Skip to content

Bright light therapy in rheumatoid arthritis to improve symptoms of fatigue and other disease outcomes: a randomized controlled pilot trial.

Bright light therapy in rheumatoid arthritis to improve symptoms of fatigue and other disease outcomes: a randomized controlled pilot trial. - Bright light therapy in reumatoid arthritis.

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON44172
Enrollment
48
Registered
2017-11-16
Start date
2017-12-13
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-06-11

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

rheumatoid arthritis / inflammatory arthritis

Interventions

In both arms, light therapy glasses (Luminette® (CE certified)
Lucimed) will be worn in the home of the participant every day for 30 minutes in the evening (between 20:00-21:00 h) during four consecutive weeks. The two arms differ in the wavelength of light th

Sponsors

Universiteit Leiden
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Age
18 Years to 99 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: I. Patient is on stable disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy for at least 3 months before the start of the study. II. Disease Activity Scale (DAS) 28 = 27 (indicates abnormal levels of fatigue) (Bultmann et al., 2000).

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: I. Patient*s treatment consists of glucocorticoids, melatonin, or photosensitizing medication (e.g. amiodarone, benoxaprofen, chlorpromazine, demeclocycline, fleroxacin, nalidixic acid, ofloxacin, piroxicam, porfimer, psoralens, quinidine, and/or temoporfin (Anderson et al., 2016)) and/or changed in type or dose within the last 3 months before start of the study. II. Patient*s medical conditions or recent medical events potentially compromises the effects of safety of light therapy (e.g. psychosis, mania, (probable) dementia, severe drug or alcohol abuse, delirium, severe acute suicidality, history of light-induced migraine or epilepsy or severe side effects to light therapy in the past, and/or pre-existing ocular abnormalities (e.g. glaucoma, retinitis, retinopathy, and/or macular degeneration)). III. Midsleep on free days corrected for sleep deficit build up during working days (as measured with the Munich Chronotype Questionnaire) > 4:00h which reflected patients with a late chronotype. IV. Patient has been involved in light therapy within 1 year before the start of the study. V. Patient has been unable to maintain a regular sleep schedule (e.g. due to shift work) within 1 year before start of the study and/or expected during the study. VI. Patient has travelled within three months before study start and/or has the plan to travel during the study to a time zone that deviates two or more hours from the Netherlands; and VII. Patient or partner is pregnant or has a wish for pregnancy during the therapy period or gives breastfeeding.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
The main endpoint is the difference between the intervention and control group in change from T0 to T1 in the primary study outcome fatigue (CIS-8 score). This difference will be reported as descriptive and will be preliminary statistically tested.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
In the same way will be explored: secondary therapy efficacy outcomes and circadian entrainment outcomes as well as follow-up effects (changes from T0 to T2). Also, the mediating role of circadian entrainment and depression on therapy efficacy will be explored. We also report the relevant parameter estimates and variances needed to design a possible future full-scale RCT (Feeley et al., 2009).

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)