Search

Background: Evidence on the effectiveness of multidomain lifestyle interventions to prevent cognitive decline in older people without dementia is mixed. Embedded in the World-Wide FINGERS initiative, FINGER-NL aims to investigate the effectiveness of a 2-year multidomain lifestyle intervention on cognitive functioning in older Dutch at risk individuals. Methods: Multi-center, randomized, controlled, multidomain lifestyle intervention trial with a duration of 24 months. 1210 adults between 60–79 years old with presence of ≥ 2 modifiable risk factors and ≥ 1 non-modifiable risk factor for cognitive decline were recruited between January 2022 and May 2023 via the Dutch Brain Research Registry and across five study sites in the Netherlands. Participants were randomized to either a high-intensity or a low-intensity intervention group. The multidomain intervention comprises a combination of 7 lifestyle components (physical activity, cognitive training, cardiovascular risk factor management, nutritional counseling, sleep counseling, stress management, and social activities) and 1 nutritional product (Souvenaid®) that could help maintain cognitive functioning. The high-intensity intervention group receives a personalized, supervised and hybrid intervention consisting of group meetings (on-site and online) and individual sessions guided by a trained lifestyle coach, and access to a digital intervention platform that provides custom-made training materials and selected lifestyle apps. The low-intensity intervention group receives bi-monthly online lifestyle-related health advice via the digital intervention platform. Primary outcome is 2-year change on a cognitive composite score covering processing speed, executive function, and memory. Results: Within 17 months, participant recruitment has been successfully completed (N = 1210; mean age: 67.7 years (SD: 4.6); 64% female). Modifiable risk factors commonly present at baseline were physical inactivity (89%), low mental/cognitive activity (50%), low social engagement (39%), hypertension (39%) and high alcohol consumption (39%). The mean body mass index of participants was 28.3 (SD: 4.2) and the total serum cholesterol was 5.4 mmol/L (SD: 1.2). Conclusions: Baseline lifestyle and clinical measurements showed successful recruitment of participants with sufficient potential for prevention. Results of FINGER-NL will provide further insight into the efficacy of a multidomain lifestyle intervention to prevent cognitive decline in older adults. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT05256199)/2022–01-11. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research into the neurobiological underpinnings of learning and memory has demonstrated the cognitive-enhancing effects associated with diverse classes of phosphodiesterase (PDE) inhibitors. Specific PDE inhibitors have been identified to improve neuronal communication through selective inhibition of PDE activity. Roflumilast, a PDE4 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in enhancing episodic memory in healthy adults and elderly participants with pronounced memory impairment, indicative of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). In alignment with these findings, the present protocol aims to provide a proof of concept phase II of the potential of roflumilast to aid patients diagnosed with (a)MCI or mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. Methods: The study will be conducted according to a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled, between-subjects design. Participants with (a)MCI and mild AD dementia will be recruited through the Memory Clinic at the Maastricht University Medical Centre + (MUMC +) in Maastricht, the Netherlands, alongside outreach through regional hospitals, and social media. The study will have three arms: placebo, 50 μg roflumilast, and 100 μg roflumilast, with a treatment duration of 24 weeks. The primary outcome measure will focus on the assessment of episodic memory, as evaluated through participants' performance on the 15-word Verbal Learning Task (VLT). Our secondary objectives are multifaceted, including an exploration of various cognitive domains. In addition, insights into the well-being and daily functioning of participants will be investigated through interviews with both the participants and their (informal) caregivers, we are interested in the well-being and daily functioning of the participants. Discussion: The outcomes of the present study aim to elucidate the significance of the PDE4 inhibition mechanism as a prospective therapeutic target for enhancing cognitive function in individuals with (a)MCI and mild AD dementia. Identifying positive effects within these patient cohorts could extend the relevance of this treatment to encompass a broader spectrum of neurological disorders. Trial registration: The Medical Ethics Committee of MUMC + granted ethics approval for the 4th version of the protocol on September 10th, 2020. The trial was registered at the European Drug Regulatory Affairs Clinical Trials (EudraCT) registered on the 19th of December 2019 (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2019-004959-36/NL) and ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04658654, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04658654?intr=roflumilast&cond=mci&rank=1) on the 8th of December 2020. The Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO) granted approval on the 30th of September 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nowadays, large benign lateral spreading lesions (LSLs) and sessile polyps in the colorectum are mostly resected by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). A major drawback of EMR is the polyp recurrence rate of up to 20%. Snare tip soft coagulation (STSC) is considered an effective technique to reduce recurrence rates. However, clinical trials on STSC have mainly been conducted in expert referral centers. In these studies, polyp recurrence was assessed optically, and additional adjunctive techniques were excluded. In the current trial, we will evaluate the efficacy and safety of STSC in daily practice, by allowing adjunctive techniques during EMR and the use of both optical and histological polyp recurrence to assess recurrences during follow-up. Methods: The RESPECT study is a multicenter, parallel-group, international single blinded randomized controlled superiority trial performed in the Netherlands and Germany. A total of 306 patients undergoing piecemeal EMR for LSLs or sessile colorectal polyps sized 20–60 mm will be randomized during the procedure after endoscopic complete polyp resection to the intervention or control group. Post-EMR defects allocated to the intervention group will be treated with thermal ablation with STSC of the entire resection margin. Primary outcome will be polyp recurrence by optical and histological confirmation at the first surveillance colonoscopy after 6 months. Secondary outcomes include technical success and complication rates. Discussion: The RESPECT study will evaluate if STSC is effective in reducing recurrence rates after piecemeal EMR of large colorectal lesions in daily clinical practice performed by expert and non-expert endoscopists. Moreover, endoscopists will be allowed to use adjunctive techniques to remove remaining adenomatous tissue during the procedure. Finally, adenomatous polyp recurrence during follow-up will be defined by histologic identification. