20830201Ono S, Clapham PJ, Chung KC. Optimal management of carpal tunnel syndrome. Int J Gen Med. 2010 Aug 30;3:255-61. doi: 10.2147/ijgm.s7682.
- Background: PubMed 23829442Platt J, Baxter N, Jones J, Metcalfe K, Causarano N, Hofer SO, O'Neill A, Cheng T, Starenkyj E, Zhong T. Pre-consultation educational group intervention to improve shared decision-making in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2013 Jul 6;14:199. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-199.
- Background: PubMed 17130065Weiss MG, Ramakrishna J, Somma D. Health-related stigma: rethinking concepts and interventions. Psychol Health Med. 2006 Aug;11(3):277-87. doi: 10.1080/13548500600595053.
Related trials for Carpal Tunnel
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Postural Control and Balance Performance in Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS), Postural Assessment
Recruiting
Comparison of Wrist Splint Positions in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS), Peripheral Neuropathies
Recruiting
Effects of Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation(rPMS) on CTS(Carpal Tunnel Syndrome)
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS)
Recruiting
Hand Function Outcome After the Application of Transfer Energy Capacitive and Resistive on Post-burn Patients Presented With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) Post-burn
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Progressive Gamified Motor Rehabilitation After Carpal Tunnel Release
Carpal Tunnel Surgery
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Michael Bezuhly, MD MSc SM principal investigator
902-470-8168
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Pamphlet and Group Consultation in people with Carpal Tunnel, run by Michael Bezuhly at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Jan 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Number of risks recalled (time frame: 2-3 weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02071238, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Jan 2016.