Low Back PaineBackNCT06651099
Trial-based Economic Evaluation of a Mobile Health Intervention for Individuals With Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain
A study testing mhealth application and Conventional exercise therapy in people with Low Back Pain, run by University of Brasilia at 2 sites in Brazil.
Trial summary
The aim of this trial is to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a supervised and more personalised mhealth intervention compared with conventional exercise therapy in people with chronic non-specific low back pain. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Low Back Pain
- What is being tested?
- mhealth application and Conventional exercise therapy
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 146 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesBrazil
- Study dates
- 15 Nov 2025to 30 Aug 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults aged between 18 and 65 years;
- Self-reported low back pain for more than 12 consecutive weeks prior to the study, with pain intensity ≥4 in the numerical rating scale (NRS);
- Not having participated in physiotherapy sessions for treatment of low back pain for at least 6 months prior to the start of the study;
- Having a smartphone with internet access;
- Self-management activation classified as Level 2 or higher (i.e., classifications of low, medium and high knowledge about self-management), according to the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) questionnaire.
Who cannot join
- History of spinal trauma or fracture;
- Diagnosis of spinal osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, or rheumatic diseases; 3) Referred pain (from viscera, appendicitis, abdominal and pelvic pain);
- Previous spinal surgery;
- Presence of red flags, signs and/or symptoms of neurological impairment;
- Pregnancy.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
Brazil2 sites
Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul
Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, 79070-900
Universidade de Brasília
Ceilândia, Federal District, 72220-275
About this study
Official title: A Multicenter Trial-based Economic Evaluation of a Mobile Health Intervention for Individuals With Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial (eBack Trial)
The aim of this trial is to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a supervised and more personalised mhealth intervention compared with conventional exercise therapy in people with chronic non-specific low back pain.
Read the detailed description
Background: Chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP) is a prevalent and costly condition that encourages research into self-management strategies. Mobile health (mhealth) applications are promising interventions, but current evidence on their effectiveness is still conflicting. The aim is to investigate the (cost-)effectiveness of a supervised and personalized mhealth intervention, compared with conventional exercise therapy in individuals with CNLBP. Methods: A multicentre trial-based economic evaluation was designed to compare a mhealth intervention with conventional exercise. Participants will be recruited from two physical therapy rehabilitation clinics located within the participating centres. Adults aged between 18 and 59 years and with self-reported LBP >12 weeks will be included. Following the collection of baseline data, participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups using a permuted block randomization: 1) mhealth; 2) Conventional exercise delivered through a booklet. Outcome assessments will be conducted following randomisation at five distinct time points, resulting in a total follow-up period of 12 months. The primary clinical outcome is disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire), while secondary outcomes include pain (NRS), utility (EQ5D5L), fears and beliefs (FABQ), self-efficacy (PSEQ), and global perceived effect. A sample size of 146 participants was estimated (73 allocated to each group) in order to detect a 2-point between-groups difference on disability. A cost-effectiveness study will be conducted alongside the trial, comparing the two interventions in terms of costs and clinical outcomes. Discussion: While mhealth applications show promise as interventions for people with LBP, there is still a gap regarding the type of delivery and personalisation strategies. This study investigates whether the implementation of stratified and tailored care within a mobile application, based on patient-reported outcome measures and supervised by a physiotherapist, is (cost)effective.
- Conditions
- Low Back Pain
- Being tested
- mhealth application, Conventional exercise therapy
- Keywords
- Back pain, Mobile health, Economic evaluation, Exercise therapy, Self-management
- Medical subject headings
- Low Back Pain, Back Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
mhealth applicationOther
Individuals enrolled in the mhealth intervention will receive tailored content will include exercises focused on mobility, flexibility, core stabilization, and strengthening. Additionally, the mobile application will provide educational material on pain and health, covering topics such as the neurophysiology of pain, the multidimensional nature of low back pain, myths and facts about the condition, the importance of sleep, and stress management, which will include relaxation techniques and mindfulness. All content will be evidence-based, using clinical guidelines, systematic reviews and other high-quality studies to support inclusion in the mobile application. The intervention will be supervised by a physiotherapist, remotely via messaging or telephone calls.