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05121805. Registered on 16 November 2021. Start recruitment: 17 March 2022. Planned completion of recruitment: 31 April 2025. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neuroimaging studies suggest an association between apathy after deep brain stimulation (DBS) and stimulation of the ventral part of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) due to the associative fibers connected to the non-motor limbic circuits that are involved in emotion regulation and motivation. We have previously described three patients with severe apathy that could be fully treated after switching stimulation from a ventral electrode contact point to a more dorsal contact point. Objectives: To determine whether more dorsal stimulation of the STN decreases apathy compared to standard care in a multicenter randomized controlled trial with a crossover design. Methods: We will include 26 patients with a Starkstein Apathy Scale (SAS) score of 14 or more after subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS) for refractory Parkinson's disease. This is a multicenter trial conducted in two teaching hospitals and one university medical center in the Netherlands after at least 3 months of STN DBS. Our intervention will consist of 1 month of unilateral dorsal STN stimulation compared to treatment as usual. The primary outcome is a change in SAS score following 1 month of DBS on the original contact compared to the SAS score following 1 month of DBS on the more dorsal contact. Secondary outcomes are symptom changes on the Movement Disorders Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale motor part III, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, 39-item Parkinson's disease questionnaire, Parkinson's disease impulsive-compulsive disorders questionnaire, changes in levodopa-equivalent daily dosage, apathy rated by the caregiver, and burden and quality of life of the caregiver. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NL8279. Registered on January 10, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected the mental health of international migrant workers (IMWs). IMWs experience multiple barriers to accessing mental health care. Two scalable interventions developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) were adapted to address some of these barriers: Doing What Matters in times of stress (DWM), a guided self-help web application, and Problem Management Plus (PM +), a brief facilitator-led program to enhance coping skills. This study examines whether DWM and PM + remotely delivered as a stepped-care programme (DWM/PM +) is effective and cost-effective in reducing psychological distress, among Polish migrant workers with psychological distress living in the Netherlands. Methods: The stepped-care DWM/PM + intervention will be tested in a two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial (RCT) among adult Polish migrant workers with self-reported psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale; K10 > 15.9). Participants (n = 212) will be randomized into either the intervention group that receives DWM/PM + with psychological first aid (PFA) and care-as-usual (enhanced care-as-usual or eCAU), or into the control group that receives PFA and eCAU-only (1:1 allocation ratio). Baseline, 1-week post-DWM (week 7), 1-week post-PM + (week 13), and follow-up (week 21) self-reported assessments will be conducted. The primary outcome is psychological distress, assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS). Secondary outcomes are self-reported symptoms of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), resilience, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. In a process evaluation, stakeholders' views on barriers and facilitators to the implementation of DWM/PM + will be evaluated. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is one of the first RCTs that combines two scalable, psychosocial WHO interventions into a stepped-care programme for migrant populations. If proven to be effective, this may bridge the mental health treatment gap IMWs experience. Trial registration: Dutch trial register NL9630, 20/07/2021, https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/27052 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Apnoea of prematurity (AOP) is one of the most common diagnoses among preterm infants. AOP often leads to hypoxemia and bradycardia which are associated with an increased risk of death or disability. In addition to caffeine therapy and non-invasive respiratory support, doxapram might be used to reduce hypoxemic episodes and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation in preterm infants, thereby possibly improving their long-term outcome. However, high-quality trials on doxapram are lacking. The DOXA-trial therefore aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of doxapram compared to placebo in reducing the composite outcome of death or severe disability at 18 to 24 months corrected age. Methods: The DOXA-trial is a double blinded, multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted in the Netherlands, Belgium and Canada. A total of 396 preterm infants with a gestational age below 29 weeks, suffering from AOP unresponsive to non-invasive respiratory support and caffeine will be randomized to receive doxapram therapy or placebo. The primary outcome is death or severe disability, defined as cognitive delay, cerebral palsy, severe hearing loss, or bilateral blindness, at 18–24 months corrected age. Secondary outcomes are short-term neonatal morbidity, including duration of mechanical ventilation, bronchopulmonary dysplasia and necrotising enterocolitis, hospital mortality, adverse effects, pharmacokinetics and cost-effectiveness. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat principle. Discussion: Doxapram has the potential to improve neonatal outcomes by improving respiration, but the safety concerns need to be weighed against the potential risks of invasive mechanical ventilation. It is unknown if the use of doxapram improves the long-term outcome. This forms the clinical equipoise of the current trial. This international, multicentre trial will provide the needed high-quality evidence on the efficacy and safety of doxapram in the treatment of AOP in preterm infants. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04430790 and EUDRACT 2019-003666-41. Prospectively registered on respectively June and January 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

