AzTrials
AzTrials

Pressure UlcerMeliCareNCT02373956

Efficacy and Tolerance of Honey-impregnated Dressings in the Local Management of Pressure Ulcers

A study testing MELECTIS G in people with Pressure Ulcer, run by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes at 3 sites in France.

Terminated

Stopped early. The study ended before it was planned to and will not resume.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The main objective of this study is to document the effectiveness of a honey-based medical device (Hyalumel) in the management of pressure ulcers. The effectiveness of the medical device will be judged according to the evolution of the surface of the wound at the end of 12 weeks of treatment. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Pressure Ulcer
What is being tested?
MELECTIS G
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
24 participants
Where
3 sitesFrance
Study dates
20 Nov 2015to 30 Nov 2020
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 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Information provided on the implementation of the study, its objectives, constraints and patient rights
  • The patient, or his/her legal guardian, must have given his/her informed and signed consent
  • The patient must be insured or beneficiary of a health insurance plan
  • The patient is available for 12 weeks of follow-up
  • Presence of one or more pressure ulcers at stages 2, 3 or 4 according to the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel - National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP-NPUAP) classification
  • Wound whose surface is between 1 cm^2 and 15 cm^2
Show all 9Show fewer
  • Wound present for more than 6 weeks
  • Patient whose wound requires a modern dressing (that is to say, a bandage that is neither tulle nor gauze) without bactericidal agents or antibiotics
  • No antibiotics for at least 7 days prior to inclusion (after inclusion, the patient can be treated with antibiotics if necessary, regardless of the indications)

Who cannot join

  • Patient participating in or having participated in another interventional study in the previous 3 months or currently in a patient exclusion period determined by a previous study.
  • Patient under judicial protection
  • Failure to correctly inform the patient or his/her legal representative
  • Patient (or his/her legal guardian) refusal to sign the consent
  • The patient is pregnant, parturient, or breastfeeding
  • Contraindications (or incompatible combination therapy) for a necessary treatment in this study
Show all 16Show fewer
  • Patient with an allergy to honey or propolis
  • The patient's general condition suggests study exclusion before twelve weeks of follow-up
  • Antibiotics received within 7 days prior to inclusion
  • Active neoplastic lesion treated with radiation or chemotherapy
  • Immunosuppressive therapy or other treatment which, in the judgment of the investigator, may interfere with the healing process
  • Surgery planned within twelve weeks of inclusion
  • Stage 1 wound according to the EPUAP-NPUAP classification
  • Amputation wound
  • Wound related to a surgical treatment or for which an act of revascularization is envisaged within twelve weeks of inclusion
  • Malignant wound

Trial locations and contacts

3 sites in 1 country.

France3 sites
  • Centre Mutualiste Neurologique Propara

    Montpellier, 34090

  • CHRU de Nîmes - Centre de Gérontologie de Serre Cavalier

    Nîmes, 30029

  • CHRU de Nîmes - Hôpital Universitaire Carémeau

    Nîmes, 30029

Other trials in France

About this study

Official title: Evaluation of the Efficacy and Tolerance of Honey-impregnated Dressings Versus Non-impregnated Dressings in the Local Management of Pressure Ulcers: A Randomized Single-blind Trial

The main objective of this study is to document the effectiveness of a honey-based medical device (Hyalumel) in the management of pressure ulcers. The effectiveness of the medical device will be judged according to the evolution of the surface of the wound at the end of 12 weeks of treatment.

Read the detailed description

The secondary objectives of this study are to compare the following items between the two arms of the study:

  1. The evolution of skin microbiota in the wound B. The evolution of the surface and the depth of the wound during follow-up C. The healing process D. Patient and caretaker acceptability
Conditions
Pressure Ulcer
Being tested
MELECTIS G, Usual care
Medical subject headings
Pressure Ulcer

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • MELECTIS GDevice

    The experimental medical device (MELECTIS G) is an association of selected honey and pharmaceutical grade hyaluronic acid.

  • Usual careProcedure or surgery

    Patients will receive usual care according to the current procedures at the Nîmes University Hospital (ICMD010 concerning pressure sore care and SCMD002 concerning referenced anti-pressure sore dressings).