Conventional exercise therapyOther
Participants in this intervention will receive a printed booklet containing a description and recommendations for carrying out an exercise program at home, which will be characterized by general exercises (such as strengthening, mobilization). The intervention will be supervised by a physiotherapist, remotely via messaging or telephone calls.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| mhealth application (experimental group) | Experimental | The mhealth intervention group will be instructed to perform the exercises twice a week for 8 weeks, lasting approximately 30 minutes per session. Participants will be instructed to watch the health education content (e.g., short videos, infographics) and exercise videos provided by the app, and to take breaks during each session. Guidance will be provided during the intervention and weekly monitoring by a physiotherapist by messaging or telephone calls. In the first week of the intervention there will be two face-to-face sessions supervised by the physiotherapist to familiarize the participants with the mobile application and provide instructions on the intervention. A further face-to-face session will take place half-way the intervention, to monitor the participants. Receives: Other: mhealth application |
| Conventional booklet exercise (comparator group) | Active comparator | After the assessment, all participants will receive a printed booklet containing a description and recommendations for carrying out the exercise program at home, which will be characterized by general exercises (i.e., strengthening, mobilization). The individuals will be instructed to perform the exercises twice a week for 8 weeks, following the same duration on the experimental group. Participants will be monitored and supervised by another physiotherapist via messaging app or telephone calls, following the same procedures reported in the experimental group. In the first week of the intervention there will be two face-to-face sessions supervised by a physiotherapist to familiarize the participants with the exercises and explain the booklet, and provide instructions on the intervention. A further face-to-face session will take place half-way the intervention, to monitor the participants. Receives: Other: Conventional exercise therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Disability score as assessed by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire
Disability will be the primary clinical outcome and will be measured using the Brazilian-portuguese validated version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The questionnaire consists of 24 items with 0=no and 1=yes, and the total score ranges from zero (no disability) to 24 (severe disability).
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Secondary outcomes (5)
Pain intensity as measured using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)
Pain intensity will be measured using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). This scale is characterized by a line with unit scores ranging from 0 to 10, where zero corresponds to no pain and ten corresponds to the worst pain ever experienced. Participants will be instructed to mark a number on the line, representing the pain intensity in the last week
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Health-related quality of life (Utility) as measured by the EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire
The Brazilian-portuguese version of the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire available at Euroqol will be used to assess participants' utility based on five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has five response levels (i.e., no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, and extreme problems). The scores range from 0 (the value of a health status equivalent to death) to 1 (the value of full health), with higher scores indicating greater health utility.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Fear and beliefs as measured by the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire
Fear and beliefs will be assessed using the validated Brazilian version of the FAB-Q (Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire). The FABQ consists of 16 self-report items, divided into two subscales: FABQ-Work, which addresses individuals' fears and beliefs in relation to work, and FABQ-Phys, which addresses their fears and beliefs in relation to physical activities. Each item is assessed on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (completely disagree) to 6 (completely agree).
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Self-efficacy as measured by the Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
Self-efficacy will be assessed using the the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ), translated and validated for Brazilian Portuguese. The PSEQ is a 10-item questionnaire designed to assess the confidence of people with persistent pain in performing various activities, even in the presence of pain. Each item is scored on a 7-point numerical scale (scores from 0 to 6), where 0 means 'not at all confident' and 6 means 'completely confident'. The items assess self-efficacy for a range of functions, including housework, socialising, work, and pain management without medication and with medication. The total score is obtained by summing the scores of the 10 items, resulting in a value between 0 and 60. Higher scores indicate greater perceived self-efficacy.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Perceived recovery as measured by the Global Perceived Effect Scale
Perceived recovery will be assessed at the end of the intervention period and follow-up moments using the Global Perceived Effect Scale (11-point scale), ranging from -5 ('much worse'), 0 ('no change') to 5 ('completely recovered')
Measured: At the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Oct 2024
- Study start15 Nov 2025
- Primary completion30 Jul 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Aug 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Low Back PainStudies 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Multicenter trial-based economic evaluation comparing mhealth intervention versus a conventional exercise therapy intervention alone. All participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: 1) blended mhealth intervention (mhG) or 2) conventional exercise therapy delivered by a booklet (beG).