STUDY QUESTION Does a short interval (i.e. ≤90 min), compared to a long interval (i.e. ≥180 min), between semen collection and intrauterine insemination (IUI) increase the cumulative chance of an ongoing pregnancy after six IUI cycles? SUMMARY ANSWER A long interval between semen collection and IUI resulted in a borderline significant improvement in cumulative ongoing pregnancies and a statistically significant shorter time to pregnancy. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Retrospective studies assessing the effect of the time interval between semen collection and IUI on pregnancy outcomes have shown inconclusive results. Some studies have indicated a beneficial effect of a short interval between semen collection and IUI on IUI outcomes, while others have not found any differences. To date, no prospective trials have been published on this subject. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION The study was performed as a non-blinded, single-center RCT with 297 couples undergoing IUI treatment in a natural or stimulated cycle. The study was conducted between February 2012 and December 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility and an indication for IUI were randomly assigned for up to six IUI cycles into either the control group (long interval, i.e. 180 min or more between semen collection and insemination) or the study group (short interval, i.e. insemination as soon as possible after semen processing and within 90 min of semen collection). The study was carried out in an academic hospital-based IVF center in the Netherlands. The primary endpoint of the study was ongoing pregnancy rate per couple, defined as a viable intrauterine pregnancy at 10 weeks after insemination. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In the short interval group, 142 couples were analyzed versus 138 couples in the long interval group. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the long interval group (71/138; 51.4%) compared to that in the short interval group (56/142; 39.4%; relative risks 0.77; 95% CI 0.59–0.99; P  = 0.044). The time to pregnancy was significantly shorter in the long interval group (log-rank test, P  = 0.012). A Cox regression analysis showed similar results (adjusted hazard ratio 1.528, 95% CI 1.074–2.174, P  = 0.019). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Limitations of our study are the non-blinded design, the long inclusion and follow-up period of nearly seven years and the large number of protocol violations, especially because they predominantly occurred in the short interval group. The non-significant results in the per-protocol (PP) analyses and the weaknesses of the study should be taken into account in the assessment of the borderline significance of the results in the ITT analyses. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Because it is not necessary to perform the IUI immediately after semen processing, there can be more time available to choose the optimum work-flow and clinic occupancy. Clinics and laboratories should find their optimal timing of insemination, considering the time between human chorionic gonadotropin injection and insemination in relation to the sperm preparation techniques used as well as the storage time and conditions until insemination. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) There were no external funding and no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Dutch trial registry, trial registration number NTR3144. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 14 November 2011. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLLMENT 5 February 2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A healthy lifestyle is indispensable for the prevention of noncommunicable diseases. However, lifestyle medicine is hampered by time constraints and competing priorities of treating physicians. A dedicated lifestyle front office (LFO) in secondary/tertiary care may provide an important contribution to optimize patient-centred lifestyle care and connect to lifestyle initiatives from the community. The LOFIT study aims to gain insight into the (cost-)effectiveness of the LFO. Methods: Two parallel pragmatic randomized controlled trials will be conducted for (cardio)vascular disorders (i.e. (at risk of) (cardio)vascular disease, diabetes) and musculoskeletal disorders (i.e. osteoarthritis, hip or knee prosthesis). Patients from three outpatient clinics in the Netherlands will be invited to participate in the study. Inclusion criteria are body mass index (BMI) ≥25 (kg/m2) and/or smoking. Participants will be randomly allocated to either the intervention group or a usual care control group. In total, we aim to include 552 patients, 276 in each trial divided over both treatment arms. Patients allocated to the intervention group will participate in a face-to-face motivational interviewing (MI) coaching session with a so-called lifestyle broker. The patient will be supported and guided towards suitable community-based lifestyle initiatives. A network communication platform will be used to communicate between the lifestyle broker, patient, referred community-based lifestyle initiative and/or other relevant stakeholders (e.g. general practitioner). The primary outcome measure is the adapted Fuster-BEWAT, a composite health risk and lifestyle score consisting of resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, objectively measured physical activity and sitting time, BMI, fruit and vegetable consumption and smoking behaviour. Secondary outcomes include cardiometabolic markers, anthropometrics, health behaviours, psychological factors, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), cost-effectiveness measures and a mixed-method process evaluation. Data collection will be conducted at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up. Discussion: This study will gain insight into the (cost-)effectiveness of a novel care model in which patients under treatment in secondary or tertiary care are referred to community-based lifestyle initiatives to change their lifestyle. Trial registration: ISRCTN ISRCTN13046877. Registered 21 April 2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Currently, the standard therapy for autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) consists of a combination of prednisolone and azathioprine. However, 15% of patients are intolerant to azathioprine which necessitates cessation of azathioprine or changes in therapy. In addition, not all patients achieve complete biochemical response (CR). Uncontrolled data indicate that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) can induce CR in a