Search

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of modern glucose-monitoring strategies on glycemic and patient-related outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and recent myocardial infarction (MI) and assess cost effectiveness. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: LIBERATES was a multicenter two-arm randomized trial comparing self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM), also known as flash CGM, in individuals with T2D and recent MI, treated with insulin and/or a sulphonylurea before hospital admission. The primary outcome measure was time in range (TIR) (glucose 3.9–10 mmol/L/day) on days 76–90 post-randomization. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included time in hypoglycemia, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), clinical outcome, quality of life (QOL), and cost effectiveness. RESULTS: Of 141 participants randomly assigned (median age 63 years; interquartile range 53, 70), 73% of whom were men, isCGM was associated with increased TIR by 17 min/day (95% credible interval −105 to +153 min/day), with 59% probability of benefit. Users of isCGM showed lower hypoglycemic exposure (<3.9 mmol/L) at days 76–90 (−80 min/day; 95% CI −118, −43), also evident at days 16–30 (−28 min/day; 95% CI −92, 2). Compared with baseline, HbA1c showed similar reductions of 7 mmol/mol at 3 months in both study arms. Combined glycemic emergencies and mortality occurred in four isCGM and seven SMBG study participants. QOL measures marginally favored isCGM, and the intervention proved to be cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SMBG, isCGM in T2D individuals with MI marginally increases TIR and significantly reduces hypoglycemic exposure while equally improving HbA1c, explaining its cost effectiveness. Studies are required to understand whether these glycemic differences translate into longer-term clinical benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pressure ulcers (PUs) impact on patient's quality of life and are costly for healthcare providers. Heels are a particular concern due to specific risk factors. Relative effectiveness of medical devices, e.g., dressings, off-loading devices, heel cushioning devices, to reduce PU development is unknown. Systematic review of the effectiveness of heel-specific medical devices for the prevention of heel PU (HPU)s. Database searches were performed from inception to June 2021 for RCTs. The primary outcome was incidence of new HPUs. Trials were assessed for risk of bias and data analysed with risk ratios, mean difference or hazard ratios as appropriate. Fifteen RCTs (4724 participants) were identified. Dressings, as constant low pressure (CLP) devices vs standard care: eight trials (very low quality) showed no-significant difference in effectiveness (RR 0.31, 95%CI 0.10 to 1.01). Off-loading devices vs standard care: three trials (low quality), showed significant reduction in development of Category≥1 HPUs (RR 0.20, 95%CI 0.05 to 0.80) two trials (medium quality), showed significant reduction in development of Category≥2 HPUs (RR 0.08, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.67). Comparisons between off-loading devices: two trials (low quality) showed no clear difference in HPU incidence. In a paediatric post-surgical population, one trial of off-loading device and one of a dressing (CLP device), both versus standard care, showed no clear difference in HPU incidence (RR 0.19 95%CI 0.02 to 1.55 and RR 0.89 95%CI 0.56 to 1.42 respectively). Off-loading devices may reduce HPU incidence, from low-quality evidence. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that dressings reduce HPU incidence. • Pressure ulcers (PU) develop & heal differently to the heel compared to other body sites. • This paper reviews the effectiveness of all heel specific devices for the prevention of heel PUs. • Off-loading devices may reduce HPU incidence, but low-quality evidence reduces certainty. • Insufficient evidence of effectiveness for dressings or devices that reduce pressure at the heel. • Further good quality research is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Sexual history does not accurately identify those with extragenital Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), so universal extragenital sampling is recommended. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are expensive. If urogenital, plus rectal and pharyngeal, samples are analyzed, the diagnostic cost is trebled. Pooling samples into 1 NAAT container would cost the same as urogenital samples alone. We compared clinician triple samples analyzed individually with self-taken pooled samples for diagnostic accuracy, and cost, in men who have sex with men (MSM) and females. Methods This was a prospective, convenience sample in United Kingdom sexual health clinic. Randomized order of clinician and self-samples from pharynx, rectum, plus first-catch urine (FCU) in MSM and vulvovaginal swabs (VVS) in females, for NG and CT detection. Results Of 1793 participants (1284 females, 509 MSM), 116 had NG detected (75 urogenital, 83 rectum, 72 pharynx); 276 had CT detected (217 urogenital, 249 rectum, 63 pharynx). There was no difference in sensitivities between clinician triple samples and self-pooled specimens for NG (99.1% and 98.3%), but clinician samples analyzed individually identified 3% more chlamydia infections than pooled (99.3% and 96.0%; P  = .027). However, pooled specimens identified more infections than VVS/FCU alone. Pooled specimens missed 2 NG and 11 CT infections, whereas VVS/FCU missed 41 NG and 58 CT infections. Self-taken pooled specimens were the most cost-effective. Conclusions FCU/VVS testing alone missed many infections. Self-taken pooled samples were as sensitive as clinician triple samples for identifying NG, but clinician samples analyzed individually identified 3% more CT infections than pooled. The extragenital sampling was achievable at no additional diagnostic cost to the FCU/VVS. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02371109. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Urogenital testing misses extragenital Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT). Extragenital self-sampling is frequently undertaken despite no robust randomized, controlled trial evidence of efficacy. We compared clinician-taken rectal and pharyngeal samples with self-taken samples for diagnostic accuracy and cost in men who have sex with men (MSM) and in females. Methods This was a prospective convenience sample from a UK sexual health clinic. We randomized the order of clinician- and self-taken samples from the pharynx and rectum, plus first catch urine (MSM) and vulvovaginal swabs (females), for NG/CT detection. Results Of 1793 participants (1284 females, 509 MSM), 116 had NG detected (75 urogenital, 83 rectum, 72 pharynx); 9.4% infected females and 67.3% MSM were urogenital-negative. A total of 276 had CT detected (217 urogenital, 249 rectum, 63 pharynx); 13.1% infected females and 71.8% MSM were urogenital-negative. Sexual history did not identify those with rectal infections. There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy between clinician- and self-taken samples from the rectum or pharynx. Clinicians took swabs more quickly than participants, so costs were lower. However, in asymptomatic people, nonqualified clinicians would oversee self-swabbing making these costs lower. Conclusions There was no difference in the diagnostic accuracy of clinician-taken compared with self-taken extragenital samples. Sexual history did not identify those with rectal infections, so individuals should have extragenital clinician- or self-taken samples. Clinician-taken swabs cost less than self-taken swabs; however, in asymptomatic people or those who perform home testing, the costs would be lower than for clinician-taken swabs. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02371109. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In primary care, multiple priorities and system pressures make closing the gap between evidence and practice challenging. Most implementation studies focus on single conditions, limiting generalisability. We compared an adaptable implementation package against an implementation control and assessed effects on adherence to four different evidence-based quality indicators.Methods and Findings: We undertook two parallel, pragmatic cluster-randomised trials using balanced incomplete block designs in general practices in West Yorkshire, England. We used 'opt-out' recruitment, and we randomly assigned practices that did not opt out to an implementation package targeting either diabetes control or risky prescribing (Trial 1); or blood pressure (BP) control or anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation (AF) (Trial 2). Within trials, each arm acted as the implementation control comparison for the other targeted indicator. For example, practices assigned to the diabetes control package acted as the comparison for practices assigned to the risky prescribing package. The implementation package embedded behaviour change techniques within audit and feedback, educational outreach, and computerised support, with content tailored to each indicator. Respective patient-level primary endpoints at 11 months comprised the following: achievement of all recommended levels of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), BP, and cholesterol; risky prescribing levels; achievement of recommended BP; and anticoagulation prescribing. Between February and March 2015, we recruited 144 general practices collectively serving over 1 million patients. We stratified computer-generated randomisation by area, list size, and pre-intervention outcome achievement. In April 2015, we randomised 80 practices to Trial 1 (40 per arm) and 64 to Trial 2 (32 per arm). Practices and trial personnel were not blind to allocation. Two practices were lost to follow-up but provided some outcome data. We analysed the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, adjusted for potential confounders at patient level (sex, age) and practice level (list size, locality, pre-intervention achievement against primary outcomes, total quality scores, and levels of patient co-morbidity), and analysed cost-effectiveness. The implementation package reduced risky prescribing (odds ratio [OR] 0.82; 97.5% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.99, p = 0.017) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £1,359 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), but there was insufficient evidence of effect on other primary endpoints (diabetes control OR 1.03, 97.5% CI 0.89-1.18, p = 0.693; BP control OR 1.05, 97.5% CI 0.96-1.16, p = 0.215; anticoagulation prescribing OR 0.90, 97.5% CI 0.75-1.09, p = 0.214). No statistically significant effects were observed in any secondary outcome except for reduced co-prescription of aspirin and clopidogrel without gastro-protection in patients aged 65 and over (adjusted OR 0.62; 97.5% CI 0.39-0.99; p = 0.021). Main study limitations concern our inability to make any inferences about the relative effects of individual intervention components, given the multifaceted nature of the implementation package, and that the composite endpoint for diabetes control may have been too challenging to achieve.Conclusions: In this study, we observed that a multifaceted implementation package was clinically and cost-effective for targeting prescribing behaviours within the control of clinicians but not for more complex behaviours that also required patient engagement.Trial Registration: The study is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN91989345). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Retraction plays a vital role in optimizing the field of vision in minimal-access surgery. As such, a number of devices have been marketed to aid the surgeon in laparoscopic retraction. This systematic review explores the advantages and disadvantages of the different instruments in order to aid surgeons and their institutions in selecting the appropriate device. Primary outcome measures include operation time, length of stay, use of staff, patient morbidity, ease of use, conversion rates to open surgery, and cost.Methods: Systematic literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Current Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The search strategy focused on studies testing a retraction device. The selection process was based on a predefined set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were then extracted and analyzed.Results: Out of 1360 papers initially retrieved, 12 articles were selected for data extraction and analysis. A total of 10 instruments or techniques were tested. Devices included the Nathanson's liver retractor, liver suspension tape, the V-List technique, a silicone disk with or without a snake retractor, the Endoloop, the Endograb, a magnetic retractor, the VaroLift, a laparoscope holder, and a retraction sponge. None of the instruments reported were associated with increased morbidity. No studies found increased rates of conversion to open surgery. All articles reported that the tested instruments might spare the use of an assistant during the procedure. It was not possible to determine the impact on length of stay or operation time.Conclusions: Each analyzed device facilitates retraction, providing a good field of view while allowing reduced staff numbers and minimal patient morbidity. Due to economic and environmental advantages, reusable devices may be preferable to disposable instruments, although the choice must be primarily based on clinical judgement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To estimate the expenditure on dental care of Mexican households, analyze their trends, and determine the factors associated with the decision to spend and the amount of money spent in 2000, 2002, and 2004. Using the National Survey of Household Income and Expenditure for 2000, 2002, and 2004, the national dental health care expenditure was calculated. To facilitate comparability across years, all expenditure was converted to pesos of 2004, using the National Consumer Price Index (11.201 pesos per USD). Proportion of households incurring catastrophic expenditures was also estimated. To evaluate the association between environmental, household, and individual characteristics with the amount of dental health care expenditure, the Heckman regression model was used to control for self-selection bias. More than 6,467 million pesos (MP) were spent in 2000 (8.5 percent of all households had some expenditure), over 3,925 MP in 2002 (4 percent households), and above 5,136 MP in 2004 (5 percent households), with an average expenditure of $806, $1,000, and $987 pesos, respectively. Prevalence of catastrophic expenditure because of dental health care was 0.8 percent in 2000 compared to 0.01 and 1.8 percent in 2002 and 2004, respectively. The Heckman model showed that municipal development, stratum, and age of the head of household significantly influenced the amount spent on dental care in all 3 years. Household capacity to pay and wealth index had a positive and statistically significant association in the 3 years with the preceding decision to spend. Variables associated with the amount of expenditure and the decision of spending support the existence of inequities in health care financing in the Mexican population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AimMethodsDiscussionClinical Trials RegistrationRecovery after surgery for colorectal cancer is a complex process, involving numerous physiological, emotional, social and economic challenges. Good information is a key factor for enabling patients to recover well, but there is a paucity of evidence to guide how this should be done. A new information intervention (Recover Together) comprising a booklet, an online video and an inpatient goal board has been developed. This study explores its feasibility, as well as the feasibility of key study methods, during its first use in the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS).This is a mixed methods, multi‐centre, feasibility study of a complex intervention. A total of 105 participants undergoing oncological colorectal surgery will be recruited across three to four study sites in the UK. Participants will receive each component of the Recover Together intervention at defined timepoints before and during hospital admission. A series of patient‐centred outcome instruments will be administered in hospital and during follow‐up at 30 days and 6 months. Outcomes of feasibility will comprise the time taken to establish the intervention at participating sites, assessments of intervention fidelity and acceptability, as well as return rates of key clinical outcome instruments. The mixed methods design will comprise interviews and focus groups with patients and health professionals, non‐participant observation in ward areas and clinics, user‐specific video analytics and daily photographs of the goal boards.The findings of this study will provide a feasibility assessment of the Recover Together intervention when used for the first time in NHS practice. If shown to be feasible, this will guide the development of a future definitive study to explore the clinical and cost effectiveness of the Recover Together intervention to improve recovery after surgery.ISRCTN62430915. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A diverse genetic toolkit is critical for understanding bacterial physiology and genotype-phenotype relationships. Inducible promoter systems are an integral part of this toolkit. In Burkholderia and related species, the L-rhamnose-inducible promoter is among the first choices due to its tight control and the lack of viable alternatives. To improve upon its maximum activity and dynamic range, we explored the effect of promoter system modifications in Burkholderia cenocepacia with a LacZ-based reporter. By combining the bacteriophage T7 gene 10 stem-loop and engineered rhaI transcription factor-binding sites, we obtained a rhamnose-inducible system with a 6.5-fold and 3.0-fold increases in maximum activity and dynamic range, respectively, compared to the native promoter. We then added the modified promoter system to pSCrhaB2 and pSC201, common genetic tools used for plasmidbased and chromosome-based gene expression, respectively, in Burkholderia, creating pSCrhaB2plus and pSC201plus. We demonstrated the utility of pSCrhaB2plus for gene expression in B. thailandensis, B. multivorans, and B. vietnamiensis and used pSC201plus to control highly expressed essential genes from the chromosome of B. cenocepacia. The utility of the modified system was demonstrated as we recovered viable mutants to control ftsZ, rpoBC, and rpsF, whereas the unmodified promoter was unable to control rpsF. The modified expression system allowed control of an essential gene depletion phenotype at lower levels of L-rhamnose, the inducer. pSCRhaB2plus and pSC201plus are expected to be valuable additions to the genetic toolkit for Burkholderia and related species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Posterior cervical foraminotomy and anterior cervical discectomy are routinely used operations to treat cervical brachialgia, although definitive evidence supporting superiority of either is lacking., Objective: The primary objective was to investigate whether or not posterior cervical foraminotomy is superior to anterior cervical discectomy in improving clinical outcome., Design: This was a Phase III, unblinded, prospective, United Kingdom multicentre, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled superiority trial comparing posterior cervical foraminotomy with anterior cervical discectomy. A rapid qualitative study was conducted during the close-down phase, involving remote semistructured interviews with trial participants and health-care professionals., Setting: National Health Service trusts., Participants: Patients with symptomatic unilateral cervical brachialgia for at least 6 weeks., Interventions: Participants were randomised to receive posterior cervical foraminotomy or anterior cervical discectomy. Allocation was not blinded to participants, medical staff or trial staff. Health-care use from providing the initial surgical intervention to hospital discharge was measured and valued using national cost data., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was clinical outcome, as measured by patient-reported Neck Disability Index score 52 weeks post operation. Secondary outcome measures included complications, reoperations and restricted American Spinal Injury Association score over 6 weeks post operation, and patient-reported Eating Assessment Tool-10 items, Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale, Voice Handicap Index-10 items, PainDETECT and Numerical Rating Scales for neck and upper-limb pain over 52 weeks post operation., Results: The target recruitment was 252 participants. Owing to slow accrual, the trial closed after randomising 23 participants from 11 hospitals. The qualitative substudy found that there was support and enthusiasm for the posterior cervical FORaminotomy Versus Anterior cervical Discectomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia trial and randomised clinical trials in this area. However, clinical equipoise appears to have been an issue for sites and individual surgeons. Randomisation on the day of surgery and processes for screening and approaching participants were also crucial factors in some centres. The median Neck Disability Index scores at baseline (pre surgery) and at 52 weeks was 44.0 (interquartile range 36.0-62.0 weeks) and 25.3 weeks (interquartile range 20.0-42.0 weeks), respectively, in the posterior cervical foraminotomy group ( n = 14), and 35.6 weeks (interquartile range 34.0-44.0 weeks) and 45.0 weeks (interquartile range 20.0-57.0 weeks), respectively, in the anterior cervical discectomy group ( n = 9). Scores appeared to reduce (i.e. improve) in the posterior cervical foraminotomy group, but not in the anterior cervical discectomy group. The median Eating Assessment Tool-10 items score for swallowing was higher (worse) after anterior cervical discectomy (13.5) than after posterior cervical foraminotomy (0) on day 1, but not at other time points, whereas the median Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale score for globus was higher (worse) after anterior cervical discectomy (15, 7, 6, 6, 2, 2.5) than after posterior cervical foraminotomy (3, 0, 0, 0.5, 0, 0) at all postoperative time points. Five postoperative complications occurred within 6 weeks of surgery, all after anterior cervical discectomy. Neck pain was more severe on day 1 following posterior cervical foraminotomy (Numerical Rating Scale - Neck Pain score 8.5) than at the same time point after anterior cervical discectomy (Numerical Rating Scale - Neck Pain score 7.0). The median health-care costs of providing initial surgical intervention were £2610 for posterior cervical foraminotomy and £4411 for anterior cervical discectomy., Conclusions: The data suggest that posterior cervical foraminotomy is associated with better outcomes, fewer complications and lower costs, but the trial recruited slowly and closed early. Consequently, the trial is underpowered and definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. Recruitment was impaired by lack of individual equipoise and by concern about randomising on the day of surgery. A large prospective multicentre trial comparing anterior cervical discectomy and posterior cervical foraminotomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia is still required., Trial Registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN10133661., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 27, No. 21. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Introduction: Hand eczema (HE) is one of the most common skin disorders and an important cause for morbidity and occupational disability. The 1-year prevalence of HE is estimated to be up to 10% and it is estimated that 5%-7% of those develop severe chronic HE. However, current clinical evidence is not compelling enough to guide clinical practice. In a survey among 194 UK dermatologists the most frequent first choice approaches were psoralen combined with ultraviolet A (UVA) treatment (PUVA), oral steroids and alitretinoin (AL). When asked which strategy was most efficient for long-term outcome 20% of clinicians indicated they did not know; 43% of clinicians reported AL and 30% reported PUVA., Methods and Analysis: ALPHA is a multicentre, open, prospective, two-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial comparing PUVA and AL with a planned sample size re-estimation. Between 500 and 780 participants will be randomised on a 1:1 basis. The physician's global assessment (PGA) will direct treatment after randomisation, non-responders will be treated according to usual clinical practice; providing valuable pilot data on second line therapeutic approaches to inform future trials.Assessments will be conducted up to 52 weeks post randomisation. The primary outcome measure is the Hand Eczema Severity Index at 12 weeks. Secondary outcome measures include modified Total Lesion Symptom Score, PGA, time to relapse, patient reported outcome measures and DNA extraction and assessment of genetic variants. A substudy on molecular inflammatory mediators will provide information on subgroup specific treatment responses. Photographs will be taken and HE severity assessed by a central review panel., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained from Leeds West Research Ethics Committee (14/YH/1259).Trial results will be disseminated at relevant clinical conferences and societies, published in peer-reviewed journals and through relevant patient groups., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN80206075., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None: MW, CG, SB, ILS, AV-P, LS, AB, PH, FC, CF, JN, CR, AB, CHS, JTL, MG and ST is a Health economist expert on the NIHR PGfAR, the H2020 mental health in the workplace (2019), the H2020 Innovation in health technology appraisal (2018) and the Belgian FNRS. commission of doctoral FRIA scholarship., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Pressure ulcers (PUs) are a burden to patients, carers and health-care providers. Specialist mattresses minimise the intensity and duration of pressure on vulnerable skin sites in at-risk patients., Primary Objective: Time to developing a new PU of category ≥ 2 in patients using an alternating pressure mattress (APM) compared with a high-specification foam mattress (HSFM)., Design: A multicentre, Phase III, open, prospective, planned as an adaptive double-triangular group sequential, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with an a priori sample size of 2954 participants. Randomisation used minimisation (incorporating a random element)., Setting: The trial was set in 42 secondary and community inpatient facilities in the UK., Participants: Adult inpatients with evidence of acute illness and at a high risk of PU development., Interventions and Follow-Up: APM or HSFM - the treatment phase lasted a maximum of 60 days; the final 30 days were post-treatment follow-up., Main Outcome Measures: Time to event., Results: From August 2013 to November 2016, 2029 participants were randomised to receive either APM ( n  = 1016) or HSFM ( n  = 1013). Primary end point - 30-day final follow-up: of the 2029 participants in the intention-to-treat population, 160 (7.9%) developed a new PU of category ≥ 2. There was insufficient evidence of a difference between groups for time to new PU of category ≥ 2 [Fine and Gray model HR 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 1.04; exact p -value of 0.0890 and 2% absolute difference]. Treatment phase sensitivity analysis: 132 (6.5%) participants developed a new PU of category ≥ 2 between randomisation and end of treatment phase. There was a statistically significant