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 146 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Brasilia
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- VU University of Amsterdam, Federal University of Mato Grosso
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Prof. Rodrigo Luiz Carregaro, University of Brasilia
- Investigators
- Rodrigo L Carregaro, PhD, Study director, University of BrasiliaFernanda Pasinato, PhD, Study chair, University of BrasiliaThomaz N Burke, PhD, Study chair, Federal University of Mato Grosso
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06651099
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 6.674.643
- Acronym
- eBack
- Status last verified
- Aug 2026
- First submitted
- 18 Oct 2024
- Last updated
- 17 Aug 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
de Araujo Mota MA, Landolfi TB, de Melo Silva MC, de Melo Santana B, Ben AJ, van Dongen JM, Bosmans JE, Ostelo R, Burke TN, Pasinato F, Tottoli CR, Luiz Carregaro R. A multicenter trial-based economic evaluation of a mobile health intervention for individuals with chronic non-specific low back pain: randomized controlled trial protocol. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025 Aug 23;26(1):814. doi: 10.1186/s12891-025-09118-5.
PubMed 40849470
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Aug 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Multicenter Trial-based Economic Evaluation of a Mobile Health Intervention for Individuals With Chronic Non-specific Low Back Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial (eBack Trial)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06651099
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- eBack / 6.674.643
- Conditions
- Low Back Pain
- Keywords
- Back pain, Mobile health, Economic evaluation, Exercise therapy, Self-management
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 146 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of BrasiliaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- VU University of Amsterdam, Federal University of Mato Grosso
- Study start
- 15 Nov 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jul 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Aug 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 21 Oct 2024 (actual)
- 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.
The aim of this trial is to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a supervised and more personalised mhealth intervention compared with conventional exercise therapy in people with chronic non-specific low back pain.
Detailed description
Background: Chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP) is a prevalent and costly condition that encourages research into self-management strategies. Mobile health (mhealth) applications are promising interventions, but current evidence on their effectiveness is still conflicting. The aim is to investigate the (cost-)effectiveness of a supervised and personalized mhealth intervention, compared with conventional exercise therapy in individuals with CNLBP. Methods: A multicentre trial-based economic evaluation was designed to compare a mhealth intervention with conventional exercise. Participants will be recruited from two physical therapy rehabilitation clinics located within the participating centres. Adults aged between 18 and 59 years and with self-reported LBP >12 weeks will be included. Following the collection of baseline data, participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups using a permuted block randomization: 1) mhealth; 2) Conventional exercise delivered through a booklet. Outcome assessments will be conducted following randomisation at five distinct time points, resulting in a total follow-up period of 12 months. The primary clinical outcome is disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire), while secondary outcomes include pain (NRS), utility (EQ5D5L), fears and beliefs (FABQ), self-efficacy (PSEQ), and global perceived effect. A sample size of 146 participants was estimated (73 allocated to each group) in order to detect a 2-point between-groups difference on disability. A cost-effectiveness study will be conducted alongside the trial, comparing the two interventions in terms of costs and clinical outcomes. Discussion: While mhealth applications show promise as interventions for people with LBP, there is still a gap regarding the type of delivery and personalisation strategies. This study investigates whether the implementation of stratified and tailored care within a mobile application, based on patient-reported outcome measures and supervised by a physiotherapist, is (cost)effective.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Multicenter trial-based economic evaluation comparing mhealth intervention versus a conventional exercise therapy intervention alone. All participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: 1) blended mhealth intervention (mhG) or 2) conventional exercise therapy delivered by a booklet (beG).
