Search

Introduction There is a lack of evidence that the benefits of screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) outweigh the harms. Following the completion of the Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke (SAFER) pilot trial, the aim of the main SAFER trial is to establish whether population screening for AF reduces incidence of stroke risk.Methods and analysis Approximately 82 000 people aged 70 years and over and not on oral anticoagulation are being recruited from general practices in England. Patients on the palliative care register or residents in a nursing home are excluded. Eligible people are identified using electronic patient records from general practices and sent an invitation and consent form to participate by post. Consenting participants are randomised at a ratio of 2:1 (control:intervention) with clustering by household. Those randomised to the intervention arm are sent an information leaflet inviting them to participate in screening, which involves use of a handheld single-lead ECG four times a day for 3 weeks. ECG traces identified by an algorithm as possible AF are reviewed by cardiologists. Participants with AF are seen by a general practitioner for consideration of anticoagulation. The primary outcome is stroke. Major secondary outcomes are: death, major bleeding and cardiovascular events. Follow-up will be via electronic health records for an average of 4 years. The primary analysis will be by intention-to-treat using time-to-event modelling. Results from this trial will be combined with follow-up data from the cluster-randomised pilot trial by fixed-effects meta-analysis.Ethics and dissemination The London—Central National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1597) provided ethical approval. Dissemination will include public-friendly summaries, reports and engagement with the UK National Screening Committee.Trial registration number ISRCTN72104369.

Objective Living Library events involve people being trained as living ‘Books’, who then discuss aspects of their personal experiences in direct conversation with attendees, referred to as ‘Readers’. This study sought to generate a realist programme theory and a theory-informed implementation guide for a Library of Lived Experience for Mental Health (LoLEM).Design Integrated realist synthesis and experience-based co-design.Setting Ten online workshops with participants based in the North of England.Participants Thirty-one participants with a combination of personal experience of using mental health services, caring for someone with mental health difficulties and/or working in mental health support roles.Results Database searches identified 30 published and grey literature evidence sources which were integrated with data from 10 online co-design workshops conducted over 12 months. The analysis generated a programme theory comprising five context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. Findings highlight how establishing psychological safety is foundational to productive Living Library events (CMO 1). For Readers, direct conversations humanise others’ experiences (CMO 2) and provide the opportunity to flexibly explore new ways of living (CMO 3). Through participation in a Living Library, Books may experience personal empowerment (CMO 4), while the process of self-authoring and co-editing their story (CMO 5) can contribute to personal development. This programme theory informed the co-design of an implementation guide highlighting the importance of tailoring event design and participant support to the contexts in which LoLEM events are held.Conclusions The LoLEM has appeal across stakeholder groups and can be applied flexibly in a range of mental health-related settings. Implementation and evaluation are required to better understand the positive and negative impacts on Books and Readers.Trial registration number PROSPERO CRD42022312789.

Objective To evaluate the feasibility of recruiting participants diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF) taking oral anticoagulation therapies (OATs) and recently experiencing a bleed to collect health-related quality of life (HRQoL) information.Design Observational feasibility study. The study aimed to determine the feasibility of recruiting participants with minor and major bleeds, the most appropriate route for recruitment and the appropriateness of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) selected for collecting HRQoL information in AF patients, and the preferred format of the surveys.Setting Primary care, secondary care and via an online patient forum.Participants The study population was adult patients (≥18) with AF taking OATs who had experienced a recent major or minor bleed within the last 4 weeks.Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcomes – PROMs: EuroQol 5 Dimensions-5 Levels, Perception of Anticoagulant Treatment Questionnaire, part 2 only (part 2), atrial fibrillation effect on quality of life. Secondary outcomes – Location of bleed, bleed severity, current treatment, patient perceptions of HRQoL in relation to bleeding events.Results We received initial expressions of interest from 103 participants. We subsequently recruited 32 participants to the study—14 from primary care and 18 through the AF forum. No participants were recruited through secondary care. Despite 32 participants consenting, only 26 initial surveys were completed. We received follow-up surveys from 11 participants (8 primary care and 3 AF forum). COVID-19 had a major impact on the study.Conclusions Primary care was the most successful route for recruitment. Most participants recruited to the study experienced a minor bleed. Further ways to recruit in secondary care should be explored, especially to capture more serious bleeds.Trial registration number The study is registered in the Clinicaltrials.gov database, NCT04921176.