majority of patients. Better understanding of first-line treatment and robust evidence from randomised clinical trials are needed. The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of MMF as compared to azathioprine, both combined with prednisolone, as induction therapy in a randomised controlled trial in patients with treatment-naive AIH. Methods: CAMARO is a randomised (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicentre superiority trial. All patients with AIH are screened for eligibility. Seventy adult patients with AIH from fourteen centres in the Netherlands and Belgium will be randomised to receive MMF or azathioprine. Both treatment arms will start with prednisolone as induction therapy. The primary outcome is biochemical remission, defined as serum levels of alanine aminotransferase and immunoglobulin G below the upper limit of normal. Secondary outcomes include safety and tolerability of MMF and azathioprine, time to remission, changes in Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-score, adverse events, and aspects of quality of life. The study period will last for 24 weeks. Discussion: The CAMARO trial investigates whether treatment with MMF and prednisolone increases the proportion of patients in remission compared with azathioprine and prednisolone as the current standard treatment strategy. In addition, we reflect on the challenges of conducting a randomized trial in rare diseases. Trial registration: EudraCT 2016-001038-91. Prospectively registered on 18 April 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Because of the expected increase in the number of people with dementia, and the associated social and economic costs, there is an urgent need to develop effective and cost-effective care for people with dementia and their caregivers. The intervention proposed here combines two approaches to caregiver support that have shown to be effective in empowering caregivers, i.e., multiple components for caregiver support and actively engaging caregivers to involve the person with dementia in activities at home. The aim is to investigate whether the intervention is effective in improving quality of life in the caregiver and the person with dementia. A further aim will be to investigate whether this intervention can improve caregivers' feeling of competence, experience of caregiving, and mood. Methods: The study design is a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with cost-effectiveness analysis. The study participants are informal caregivers and home-living persons with dementia for whom they care, recruited in various regions in the Netherlands. The trial will compare outcomes in two groups of participants: 85 dyads who receive the intervention, and 85 dyads who receive care as usual. The intervention is a caregiver support training that is manual based and consists of 6 group sessions over 2 months. Training takes place in small groups of caregivers led by a health care professional presented at dementia day care centres. Randomisation occurs at the level of the day care centre. Participants are assessed on the outcome measures at baseline, prior to the intervention, and at 3 and 6 months after baseline. Discussion: The study will provide insight into effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an intervention that has not previously been evaluated or implemented in the Netherlands. The intervention potentially adds to the effective support options for informal caregivers of people with dementia without greatly increasing the workload for health- or social care professionals. Trial registration: The trial is registered at the Dutch Trial Register at NTR6643; August 22nd, 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Rotterdam Eczema Study was an observational cohort study with an embedded pragmatic randomised controlled open-label trial. It was conducted in children with atopic dermatitis (AD) in the Dutch primary care system. The objective of the trial was to determine whether a potent topical corticosteroid (TCS) is more effective than a low-potency TCS., Objective: We are aiming to communicate transparently about the poor recruitment for the trial part and to explore the reasons why recruitment was weak., Design: We used a survey to find out what patients in the cohort did when they experienced a flare-up., Methods: Descriptive statistics were used to present the baseline characteristics of participants in the trial and the results of the survey., Results: In total, 367 patients were included in the cohort. Of these, 32 were randomly assigned to a trial treatment; they had a median age of 4.0 years (IQR 2.0-9.8). A total of 69 of the 86 children (80.2%) who could participate in the survey responded. 39 (56.5%) suffered a flare-up during the follow-up (making them potentially eligible for inclusion in the trial). 26 out of 39 (66.7%) increased their use of an emollient and/or TCS themselves. Only 12 of the 39 (30.7%) contacted their general practitioner (GP) as instructed in the study protocol, but 8 out of these 12 did not meet the inclusion criteria for the trial., Conclusion: The main reason why cohort participants did not take part in the trial was that they did not contact their GPs when they experienced an AD flare-up. Furthermore, the majority of patients who contacted their GPs did not match the inclusion criteria of the trial. We expect that the lessons learnt from this study will be useful when developing future studies of children with AD in primary care., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: By implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery protocols and day-care surgery, early discharge poses a challenge if excessive bleeding occurs after bariatric surgery. Tranexamic acid (TXA) has demonstrated efficacy in other surgical fields and in bariatric pilot studies. This trial aims to assess the efficacy of peroperative administration of TXA in reducing haemorrhage in patients undergoing gastric bypass surgery., Method and Analysis: This is a multicentre, phase III, double-blind randomised controlled trial in six high-volume bariatric centres in the Netherlands. A total of 1524 eligible patients, aged 18 years or older, undergoing primary gastric bypass surgery (either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or one-anastomosis gastric bypass) will be randomised between TXA and placebo (1:1, variable block, stratified for centre, day-care/overnight stay and type of surgery) after obtaining informed consent (2.5% less haemorrhage, power 80%, 2-sided-α 0.05 and 10% dropout). Exclusion criteria are pregnancy, amedical history of acute bleeding (without cause), venous thrombotic events (VTEs), epilepsy, anticoagulant use and iatrogenic bleeding during surgery (aside from staple line). The primary outcome is postoperative haemorrhage requiring intervention within 30 days postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures are staple line reinforcement, blood loss, duration of surgery, postoperative haemoglobin, vital parameters, minor and major complications, side effects of TXA (nausea, hypotension and VTE), length of hospital stay and directly made costs., Ethics and Dissemination: Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The protocol has been approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committees United, Nieuwegein, on 7 February 2023 (registration number: R22.102). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conferences., Trial Registration Number: NCT05464394., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: To compare quality of vision and vision‐related quality of life (QOL) in patients undergoing Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) or ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). Methods: Fifty‐four eyes of 54 patients with Fuchs' dystrophy from six corneal clinics in the Netherlands were randomized to DMEK or ultrathin DSAEK and examined preoperatively, and 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Main outcome measures were corneal higher‐order aberrations (HOAs), contrast sensitivity, straylight and vision‐related QOL. Results: Posterior corneal HOAs decreased after DMEK and increased after ultrathin DSAEK (p ≤ 0.001) 3 months after surgery and correlated positively with best spectacle‐corrected visual acuity (12 months: r = 0.29, p = 0.04). Anterior and total corneal HOAs did not differ significantly between both techniques at any time point. Contrast sensitivity was better (p = 0.01), and straylight was lower (p = 0.01) 3 months after DMEK compared with ultrathin DSAEK; 95% confidence interval [CI] of log(cs) 1.10–1.35 versus 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.12, and 95% CI: log(s) 1.18 to 1.43 versus 95% CI: 1.41 to 1.66, respectively. Both were comparable at later time points. Vision‐related QOL (scale 0–100) did not differ significantly between both groups at any time point and improved significantly at 3 months (β = 12 [95% CI: 7 to 16]; p < 0.001), and subsequently between 3 and 12 months (β = 5 [95% CI: 0 to 9]; p = 0.06). Conclusions: Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) results in lower posterior corneal HOAs compared with ultrathin DSAEK. Contrast sensitivity and straylight recover faster after DMEK but reach similar levels with both techniques at 1 year. Vision‐related QOL improved significantly after surgery, but did not differ between both techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: It is currently thought that most-but not all-individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop symptoms, but the infectious period starts on average 2 days before the first overt symptoms appear. It is estimated that pre- and asymptomatic individuals are responsible for more than half of all transmissions. By detecting infected individuals before they have overt symptoms, wearable devices could potentially and significantly reduce the proportion of transmissions by pre-symptomatic individuals. Using laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections (detected via serology tests [to determine if there are antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 in the blood] or SARS-CoV-2 infection tests such as polymerase chain reaction [PCR] or antigen tests) as the gold standard, we will determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the following two algorithms to detect first time SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection: • The algorithm using Ava bracelet data when coupled with self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data (Wearable + Symptom Data Algo; experimental condition) • The algorithm using self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data alone (Symptom Only Algo; control condition) In addition, we will determine which of the two algorithms has superior performance characteristics for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection as confirmed by SARS-CoV-2 virus testing.Trial Design: The trial is a randomized, single-blinded, two-period, two-sequence crossover trial. The study will start with an initial learning phase (maximum of 3 months), followed by period 1 (3 months) and period 2 (3 months). Subjects entering the study at the end of the recruitment period may directly start with period 1 and will not be part of the learning phase. Each subject will undergo the experimental condition (the Wearable + Symptom Data Algo) in either period 1 or period 2 and the control condition (Symptom Only Algo) in the other period. The order will be randomly assigned, resulting in subjects being allocated 1:1 to either sequence 1 (experimental condition first) or sequence 2 (control condition first). Based on demographics, medical history and/or profession, each subject will be stratified at baseline into a high-risk and normal-risk group within each sequence.Participants: The trial will be conducted in the Netherlands. A target of 20,000 subjects will be enrolled. Based on demographics, medical history and/or profession, each subject will be stratified at baseline into a high-risk and normal-risk group within each sequence. This results in approximately 6500 normal-risk individuals and 3500 high-risk individuals per sequence. Subjects will be recruited from previously studied cohorts as well as via public campaigns and social media. All data for this study will be collected remotely through the Ava COVID-RED app, the Ava bracelet, surveys in the COVID-RED web portal and self-sampling serology and PCR kits. More information on the study can be found in www.covid-red.eu . During recruitment, subjects will be invited to visit the COVID-RED web portal. After successfully completing the enrolment questionnaire, meeting eligibility criteria and indicating interest in joining the study, subjects will receive the subject information sheet and informed consent form. Subjects can enrol in COVID-RED if they comply with the following inclusion and exclusion criteria: Inclusion criteria: • Resident of the Netherlands • At least 18 years old • Informed consent provided (electronic) • Willing to adhere to the study procedures described in the protocol • Must have a smartphone that runs at least Android 8.0 or iOS 13.0 operating systems and is active for the duration of the study (in the case of a change of mobile number, the study team should be notified) • Be able to read, understand and write Dutch Exclusion criteria: • Previous positive SARS-CoV-2 test result (confirmed either through PCR/antigen or antibody tests; self-reported) • Current suspected (e.g. waiting for test result) COVID-19 infection or symptoms of a COVID-19 infection (self-reported) • Participating in any other COVID-19 clinical drug, vaccine or medical device trial (self-reported) • Electronic