Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02369068

Onabotulinumtoxin A Versus Kenalog for Chronic Pelvic Pain

The goal of this study is to compare the effectiveness of two different medications used in intravaginal trigger point injections (injections into extremely painful areas of a muscle) to treat chronic pelvic pain. The study compares onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX®) (a drug prepared from the bacterial toxin botulin which temporarily paralyzes muscles) to Kenalog (a synthetic corticosteroid used as an anti-inflammatory agent).

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Pelvic Pain Neurologic Manifestations Pain Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms Signs and Symptoms

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

Female

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Beaumont Hospitals

Royal Oak, Michigan, 48073, United States

About this study

Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a common and often debilitating problem among women. The musculoskeletal system is an important factor in chronic pelvic pain. Studies have demonstrated that women with CPP had more frequent musculoskeletal findings. On physical examination, myofascial trigger points have been found. Trigger points are hyperirritable bands of muscle that can be felt from the vaginal wall. They are often knot-like or taut and are painful when pressure is placed on them. Intravaginal injections of these trigger points using steroids including Kenalog (triamcinolone) have been done and produced decreases in pelvic pain. Trigger point injections of Onabotulinumtoxin A has also been shown to decrease pain in subjects with CPP. This study will compare these two drugs and assess pain (using subject questionnaires) at one, three and six months post injection.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Provide informed consent
  • Healthy women > age 18 regardless of menopausal status
  • Willing and able to fill out study questionnaires. In patients that are unable to read, the research nurse will be available to assist.
  • High-tone pelvic floor dysfunction on vaginal exam
  • A pelvic pain score of > 4 on screening Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
  • Pain perceived to be in the pelvis that has been present for at least 3 months.

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients that have had Botox to the bladder within the last 8 months
  • Patients that have had Botox outside the bladder of > 160 u within the last 12 weeks.
  • Patients that have had transvaginal trigger point injections of any form (Botox or steroid) in the last 3 months
  • Pregnancy
  • Concomitant use of any narcotic drug, alcohol, or any illicit drug use during the study period that could be deemed unsafe in combination with study medication as judged by the investigators.
  • Any evidence of vaginitis on wet mount slide at initial visit that is untreated.
  • Subject with any other vaginal epithelial disorder that could affect absorption of medication as deemed by the investigators.
  • Any indication/condition/medication that the investigators identify as contraindicated in conjunction with study medication.
  • Systolic blood pressure > 160 mm Hg on screening blood pressure
  • Heart rate > 110 beats/minute on screening heart rate

Treatment and study plan

Onabotulinumtoxin A

Drug

Intravaginal pelvic floor injection one series

Other names: Botox

kenalog

Drug

Intravaginal pelvic floor injection one series

Other names: triamcinolone

Primary outcomes

  1. Pain Assessed by Change in Overall Pain Score Using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).

    Time frame: Baseline and One Month

    The visual analog scale asks subjects to rate their level of pain on a scale from 0-10, with 0 being 'No pain' and 10 being 'Worst pain imaginable', hence lower scores are better. The baseline and follow-up visual analog scale for pain was obtained at every visit regardless if the patient received Trigger Point Injections. The difference between visual analog scale at 1 month and the visual analog scale at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain increased from baseline to 1 month and negative numbers indicates that pain decreased.

  2. Pain Severity Assessed by Change in Overall Pain and Other Related Scores Using Questions 3, 4, 5, and 6 in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and One Month

    Pain severity was constructed by averaging questions 3,4,5 and 6 of the brief pain inventory questionnaire (adding scores together and dividing by 4). Each question is on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine). Thus, lower numbers represent a better outcome. The difference between pain severity at 1 month and the pain severity at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain severity increased from baseline to 1 month and negative numbers indicates that the severity of the pain decreased.

  3. Pain Interference Assessed by Change in Overall Pain and Other Related Scores Using Questions 9A Through 9G in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and One Month

    The Pain Interference score was constructed by averaging the individual interference question scores from the brief pain inventory questionnaire (adding scores from questions 9A-9G and dividing by 7). The questions assess how, during the past 24 hours, pain has interfered with general anxiety (9A), mood (9B), walking ability (9C), normal work (9D), relations with other people (9E), sleep (9F), and enjoyment of life (9G). Each question is scored on a scale from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes). Thus, a lower value represents a better outcome. The difference between pain interference at 1 month and the pain interference at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain severity increased from baseline to 1 month and negative numbers indicates that the severity of the pain decreased.