Introduction Peer online mental health forums are commonly used and offer accessible support. Positive and negative impacts have been reported by forum members and moderators, but it is unclear why these impacts occur, for whom and in which forums. This multiple method realist study explores underlying mechanisms to understand how forums work for different people. The findings will inform codesign of best practice guidance and policy tools to enhance the uptake and effectiveness of peer online mental health forums.Methods and analysis In workstream 1, we will conduct a realist synthesis, based on existing literature and interviews with approximately 20 stakeholders, to generate initial programme theories about the impacts of forums on members and moderators and mechanisms driving these. Initial theories that are relevant for forum design and implementation will be prioritised for testing in workstream 2.Workstream 2 is a multiple case study design with mixed methods with several online mental health forums differing in contextual features. Quantitative surveys of forum members, qualitative interviews and Corpus-based Discourse Analysis and Natural Language Processing of forum posts will be used to test and refine programme theories. Final programme theories will be developed through novel triangulation of the data.Workstream 3 will run alongside workstreams 1 and 2. Key stakeholders from participating forums, including members and moderators, will be recruited to a Codesign group. They will inform the study design and materials, refine and prioritise theories, and codesign best policy and practice guidance.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was granted by Solihull Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 314029). Findings will be reported in accordance with RAMESES (Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines, published as open access and shared widely, along with codesigned tools.Trial registration number ISRCTN 62469166; the protocol for the realist synthesis in workstream one is prospectively registered at PROSPERO CRD42022352528.

Introduction People with lived expertise in managing mental health challenges can be an important source of knowledge and support for other people facing similar challenges, and for carers to learn how best to help. However, opportunities for sharing lived expertise are limited. Living libraries support people with lived expertise to be ‘living books’, sharing their experiences in dialogue with ‘readers’ who can ask questions. Living libraries have been piloted worldwide in health-related contexts but without a clear model of how they work or rigorous evaluation of their impacts. We aim to develop a programme theory about how a living library could be used to improve mental health outcomes, using this theory to codesign an implementation guide that can be evaluated across different contexts.Methods and analysis We will use a novel integration of realist synthesis and experience-based codesign (EBCD) to produce a programme theory about how living libraries work and a theory and experience informed guide to establishing a library of lived experience for mental health (LoLEM). Two workstreams will run concurrently: (1) a realist synthesis of literature on living libraries, combined with stakeholder interviews, will produce several programme theories; theories will be developed collaboratively with an expert advisory group of stakeholders who have hosted or taken part in a living library and will form our initial analysis framework; a systematic search will identify literature about living libraries; data will be coded into our analysis framework, and we will use retroductive reasoning to explain living libraries’ impacts across multiple contexts. Individual stakeholder interviews will help refine and test theories; (2) data from workstream 1 will inform 10 EBCD workshops with people with experience of managing mental health difficulties and health professionals to produce a LoLEM implementation guide; data from this process will also inform the theory in workstream 1.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was granted by Coventry and Warwick National Health Service Research Ethics Committee on 29 December 2021 (reference number 305975). The programme theory and implementation guide will be published as open access and shared widely through a knowledge exchange event, a study website, mental health provider and peer support networks, peer reviewed journals and a funders report.PROSPERO registration details CRD42022312789.

Introduction Diagnosing underlying arrhythmia in emergency department (ED) syncope patients is difficult. There is a evidence that diagnostic yield for detecting underlying arrhythmia is highest when cardiac monitoring devices are applied early, ideally at the index visit. This strategy has the potential to change current syncope management from low diagnostic yield Holter to higher yield ambulatory monitoring, reduce episodes of syncope, reduce risk of recurrence and its potential serious consequences, reduce hospital admissions, reduce overall health costs and increase quality of life by allowing earlier diagnosis, treatment and exclusion of clinically important arrhythmias.Methods and analyses This is a UK open prospective parallel group multicentre randomised controlled trial of an immediate 14-day ambulatory patch heart monitor vs standard care in 2234 patients presenting acutely with unexplained syncope. Our patient focused primary endpoint will be number of episodes of syncope at 1 year. Health economic evaluation will estimate the incremental cost per syncope episode avoided and quality-adjusted life year gained.Ethics and dissemination Informed consent for participation will be sought. The ASPIRED trial received a favourable ethical opinion from South East Scotland Research Ethics Committee 01 (21/SS/0073). Results will be disseminated via scientific publication, lay summary and visual abstract.Trial registration number ISRCTN 10278811.

Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia globally. It is associated with a fivefold risk in stroke, but early diagnosis and effective treatment can reduce this risk. AF is often underdiagnosed, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) where screening for AF is not always feasible or considered common practice in primary care settings. Epidemiological data on AF in LMICs is often incomplete particularly in vulnerable populations. This LMIC research collaborative aims to identify the prevalence of AF in the Northern Sri Lankan community.Methods and analysis A cross-sectional household survey piloted and codesigned through a series of community engagement events will be administered in all five districts in Northern Province, Sri Lanka. A multistage cluster sampling approach will be used starting at district level, then the Divisional Secretariats followed by Grama Niladhari divisions. Twenty households will be selected from each cluster. The study aims to recruit 10 000 participants aged 50 years or older, 1 participant per household. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, well-being and lifestyle and anthropometric measurements will be collected using a digital data platform (REDCap, Research Electronic Data Capture) by trained data collectors. Participants will be screened for AF using a fingertip single-lead ECG via a smartphone application (AliveCor) with rhythm strips reviewed by a consultant cardiologist. Prevalence of AF and risk factors will be established at province and district-levels. Adjusted ORs and population attributable fractions for AF risk factors will be determined.Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the Ethics Review Committee of Faculty of Medicine at University of Jaffna. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentations at conferences. The findings will enable early treatment for new AF diagnoses and inform interventions to improve community-based management of AF in LMICs.

Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with 30% of strokes, as well as other cardiovascular disease, dementia and death. AF meets many criteria for screening, but there is limited evidence that AF screening reduces stroke. Consequently, no countries recommend national screening programmes for AF. The Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke (SAFER) trial aims to determine whether screening for AF is effective at reducing risk of stroke. The aim of the pilot study is to assess feasibility of the main trial and inform implementation of screening and trial procedures.Methods and analysis SAFER is planned to be a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) of over 100 000 participants aged 70 years and over, not on long-term anticoagulation therapy at baseline, with an average follow-up of 5 years. Participants are asked to record four traces every day for 3 weeks on a hand-held single-lead ECG device. Cardiologists remotely confirm episodes of AF identified by the device algorithm, and general practitioners follow-up with anticoagulation as appropriate. The pilot study is a cluster RCT in 36 UK general practices, randomised 2:1 control to intervention, recruiting approximately 12 600 participants. Pilot study outcomes include AF detection rate, anticoagulation uptake and other parameters to incorporate into sample size calculations for the main trial. Questionnaires sent to a sample of participants will assess impact of screening on psychological health. Process evaluation and qualitative studies will underpin implementation of screening during the main trial. An economic evaluation using the pilot data will confirm whether it is plausible that screening might be cost-effective.Ethics and dissemination The London—Central Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1597) and Confidentiality Advisory Group (19/CAG/0226) provided ethical approval. Dissemination will be via publications, patient-friendly summaries, reports and engagement with the UK National Screening Committee.Trial registration number ISRCTN72104369.

IntroductionBipolar disorder is a severe and chronic mental health problem that persists into older adulthood. The number of people living with this condition is set to rise as the UK experiences a rapid ageing of its population. To date, there has been very little research or service development with respect to psychological therapies for this group of people.Methods and analysisA parallel two-arm randomised controlled trial comparing a 14-session, 6-month Recovery-focused Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy for Older Adults with bipolar disorder (RfCBT-OA) plus treatment as usual (TAU) versus TAU alone. Participants will be recruited in the North-West of England via primary and secondary mental health services and through self-referral. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of RfCBT-OA; therefore, a formal power calculation is not appropriate. It has been estimated that randomising 25 participants per group will be sufficient to be able to reliably determine the primary feasibility outcomes (eg, recruitment and retention rates), in line with recommendations for sample sizes for feasibility/pilot trials. Participants in both arms will complete assessments at baseline and then every 3 months, over the 12-month follow-up period. We will gain an estimate of the likely effect size of RfCBT-OA on a range of clinical outcomes and estimate parameters needed to determine the appropriate sample size for a definitive, larger trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of RfCBT-OA. Data analysis is discussed further in the Analysis section in the main paper.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by the UK National Health Service (NHS) Ethics Committee process (REC ref: 15/NW/0330). The findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, national and international conference presentations and local, participating NHS trusts.Trial registration numberISRCTN13875321; Pre-results.