implanted device (such as a pacemaker; self-reported) • Pregnant at the time of informed consent (self-reported) • Suffering from cholinergic urticaria (per the Ava bracelet's user manual; self-reported) • Staff involved in the management or conduct of this study INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: All subjects will be instructed to complete the Daily Symptom Diary in the Ava COVID-RED app daily, wear their Ava bracelet each night and synchronize it with the app each day for the entire period of study participation. Provided with wearable sensor and/or self-reported symptom data within the last 24 h, the Ava COVID-RED app's underlying algorithms will provide subjects with a real-time indicator of their overall health and well-being. Subjects will see one of three messages, notifying them that no seeming deviations in symptoms and/or physiological parameters have been detected; some changes in symptoms and/or physiological parameters have been detected and they should self-isolate; or alerting them that deviations in their symptoms and/or physiological parameters could be suggestive of a potential COVID-19 infection and to seek additional testing. We will assess the intraperson performance of the algorithms in the experimental condition (Wearable + Symptom Data Algo) and control conditions (Symptom Only Algo). Note that both algorithms will also instruct to seek testing when any SARS-CoV-2 symptoms are reported in line with those defined by the Dutch national institute for public health and the environment 'Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu' (RIVM) guidelines.Main Outcomes: The trial will evaluate the use and performance of the Ava COVID-RED app and Ava bracelet, which uses sensors to measure breathing rate, pulse rate, skin temperature and heart rate variability for the purpose of early and asymptomatic detection and monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 in general and high-risk populations. Using laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections (detected via serology tests, PCR tests and/or antigen tests) as the gold standard, we will determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for each of the following two algorithms to detect first-time SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection: the algorithm using Ava bracelet data when coupled with the self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data and the algorithm using self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data alone. In addition, we will determine which of the two algorithms has superior performance characteristics for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection as confirmed by SARS-CoV-2 virus testing. The protocol contains an additional twenty secondary and exploratory objectives which address, among others, infection incidence rates, health resource utilization, symptoms reported by SARS-CoV-2-infected participants and the rate of breakthrough and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections among individuals vaccinated against COVID-19. PCR or antigen testing will occur when the subject receives a notification from the algorithm to seek additional testing. Subjects will be advised to get tested via the national testing programme and report the testing result in the Ava COVID-RED app and a survey. If they cannot obtain a test via the national testing programme, they will receive a nasal swab self-sampling kit at home, and the sample will be tested by PCR in a trial-affiliated laboratory. In addition, all subjects will be asked to take a capillary blood sample at home at baseline (between month 0 and 3.5 months after the start of subject recruitment), at the end of the learning phase (month 3; note that this sampling moment is skipped if a subject entered the study at the end of the recruitment period), period 1 (month 6) and period 2 (month 9). These samples will be used for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody testing in a trial-affiliated laboratory, differentiating between antibodies resulting from a natural infection and antibodies resulting from COVID-19 vaccination (as vaccination will gradually be rolled out during the trial period). Baseline samples will only be analysed if the sample collected at the end of the learning phase is positive, or if the subject entered the study at the end of the recruitment period, and samples collected at the end of period 1 will only be analysed if the sample collected at the end of period 2 is positive. When subjects obtain a positive PCR/antigen or serology test result during the study, they will continue to be in the study but will be moved into a so-called COVID-positive mode in the Ava COVID-RED app. This means that they will no longer receive recommendations from the algorithms but can still contribute and track symptom and bracelet data. The primary analysis of the main objective will be executed using the data collected in period 2 (months 6 through 9). Within this period, serology tests (before and after period 2) and PCR/antigen tests (taken based on recommendations by the algorithms) will be used to determine if a subject was infected with SARS-CoV-2 or not. Within this same time period, it will be determined if the algorithms gave any recommendations for testing. The agreement between these quantities will be used to evaluate the performance of the algorithms and how these compare between the study conditions.Randomization: All eligible subjects will be randomized using a stratified block randomization approach with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to one of two sequences (experimental condition followed by control condition or control condition followed by experimental condition). Based on demographics, medical history and/or profession, each subject will be stratified at baseline into a high-risk and normal-risk group within each sequence, resulting in approximately equal numbers of high-risk and normal-risk individuals between the sequences.Blinding (masking): In this study, subjects will be blinded to the study condition and randomization sequence. Relevant study staff and the device manufacturer will be aware of the assigned sequence. The subject will wear the Ava bracelet and complete the Daily Symptom Diary in the Ava COVID-RED app for the full duration of the study, and they will not know if the feedback they receive about their potential infection status will only be based on the data they entered in the Daily Symptom Diary within the Ava COVID-RED app or based on both the data from the Daily Symptom Diary and the Ava bracelet.Numbers To Be Randomized (sample Size): A total of 20,000 subjects will be recruited and randomized 1:1 to either sequence 1 (experimental condition followed by control condition) or sequence 2 (control condition followed by experimental condition), taking