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| mhealth application (experimental group) | Experimental | Other: mhealth applicationThe mhealth intervention group will be instructed to perform the exercises twice a week for 8 weeks, lasting approximately 30 minutes per session. Participants will be instructed to watch the health education content (e.g., short videos, infographics) and exercise videos provided by the app, and to take breaks during each session. Guidance will be provided during the intervention and weekly monitoring by a physiotherapist by messaging or telephone calls. In the first week of the intervention there will be two face-to-face sessions supervised by the physiotherapist to familiarize the participants with the mobile application and provide instructions on the intervention. A further face-to-face session will take place half-way the intervention, to monitor the participants. |
| Conventional booklet exercise (comparator group) | Active comparator | Other: Conventional exercise therapyAfter the assessment, all participants will receive a printed booklet containing a description and recommendations for carrying out the exercise program at home, which will be characterized by general exercises (i.e., strengthening, mobilization). The individuals will be instructed to perform the exercises twice a week for 8 weeks, following the same duration on the experimental group. Participants will be monitored and supervised by another physiotherapist via messaging app or telephone calls, following the same procedures reported in the experimental group. In the first week of the intervention there will be two face-to-face sessions supervised by a physiotherapist to familiarize the participants with the exercises and explain the booklet, and provide instructions on the intervention. A further face-to-face session will take place half-way the intervention, to monitor the participants. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Adults aged between 18 and 65 years;
- Self-reported low back pain for more than 12 consecutive weeks prior to the study, with pain intensity ≥4 in the numerical rating scale (NRS);
- Not having participated in physiotherapy sessions for treatment of low back pain for at least 6 months prior to the start of the study;
- Having a smartphone with internet access;
- Self-management activation classified as Level 2 or higher (i.e., classifications of low, medium and high knowledge about self-management), according to the Patient Activation Measure (PAM) questionnaire.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- History of spinal trauma or fracture;
- Diagnosis of spinal osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, or rheumatic diseases; 3) Referred pain (from viscera, appendicitis, abdominal and pelvic pain);
- Previous spinal surgery;
- Presence of red flags, signs and/or symptoms of neurological impairment;
- Pregnancy.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| mhealth applicationIndividuals enrolled in the mhealth intervention will receive tailored content will include exercises focused on mobility, flexibility, core stabilization, and strengthening. Additionally, the mobile application will provide educational material on pain and health, covering topics such as the neurophysiology of pain, the multidimensional nature of low back pain, myths and facts about the condition, the importance of sleep, and stress management, which will include relaxation techniques and mindfulness. All content will be evidence-based, using clinical guidelines, systematic reviews and other high-quality studies to support inclusion in the mobile application. The intervention will be supervised by a physiotherapist, remotely via messaging or telephone calls. | Other | mhealth application (experimental group) |
| Conventional exercise therapyParticipants in this intervention will receive a printed booklet containing a description and recommendations for carrying out an exercise program at home, which will be characterized by general exercises (such as strengthening, mobilization). The intervention will be supervised by a physiotherapist, remotely via messaging or telephone calls. | Other | Conventional booklet exercise (comparator group) |
Primary outcome
Disability score as assessed by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Disability will be the primary clinical outcome and will be measured using the Brazilian-portuguese validated version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The questionnaire consists of 24 items with 0=no and 1=yes, and the total score ranges from zero (no disability) to 24 (severe disability).
5 secondary outcomes
Pain intensity as measured using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Health-related quality of life (Utility) as measured by the EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Fear and beliefs as measured by the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Self-efficacy as measured by the Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Perceived recovery as measured by the Global Perceived Effect Scale
Time frame: At the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Aug 2026.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40849470de Araujo Mota MA, Landolfi TB, de Melo Silva MC, de Melo Santana B, Ben AJ, van Dongen JM, Bosmans JE, Ostelo R, Burke TN, Pasinato F, Tottoli CR, Luiz Carregaro R. A multicenter trial-based economic evaluation of a mobile health intervention for individuals with chronic non-specific low back pain: randomized controlled trial protocol. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025 Aug 23;26(1):814. doi: 10.1186/s12891-025-09118-5.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Hip Hinge Exercises on Pain, Range of Motion and Functional Disability in Non-specific Low Back Pain.
Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Lumbar Stabilization Exercises With and Without YTWL (Scapular Stabilization Exercises) on Reducing Chronic Low Back Pain and Related Disability. A Randomized Clinical Trial,
Chronic Non Specific Mechanical Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Comparing Non-Medicine Strategies for Improving Low Back Pain
Chronic Low-back Pain (cLBP), High-Impact Chronic Pain (HICP)
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Whole-Body Vibration and Cervical Stabilization With Core Stabilization in Young Adults With Non-Specific Low Back Pain
Nonspecific Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Spinery Basivertebral Nerve Ablation for Vertebrogenic Chronic Low Back Pain
Low Back Pain, Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP)
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.
Rodrigo L Carregaro, PhD study director
University of Brasilia
Fernanda Pasinato, PhD study chair
University of Brasilia
Thomaz N Burke, PhD study chair
Federal University of Mato Grosso
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing mhealth application and Conventional exercise therapy in people with Low Back Pain, run by University of Brasilia at 2 sites in Brazil.
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 5 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: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Aug 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in Brazil. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Disability score as assessed by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment (around eight to ten weeks from baseline), and follow-up moments: follow-up 1 (26 weeks after baseline); follow-up 2 (39 weeks after baseline), and follow-up 3 (52 weeks after baseline)). 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 NCT06651099, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 17 Aug 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.