Objectives As awareness of bipolar disorder (BD) increases and the world experiences a rapid ageing of the population, the number of people living with BD in later life is expected to rise substantially. There is no current evidence base for the effectiveness of psychological interventions for older adults with BD. This focus group study explored a number of topics to inform the development and delivery of a recovery-focused therapy (RfT) for older adults with BD.Design A qualitative focus group study.Setting Three focus groups were conducted at a university in the North West of England.Participants Eight people took part in the focus groups; six older adults with BD, one carer and one friend.Results Participant’s responses clustered into six themes: (1) health-related and age-related changes in later life, (2) the experience of BD in later life, (3) managing and coping with BD in later life, (4) recovery in later life, (5) seeking helping in the future and (6) adapting RfT for older people.Conclusions Participants reported a range of health-related and age-related changes and strategies to manage their BD. Participants held mixed views about using the term ‘recovery’ in later life. Participants were in agreement that certain adaptations were needed for delivering RfT for older adults, based on their experience of living with BD in later life. The data collected as part of the focus groups have led to a number of recommendations for delivering RfT for older adults with BD in a randomised controlled trial (Clinical Trial Registration: ISRCTN13875321).

Objective To explore the attitudes towards implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) deactivation and initiation of deactivation discussions among patients, relatives and clinicians.Design A multiphase qualitative study consisting of in situ hospital ICD clinic observations, and semistructured interviews of clinicians, patients and relatives. Data were analysed using a constant comparative approach.Setting One tertiary and two district general hospitals in England.Participants We completed 38 observations of hospital consultations prior to ICD implantation, and 80 interviews with patients, family members and clinicians between 2013 and 2015. Patients were recruited from preimplantation to postdeactivation. Clinicians included cardiologists, cardiac physiologists, heart failure nurses and palliative care professionals.Results Four key themes were identified from the data: the current status of deactivation discussions; patients’ perceptions of deactivation; who should take responsibility for deactivation discussions and decisions; and timing of deactivation discussions. We found that although patients and doctors recognised the importance of advance care planning, including ICD deactivation at an early stage in the patient journey, this was often not reflected in practice. The most appropriate clinician to take the lead was thought to be dependent on the context, but could include any appropriately trained member of the healthcare team. It was suggested that deactivation should be raised preimplantation and regularly reviewed. Identification of trigger points postimplantation for deactivation discussions may help ensure that these are timely and inappropriate shocks are avoided.Conclusions There is a need for early, ongoing and evolving discussion between ICD recipients and clinicians regarding the eventual need for ICD deactivation. The most appropriate clinician to instigate deactivation discussions is likely to vary between patients and models of care. Reminders at key trigger points, and routine discussion of deactivation at implantation and during advance care planning could prevent distressing experiences for both the patient and their family at the end of life.

Rationale Clinical trials are the gold standard for testing interventions. COVID-19 has further raised their public profile and emphasised the need to deliver better, faster, more efficient trials for patient benefit. Considerable overlap exists between data required for trials and data already collected routinely in electronic healthcare records (EHRs). Opportunities exist to use these in innovative ways to decrease duplication of effort and speed trial recruitment, conduct and follow-up.Approach The National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), Health Data Research UK and Clinical Practice Research Datalink co-organised a national workshop to accelerate the agenda for ‘data-enabled clinical trials’. Showcasing successful examples and imagining future possibilities, the plenary talks, panel discussions, group discussions and case studies covered: design/feasibility; recruitment; conduct/follow-up; collecting benefits/harms; and analysis/interpretation.Reflection Some notable studies have successfully accessed and used EHR to identify potential recruits, support randomised trials, deliver interventions and supplement/replace trial-specific follow-up. Some outcome measures are already reliably collected; others, like safety, need detailed work to meet regulatory reporting requirements. There is a clear need for system interoperability and a ‘route map’ to identify and access the necessary datasets. Researchers running regulatory-facing trials must carefully consider how data quality and integrity would be assessed. An experience-sharing forum could stimulate wider adoption of EHR-based methods in trial design and execution.Discussion EHR offer opportunities to better plan clinical trials, assess patients and capture data more efficiently, reducing research waste and increasing focus on each trial’s specific challenges. The short-term emphasis should be on facilitating patient recruitment and for postmarketing authorisation trials where research-relevant outcome measures are readily collectable. Sharing of case studies is encouraged. The workshop directly informed NIHR’s funding call for ambitious data-enabled trials at scale. There is the opportunity for the UK to build upon existing data science capabilities to identify, recruit and monitor patients in trials at scale.