into account their risk level. This results in approximately 6500 normal-risk and 3500 high-risk individuals per sequence.Trial Status: Protocol version: 3.0, dated May 3, 2021. Start of recruitment: February 19, 2021. End of recruitment: June 3, 2021. End of follow-up (estimated): November 2021 TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands Trial Register on the 18th of February, 2021 with number NL9320 ( https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9320 ) FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dexamethasone, a highly effective drug in treating pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), can induce serious neurobehavioral side effects. These side effects are experienced by patients and parents as detrimental with respect to health related quality of life (HRQoL). Based on previous studies, it has been suggested that neurobehavioral side effects are associated to cortisol depletion of the mineralocorticoid receptor in the brain. Our previously reported randomized controlled trial, the Dexadagen study (NTR3280), suggests that physiological hydrocortisone addition during dexamethasone treatment may overcome clinically relevant neurobehavioral problems in patients who experience these problems during dexamethasone treatment. With our current study, we aim to replicate these results in a targeted larger sample before further implementing this intervention into standard of care.Methods: In a national center setting, pediatric ALL patients between 3 and 18 years are enrolled in an Identification study, which identifies patients with clinically relevant dexamethasone-induced neurobehavioral side effects using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Contributing factors, such as genetic susceptibility, dexamethasone pharmacokinetics as well as psychosocial and family factors are studied to determine their influence in the inter-patient variability for developing dexamethasone-induced neurobehavioral side effects. Patients with clinically relevant problems (i.e. a rise of ≥ 5 points on the SDQ Total Difficulties Score after 5 days of dexamethasone) are subsequently included in a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial with a cross-over design. They receive two courses placebo followed by two courses hydrocortisone during dexamethasone treatment, or vice versa, each time at least 16 days without study medication in between. The primary endpoint is change in SDQ score. The secondary endpoints are sleep (measured with actigraphy and the Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children) and HRQoL (Pediatric Quality of Life Questionnaire).Discussion: The results of our current study may contribute to the management of future ALL patients who experience dexamethasone-induced neuropsychological problems as it may improve HRQoL for patients who suffer most from dexamethasone-induced neurobehavioral side effects. Furthermore, by investigating multiple risk factors that could be related to inter-patient variability in developing these side effects, we might be able to identify and treat patients who are at risk earlier during treatment.Trial Registration: Medical Ethical Committee approval number: NL62388.078.17. Affiliation: Erasmus Medical Centre. Netherlands Trial Register: NL6507 ( NTR6695 ). Registered 5 September 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To determine whether intermittent intravenous (IV) paracetamol as primary analgesic would significantly reduce morphine consumption in children aged 0-3 years after cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass., Methods: Multi-center, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial in four level-3 Pediatric Intensive Care Units (PICU) in the Netherlands and Belgium. Inclusion period; March 2016-July 2020. Children aged 0-3 years, undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass were eligible. Patients were randomized to continuous morphine or intermittent IV paracetamol as primary analgesic after a loading dose of 100 mcg/kg morphine was administered at the end of surgery. Rescue morphine was given if numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores exceeded predetermined cutoff values. Primary outcome was median weight-adjusted cumulative morphine dose in mcg/kg in the first 48 h postoperative. For the comparison of the primary outcome between groups, the nonparametric Van Elteren test with stratification by center was used. For comparison of the proportion of patients with one or more NRS pain scores of 4 and higher between the two groups, a non-inferiority analysis was performed using a non-inferiority margin of 20%., Results: In total, 828 were screened and finally 208 patients were included; parents of 315 patients did not give consent and 305 were excluded for various reasons. Fourteen of the enrolled 208 children were withdrawn from the study before start of study medication leaving 194 patients for final analysis. One hundred and two patients received intermittent IV paracetamol, 106 received continuous morphine. The median weight-adjusted cumulative morphine consumption in the first 48 h postoperative in the IV paracetamol group was 5 times lower (79%) than that in the morphine group (median, 145.0 (IQR, 115.0-432.5) mcg/kg vs 692.6 (IQR, 532.7-856.1) mcg/kg; P < 0.001). The rescue morphine consumption was similar between the groups (p = 0.38). Non-inferiority of IV paracetamol administration in terms of NRS pain scores was proven; difference in proportion - 3.1% (95% CI - 16.6-10.3%)., Conclusions: In children aged 0-3 years undergoing cardiac surgery, use of intermittent IV paracetamol reduces the median weight-adjusted cumulative morphine consumption in the first 48 h after surgery by 79% with equal pain relief showing equipoise for IV paracetamol as primary analgesic. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT05853263; EudraCT Number: 2015-001835-20., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The onset of mental health problems generally occurs between the ages of 16 and 23 – the years in which young people follow post-secondary education, which is a major channel in our society to prepare for a career and enhance life goals. Several studies have shown that students with mental health problems have a higher chance of early school leaving. Supported Education services have been developed to support students with mental health problems to remain at school. The current project aims to study the effect of an individually tailored Supported Education intervention on remaining at school, study success, and satisfaction of students with mental health problems studying at an institute for intermediate vocational education and a university of applied sciences in the Netherlands. Methods/design: The design combines quantitative research (Randomized Controlled Trial; RCT) with qualitative