Study groups in NCT02373956
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
MELECTIS GExperimentalIn addition to usual care as described for the other arm, patients randomized to this arm will have MELECTIS G added to their wound dressing according to the manufacturer's instructions. Intervention: Usual care Intervention: MELECTIS G
Receives: Device: MELECTIS G
Usual careActive comparatorPatients randomized to this are will receive usual care according the current procedures at the Nîmes University Hospital (ICMD010 concerning pressure sore care and SCMD002 concerning referenced anti-pressure sore dressings). Intervention: Usual care
Receives: Device: MELECTIS G; Procedure: Usual care

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula

    According to the Gilman formula

    Measured: Week 12

Secondary outcomes (73)
  1. Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula

    According to the Gilman formula

    Measured: Week 1

  2. Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula

    According to the Gilman formula

    Measured: Week 2

  3. Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula

    According to the Gilman formula

    Measured: Week 4

  4. Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula

    According to the Gilman formula

    Measured: Week 8

  5. Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula

    According to the Gilman formula

    Measured: Week 12

  6. Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula

    According to the Gilman formula

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

  7. Relative variation (%) in wound surface area

    Measured: Week 1

  8. Relative variation (%) in wound surface area

    Measured: Week 2

  9. Relative variation (%) in wound surface area

    Measured: Week 4

  10. Relative variation (%) in wound surface area

    Measured: Week 8

  11. Relative variation (%) in wound surface area

    Measured: Week 12

  12. Relative variation (%) in wound surface area

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

  13. Relative variation (%) in wound depth

    Measured: Week 1

  14. Relative variation (%) in wound depth

    Measured: Week 2

  15. Relative variation (%) in wound depth

    Measured: Week 4

  16. Relative variation (%) in wound depth

    Measured: Week 8

  17. Relative variation (%) in wound depth

    Measured: Week 12

  18. Relative variation (%) in wound depth

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

  19. Has the wound surface area reduced by at least 40%? yes/no

    Measured: Week 2

  20. Has the wound surface area reduced by at least 40%? yes/no

    Measured: Week 4

  21. Has the wound surface area reduced by at least 40%? yes/no

    Measured: Week 8

  22. Has the wound surface area reduced by at least 40%? yes/no

    Measured: Week 12

  23. Has the wound surface area reduced by at least 40%? yes/no

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

  24. Number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  25. Number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 14

  26. Number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 84

  27. Diversity (Shannon's H) of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  28. Diversity (Shannon's H) of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 14

  29. Diversity (Shannon's H) of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 84

  30. Number of bacteria functional groups present in the wound

    Functional groups: commensal, pathogenic, weak pathogenic potential

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  31. Number of bacteria functional groups present in the wound

    Functional groups: commensal, pathogenic, weak pathogenic potential

    Measured: Day 14

  32. Number of bacteria functional groups present in the wound

    Functional groups: commensal, pathogenic, weak pathogenic potential

    Measured: Day 84

  33. Diversity (Shannon's H) of bacteria functional groups present in the wound

    Functional groups: commensal, pathogenic, weak pathogenic potential

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  34. Diversity (Shannon's H) of bacteria functional groups present in the wound

    Functional groups: commensal, pathogenic, weak pathogenic potential

    Measured: Day 14

  35. Diversity (Shannon's H) of bacteria functional groups present in the wound

    Functional groups: commensal, pathogenic, weak pathogenic potential

    Measured: Day 84

  36. The number of multiresistant bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  37. The number of multiresistant bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 14

  38. The number of multiresistant bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 84

  39. the ratio of the number of commensal over the total number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  40. the ratio of the number of commensal over the total number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 14

  41. the ratio of the number of commensal over the total number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 84

  42. the ratio of the number of commensal or weakly virulent over the total number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  43. the ratio of the number of commensal or weakly virulent over the total number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 14

  44. the ratio of the number of commensal or weakly virulent over the total number of bacteria species present in the wound

    Measured: Day 84

  45. Wound healing speed (change in cm^2 of surface area per week)

    Measured: 12 weeks (or maximum time span if total healing occurs before 12 weeks)

  46. Is the wound completely healed? yes/no

    Measured: Week 12

  47. The time to healing (days)

    Measured: Week 12

  48. Appearance of the pressure ulcer

    Appearance of the pressure ulcer: burgeoning, fibrinous, necrotic, blistering or de-epidermisation, exudative, bad odor

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  49. Appearance of the pressure ulcer