difference in the treatment phase time-to-event sensitivity analysis (Fine and Gray model HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.93; p  = 0.0176 and 2.6% absolute difference). Secondary end points - 30-day final follow-up: new PUs of category ≥ 1 developed in 350 (17.2%) participants, with no evidence of a difference between mattress groups in time to PU development, (Fine and Gray model HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.02; p -value = 0.0733 and absolute difference 3.1%). New PUs of category ≥ 3 developed in 32 (1.6%) participants with insufficient evidence of a difference between mattress groups in time to PU development (Fine and Gray model HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.62; p  = 0.5530 and absolute difference 0.4%). Of the 145 pre-existing PUs of category 2, 89 (61.4%) healed - there was insufficient evidence of a difference in time to healing (Fine and Gray model HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.68; p  = 0.6122 and absolute difference 2.9%). Health economics - the within-trial and long-term analysis showed APM to be cost-effective compared with HSFM; however, the difference in costs models are small and the quality-adjusted life-year gains are very small. There were no safety concerns. Blinded photography substudy - the reliability of central blinded review compared with clinical assessment for PUs of category ≥ 2 was 'very good' (kappa statistic 0.82, prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa 0.82). Quality-of-life substudy - the Pressure Ulcer Quality of Life - Prevention (PU-QoL-P) instrument meets the established criteria for reliability, construct validity and responsiveness., Limitations: A lower than anticipated event rate., Conclusions: In acutely ill inpatients who are bedfast/chairfast and/or have a category 1 PU and/or localised skin pain, APMs confer a small treatment phase benefit that is diminished over time. Overall, the APM patient compliance, very low PU incidence rate observed and small differences between mattresses indicate the need for improved indicators for targeting of APMs and individualised decision-making. Decisions should take into account skin status, patient preferences (movement ability and rehabilitation needs) and the presence of factors that may be potentially modifiable through APM allocation, including being completely immobile, having nutritional deficits, lacking capacity and/or having altered skin/category 1 PU., Future Work: Explore the relationship between mental capacity, levels of independent movement, repositioning and PU development. Explore 'what works for whom and in what circumstances'., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN01151335., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 23, No. 52. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information., Competing Interests: Christopher McCabe has received grant funding from the University of Alberta and Alberta Innovates Health Solutions (Edmonton, AB, Canada). Julia Brown is Deputy Director of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Clinical Evaluation and Trials Board and has received grant funding for the following studies: the NIHR eRAPID Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR) trial, the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) GLiSten trial, the NIHR HTA LAVA trial (liver resection surgery versus thermal ablation for colorectal liver metastases), the NIHR EME IntAct (Intraoperative flourescence angiography to prevent Anastomotic leak in rectal cancer surgery), NIHR Research for Patient Benefit LACE (Life After Cancer Epidemiology) trial, the NIHR EME ROLARR (RObotic vs. LAparoscopic Resection for Rectal cancer) trial, the NIHR HTA SaFarI (Sacral nerve stimulation versus the FENIX TM magnetic sphincter augmentation for faecal incontinence: a Randomised Investigation and the NIHR StamINA Programme Development Grant trial. Claire Hulme and E Andrea Nelson have been members of the NIHR HTA Commissioning Board and E Andrea Nelson has received funding for the NIHR HTA CODIFI (Concordance in Diabetic Foot Ulcer Infection) study. Elizabeth McGinnis has received funding for NIHR Health Service and Delivery Research (HSDR) Information Systems, Monitoring and Managing from Ward to Board and the NIHR PGfAR SWHSI (Surgical Wounds Healing by Secondary Intention) trial. Isabelle L Smith and Susanne Coleman have received a NIHR personal fellowship. Benjamin Thorpe has received a NIHR research methods fellowship. Delia Muir has received a Wellcome Trust Engagement Fellowship. Rachael Gilberts has received funding for the NIHR HTA ALPHA (ALitretinoin versus PUVA in severe chronic HAnd eczema) and MIDFUT (Multiple Interventions for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Treatment) trials. Nikki Stubbs has received funding for NIHR PGfAR SWHSI and NIHR HTA AMBER (Abdominal Massage for Bowel Dysfunction Effectiveness Research) trial. Jane Nixon has received funding for NIHR HTA MIDFUT, CODIFI and ALPHA. Sarah Brown has received funding for NIHR HTA ALPHA, MIDFUT, FORVAD (Clinical and cost-effectiveness of posterior cervical FORaminotomy Versus Anterior cervical Discectomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia: a multicentre, Phase III, randomised controlled trial), the NIHR PGfAR PROMPT (early detection to improve outcome in patients with undiagnosed psoriatic arthritis), ARUK (Arthritis Research UK) SALRISE (SALivary electro-stimulation for the treatment of dry mouth in patients with Sjögren’s syndrome: a multicentRe randomISEd sham-controlled double-blind study).