Search

Aim: To investigate whether neonates at risk for neurodevelopmental impairment have improved neurodevelopment after docosahexaenoic acid, choline, and uridine-5-monophosphate supplementation versus controls.Method: Recruitment was from UK neonatal units. Eligible for inclusion were infants born at less than 31 weeks' gestation with a weight less than the ninth centile; infants born at less than 31 weeks' gestation with a grade II or higher intraventricular haemorrhage/preterm white matter injury; infants born between 31 weeks' and 40 weeks' gestation plus 28 days with a grade II or higher intraventricular haemorrhage/preterm white matter injury, moderate or severe hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy, or defined neuroimaging abnormalities. Treatment/control supplementation was for 2 years (double-blind, randomized, controlled design). Infants were stratified according to sex, gestation, and brain injury severity. Primary outcome was cognitive composite score (CCS) of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III at 24mo). Secondary outcomes were language composite score (LCS) of the Bayley-III, motor composite score (MCS) of the Bayley-III, and Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales, Second Edition (VABS-II) score.Results: Sixty-two neonates were recruited, 59 were randomized (34 males, 25 females). Fifty-three started supplementation. Most families found supplementation acceptable. The treatment group CCS-Bayley-III scores were non-significantly higher than controls (mean score difference at 24mo: 9.0; 95% confidence interval -0.2 to 18.2). Language and VABS-II scores, but not motor score, were non-significantly higher in the treatment group.Interpretation: Most families found supplementation feasible. Improved neurodevelopmental outcomes in the treatment group were not statistically significant. A larger multicentre trial exploration is warranted.What This Paper Adds: Dietary supplementation of neonates at risk of neurodevelopmental impairment is feasible. No statistically significant neurodevelopmental advantages were identified for the treatment group compared to controls. Treatment group cognitive and language advantage are of a clinically meaningful magnitude. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To investigate whether docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), choline, and uridine-5-monophosphate (UMP) supplementation improves neurodevelopmental outcome in infants with suspected cerebral palsy (CP) versus a comparison group of children.Method: Infants aged 1 to 18 months with suspected CP were recruited from UK child development centres. Participants received daily treatment or control supplementation for 2 years (double-blind randomized control design). Stratification was by age, sex, predominant pattern of motor involvement (four limbs or other), and visual impairment (or not). The primary outcome was the cognitive composite score of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (CCS-Bayley-III). Secondary outcomes included language composite and motor composite scores of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III).Results: Forty infants were recruited; 35 began supplementation, 29 completed 1 to 2 years' supplementation. The treatment group CCS-Bayley-III was non-significantly higher than the comparison group (mean 77.7 [SD 19.2] and 72.2 [SD 19.8] respectively, mean modelled difference 4.4 [-2.8, 11.6]). The treatment group language scores, but not motor scores, were non-significantly higher than for the comparison group.Interpretation: Most families found supplementation feasible. No statistically significant differences in neurodevelopmental outcome between the treatment and comparison groups were identified. Further investigation of neurodevelopmental outcome after supplementation with DHA, choline, and UMP of infants with suspected CP is warranted.What This Paper Adds: This was the first trial of phosphatidylcholine precursor supplementation in infants with suspected cerebral palsy (CP). Families of infants with suspected CP found 2-year nutritional supplementation feasible. There was no statistically significant neurodevelopmental advantage for the treatment group versus the comparison group. However, treatment group cognitive and language advantage were of clinically meaningful magnitude. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The South African National Department of Health sought to improve syndromic management of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Continuing medical education on STIs was delivered at primary healthcare (PHC) clinics using one of three training methods: (1) lecture, (2) computer and (3) paper-based. Clinics with training were compared with control clinics.Methods: Ten PHC clinics were randomly assigned to control and 10 to each training method arm. Clinicians participated in on-site training on six modules; two per week for three weeks. Each clinic was visited by three or four unannounced standardised patient (SP) actors pre-training and post-training. Male SPs reported symptoms of male urethritis syndrome and female SPs reported symptoms of vaginal discharge syndrome. Quality of healthcare was measured by whether or not clinicians completed five tasks: HIV test, genital exam, correct medications, condoms and partner notification.Results: An average of 31% of clinicians from each PHC attended each module. Quality of STI care was low. Pre-training (n=128) clinicians completed an average of 1.63 tasks. Post-training (n=114) they completed 1.73. There was no change in the number of STI tasks completed in the control arm and an 11% increase overall in the training arms relative to the control (ratio of relative risk (RRR)=1.11, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.84). Across training arms, there was a 26% increase (RRR=1.26, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.06) associated with lecture, 17% increase (RRR=1.17, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.28) with paper-based and 13% decrease (RRR=0.87, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.90) with computer arm relative to the control.Conclusions: Future interventions should address increasing training attendance and computer-based training effectiveness.Trial Registration Number: AEARCTR-0000668. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with cognitive dysfunction and an increased risk of dementia. Linagliptin is a glucose-lowering agent of the dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-IV) inhibitor class that is of particular interest for the prevention of accelerated cognitive decline, because it may potentially benefit the brain through pleiotropic effects, beyond glucose lowering. This paper presents the design of a study that aims to establish if linagliptin is superior to the sulfonylurea glimepiride in the prevention of accelerated cognitive decline in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Methods: The cognition substudy is an integral part of the ongoing event-driven, randomised, double blind CARdiOvascular safety of LINAgliptin (CAROLINA®) trial, which evaluates the effect of treatment with linagliptin versus glimepiride on cardiovascular outcomes. CAROLINA® includes patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with sub-optimal glycaemic control at elevated cardiovascular risk. The substudy will evaluate patients randomised and treated who have a baseline Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≥ 24, documented years of formal education with at least one valid cognitive assessment at baseline and during follow-up. The primary cognitive outcome is the occurrence of accelerated cognitive decline at the end of follow-up. The two treatment groups will be compared by using a logistic regression. Accelerated cognitive decline is defined as a rate of cognitive decline that falls at or below the 16th percentile of decline for the whole cohort on either the MMSE or a combined score of the trail making and verbal fluency test. Potential confounders are taken into account at an individual patient level, using a regression based index.Discussion: Between December 2010 and December 2012, 6042 patients were randomised and treated with either linagliptin (5 mg) or glimepiride (1-4 mg) once daily in CAROLINA®. Cognitive tests were conducted in nearly 4500 participants at baseline and are scheduled for two subsequent assessments, after 160 weeks of follow-up and end of follow-up. This substudy of the ongoing CAROLINA® trial will establish if linagliptin is superior to glimepiride in the prevention of accelerated cognitive decline in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Final results are expected in 2019.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT 01243424 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The high rate of cannabis use among patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP), as well as the associated negative impact on illness course and treatment outcomes, underlines the need for effective interventions in these populations. However, to date, there have been few clinical treatment trials (of pharmacological or psychological interventions) that have specifically focused on addressing comorbid cannabis use among these patients. The aim of this paper is to describe the design of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial in which the objective is to assess the efficacy of a specific cognitive behavioral therapy program for cannabis cessation in patients with FEP compared to standard treatment (psychoeducation).Methods/design: This is a single-blind randomized study with 1 year of follow-up. Patients are to be randomly assigned to one of two treatments: (1) specific cognitive behavioral therapy for cannabis cessation composed of 1-hour sessions once a week for 16 weeks, in addition to pharmacological treatment scheduled by the psychiatrist, or (2) a control group (psychoeducation + pharmacological treatment) following the same format as the experimental group. Participants in both groups will be evaluated at baseline (pre-treatment), at 16 weeks (post-treatment), and at 3 and 6 months and 1 year of follow-up. The primary outcome will be that patients in the experimental group will have greater cannabis cessation than patients in the control group at post-treatment. The secondary outcome will be that the experimental group will have better clinical and functional outcomes than the control group.Discussion: This study provides the description of a clinical trial design based on specific cognitive behavioral therapy for cannabis cessation in FEP patients, aiming to improve clinical and functional outcome, as well as tackling the addictive disorder.Trial Registration: NCT02319746 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier. ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol and Results Registration System (PRS) Receipt Release Date: 15 December 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Buprenorphine was registered in Australia as a maintenance and detoxification agent for the management of opioid dependence in November, 2000, and became widely available in August, 2001. This paper provides an overview of key developments in the introduction of buprenorphine treatment in Australia, with an emphasis upon the delivery of services in community-based (primary care) settings. A central study in this work was the Buprenorphine Implementation Trial (BIT), a randomized, controlled trial comparing buprenorphine and methadone maintenance treatment delivered under naturalistic conditions by specialist and community-based service providers (general practitioners and community pharmacists) in 139 subjects across nineteen treatment sites. In addition to conventional patient outcome measures (treatment retention, drug use, psychosocial functioning, and cost effectiveness), the BIT study also involved the development and evaluation of clinical guidelines, training programs for clinicians, and client literature, which are described here. Integration of treatment systems (methadone with buprenorphine, specialist and primary-care programs) and factors thought to be important in the uptake of buprenorphine treatment in Australia since registration are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]