    Appearance of the pressure ulcer: burgeoning, fibrinous, necrotic, blistering or de-epidermisation, exudative, bad odor

    Measured: Week 1

  50. Appearance of the pressure ulcer

    Appearance of the pressure ulcer: burgeoning, fibrinous, necrotic, blistering or de-epidermisation, exudative, bad odor

    Measured: Week 2

  51. Appearance of the pressure ulcer

    Appearance of the pressure ulcer: burgeoning, fibrinous, necrotic, blistering or de-epidermisation, exudative, bad odor

    Measured: Week 4

  52. Appearance of the pressure ulcer

    Appearance of the pressure ulcer: burgeoning, fibrinous, necrotic, blistering or de-epidermisation, exudative, bad odor

    Measured: Week 8

  53. Appearance of the pressure ulcer

    Appearance of the pressure ulcer: burgeoning, fibrinous, necrotic, blistering or de-epidermisation, exudative, bad odor

    Measured: Week 12

  54. Appearance of the pressure ulcer

    Appearance of the pressure ulcer: burgeoning, fibrinous, necrotic, blistering or de-epidermisation, exudative, bad odor

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

  55. Presence/absence of adverse events

    Measured: Week 1

  56. Presence/absence of adverse events

    Measured: Week 2

  57. Presence/absence of adverse events

    Measured: Week 4

  58. Presence/absence of adverse events

    Measured: Week 8

  59. Presence/absence of adverse events

    Measured: Week 12

  60. Presence/absence of adverse events

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

  61. Algo plus scale

    Measured: Baseline (Day 0)

  62. Algo plus scale

    Measured: Week 1

  63. Algo plus scale

    Measured: Week 2

  64. Algo plus scale

    Measured: Week 4

  65. Algo plus scale

    Measured: Week 8

  66. Algo plus scale

    Measured: Week 12

  67. Algo plus scale

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

  68. Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff

    Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff in relation to each of the following:

    • Overall satisfaction
    • Easy installation
    • Ease of removal
    • conformability of the dressing to the wound
    • Pain at dressing change
    • Adhesion of dressing to the wound

    Measured: Week 1

  69. Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff

    Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff in relation to each of the following:

    • Overall satisfaction
    • Easy installation
    • Ease of removal
    • conformability of the dressing to the wound
    • Pain at dressing change
    • Adhesion of dressing to the wound

    Measured: Week 2

  70. Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff

    Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff in relation to each of the following:

    • Overall satisfaction
    • Easy installation
    • Ease of removal
    • conformability of the dressing to the wound
    • Pain at dressing change
    • Adhesion of dressing to the wound

    Measured: Week 4

  71. Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff

    Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff in relation to each of the following:

    • Overall satisfaction
    • Easy installation
    • Ease of removal
    • conformability of the dressing to the wound
    • Pain at dressing change
    • Adhesion of dressing to the wound

    Measured: Week 8

  72. Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff

    Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff in relation to each of the following:

    • Overall satisfaction
    • Easy installation
    • Ease of removal
    • conformability of the dressing to the wound
    • Pain at dressing change
    • Adhesion of dressing to the wound

    Measured: Week 12

  73. Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff

    Acceptability of the dressing by the medical staff in relation to each of the following:

    • Overall satisfaction
    • Easy installation
    • Ease of removal
    • conformability of the dressing to the wound
    • Pain at dressing change
    • Adhesion of dressing to the wound

    Measured: At treatment stopping if appropriate (before week 12)

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted27 Feb 2015 (estimated)
  2. Study start20 Nov 2015
  3. Primary completion30 Nov 2020
  4. Study completion30 Nov 2020

Why it stopped: difficulties to include

Resources

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
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
24 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02373956
Sponsor's protocol ID
LOCAL/2014/JPL-01
Other IDs
2014-A01407-40
Acronym
MeliCare
Status last verified
Aug 2021
First submitted
23 Feb 2015
Last updated
9 Aug 2021
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing MELECTIS G in people with Pressure Ulcer, run by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes at 3 sites in France.

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 9 inclusion and 16 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: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Aug 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 3 sites in France. 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 was stopped early (reason given: difficulties to include). Results are not available in the source record.

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?

Change in wound surface area according to the Gilman formula (time frame: Week 12). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
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 9 Aug 2021.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in