  4. Pain Assessed by Change in Overall Pain Symptom Using Question 2 of the Global Response Assessment (GRA) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and One Month

    The GRA questionnaire asks subjects to rate symptoms and functioning since having the research procedure, Trigger Point Injections (TPI). Question 2 asks the subject to rate their pain symptoms since having TPI. Scores are on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Markedly Worse) to 7 (Markedly Improved).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Pain Assessed by Change in Overall Pain Score Using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Three Months

    The visual analog scale asks subjects to rate their level of pain on a scale from 0-10, with 0 being 'No pain' and 10 being 'Worst pain imaginable', hence lower scores are better. The baseline and follow-up visual analog scale for pain was obtained at every visit regardless if the patient received Trigger Point Injections. The difference between visual analog scale at 3 months and the visual analog scale at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain severity increased from baseline to 3 months and negative numbers indicates that the severity of the pain decreased.

  2. Pain Severity Assessed by Change in Overall Pain and Other Related Scores Using Questions 3, 4, 5, and 6 in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Three Months

    Pain severity was constructed by averaging questions 3,4,5 and 6 of the brief pain inventory questionnaire (adding scores and dividing by 4). Each question is on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine). Thus, lower numbers represent a better outcome. The difference between pain severity at 3 months and the pain severity at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain severity increased from baseline to 3 months and negative numbers indicates that the severity of the pain decreased.

  3. Pain Interference Assessed by Change in Overall Pain and Other Related Scores Using Questions 9A Through 9G in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Three months

    The Pain Interference score was constructed by averaging the individual interference question scores from the brief pain inventory questionnaire (adding scores together for questions 9A-9G and dividing by 7). The questions assess how, during the past 24 hours, pain has interfered with general anxiety (9A), mood (9B), walking ability (9C), normal work (9D), relations with other people (9E), sleep (9F), and enjoyment of life (9G). Each question is scored on a scale from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes). Thus, a lower value represents a better outcome. The difference between pain interference at 3 months and the pain interference at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain severity increased from baseline to 3 months and negative numbers indicates that the severity of the pain decreased.

  4. Pain Assessed by Change in Overall Pain Symptom Using Question 2 of the Global Response Assessment (GRA) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Three Months

    The GRA questionnaire asks subjects to rate symptoms and functioning since having the research procedure, Trigger Point Injections (TPI). Question 2 asks the subject to rate their pain symptoms since having TPI. Scores are on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Markedly Worse) to 7 (Markedly Improved).

  5. Pain Assessed by Change in Overall Pain Score Using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Six Months

    The pain visual analog scale (VAS) is a tool used by the patient to describe their pain intensity. Utilizing the VAS, the patient describes their pain at baseline, before receiving trigger point injections. The VAS ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). Thus, a lower value represents a better outcome.

  6. Pain Severity Assessed by Change in Overall Pain and Other Related Scores Using Questions 3, 4, 5, and 6 in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Six Months

    Pain severity was constructed by averaging questions 3,4,5 and 6 of the brief pain inventory questionnaire (adding scores together and dividing by 4). Each question is on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine). Thus, lower numbers represent a better outcome. The difference between pain severity at 6 months and the pain severity at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain severity increased from baseline to 6 months and negative numbers indicates that the severity of the pain decreased.

  7. Pain Interference Assessed by Change in Overall Pain and Other Related Scores Using Questions 9A Through 9G in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Six months

    The Pain Interference score was constructed by averaging the individual interference question scores from the brief pain inventory questionnaire (adding together scores for questions 9A-9G and dividing by 7). The questions assess how, during the past 24 hours, pain has interfered with general anxiety (9A), mood (9B), walking ability (9C), normal work (9D), relations with other people (9E), sleep (9F), and enjoyment of life (9G). Each question is scored on a scale from 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes). Thus, a lower value represents a better outcome. The difference between pain interference at 6 months and the pain interference at baseline was calculated. Positive numbers indicate the pain severity increased from baseline to 6 months and negative numbers indicates that the severity of the pain decreased.

  8. Pain Assessed by Change in Overall Pain and Other Related Scores Using the Global Response Assessment (GRA) Questionnaire.

    Time frame: Baseline and Six Months

    The GRA questionnaire asks subjects to rate symptoms and functioning since having the research procedure, Trigger Point Injections (TPI). Scores are on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Markedly Worse) to 7 (Markedly Improved).

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Jamie Bartley, DO

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Double-Blind, Randomized Study to Compare Onabotulinumtoxin A Versus Kenalog for Intravaginal Trigger Point Injections in the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain

Important dates

Study start
2015
Primary completion
2018
Study completion
2018
First posted
Feb 23, 2015
Registry last updated
Jul 24, 2019

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.