research (monitoring, interviews, focus groups). One hundred students with mental health problems recruited from the two educational institutes will be randomly allocated to either the intervention or control condition. The students in the intervention condition receive the Supported Education intervention given by a Supported Education specialist, the students in the active control condition receive support as usual plus advice from a trained staff member on potential supportive resources regarding studying with mental health problems. The primary outcome 'remaining at school', and the secondary outcome 'study success' will be determined using data from the school's administration. The secondary outcome 'student satisfaction' and other variables that will be studied in a more exploratory way, such as self-efficacy and study skills, will be determined through online questionnaires at baseline, at 6 and at 12 months follow-up. Focus groups and interviews with the students and Supported Education specialists will be carried out to complement the trial. Discussion: This RCT is the first to assess the effect of Supported Education on remaining at school, next to study success and student satisfaction among students with mental health problems. The use of a mixed-methods design will result in a thorough evaluation of the effect of the intervention. Issues regarding the influx and possible attrition of students in the follow-up are discussed. Trial registration: The study was registered with Trialregister.nl, no. NL8349, date registered: February 4th 2020. Register name: Community participation through education. Effectiveness of Supported Education for youth with mental health problems, a mixed methods study – Study protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. Protocol Version: 3, date: May 28th, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many women experience at least one type of intimate partner violence and abuse (IPVA), and although various support options are available, we still know relatively little about web-based interventions for IPVA survivors. We conducted a qualitative evaluation of the SAFE eHealth intervention for women experiencing IPVA in the Netherlands, complementing the quantitative evaluation of self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, and multiple feasibility aspects., Objective: This study assessed users' experiences and what, according to them, were useful and helpful aspects of the intervention., Methods: The intervention consisted of modules with information on relationships and IPVA, help options, physical and mental health, and social support. It also contained interactive elements such as exercises, stories from survivors, a chat, and a forum. A randomized controlled trial was conducted with an intervention arm receiving the complete version of the intervention and a control arm receiving only a static version with the modules on relationships and IPVA and help options. We gathered data through open questions from surveys (for both study arms; n=65) and semistructured interviews (for the intervention study arm; n=10), all conducted on the web, during the randomized controlled trial and process evaluation. Interview data were coded following the principles of open thematic coding, and all qualitative data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis., Results: Overall, most users positively rated the intervention regarding safety, content, and suiting their needs, especially participants from the intervention study arm. The intervention was helpful in the domains of acknowledgment, awareness, and support. However, participants also identified points for improvement: the availability of a simplified version for acute situations; more attention for survivors in the aftermath of ending an abusive relationship; and more information on certain topics, such as technological IPVA, support for children, and legal affairs. Furthermore, although participants expressed a prominent need for interactive contact options such as a chat or forum, the intervention study arm (the only group that had these features at their disposal) mainly used them in a passive way-reading instead of actively joining the conversation. The participants provided various reasons for this passive use., Conclusions: The positive outcomes of this study are similar to those of other web-based interventions for IPVA survivors, and specific points for improvement were identified. The availability of interactive elements seems to be of added value even when they are used passively. This study provides in-depth insight into the experiences of female IPVA survivors with the SAFE eHealth intervention and makes suggestions for improvements to SAFE and comparable web-based interventions for IPVA as well as inspiring future research. Furthermore, this study shows the importance of a varied assessment of an intervention's effectiveness to understand the real-world impact on its users., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR7313; https://tinyurl.com/3t7vwswz., (©Nicole E van Gelder, Suzanne A Ligthart, Karin A W L van Rosmalen-Nooijens, Judith B Prins, Sabine Oertelt-Prigione. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 21.08.2023.)

Background: New intensive trauma-focused treatment (TFT) programmes that incorporate physical activity have been developed for people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, the unique contribution of physical activity within these intensive TFT programmes has never been investigated in a controlled manner., Objectives: This randomized controlled trial will investigate the effectiveness of physical activity added to an intensive TFT programme. In addition, the study aims to investigate the underlying mechanisms of the effects of physical activity on the change in PTSD symptoms., Methods: Individuals with PTSD ( N = 120) will be randomly allocated to two conditions: a physical activity or a non-physical active control condition. All participants will receive the same intensive TFT lasting eight days within two consecutive weeks, in which daily prolonged exposure and EMDR therapy sessions, and psycho-education are combined. The amount of physical activity will differ per condition. While the physical activity condition induces daily physical activities with moderate intensity, in the non-physical active control condition no physical activity is prescribed; but instead, a controlled mixture of guided (creative) tasks is performed. The two primary outcome measures are change in PTSD symptoms from pre- to post-treatment and at six months follow-up, measured with the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5), and the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). Additionally, self-reported sleep problems, depressive symptoms, emotion regulation, dissociation symptoms and anxiety sensitivity will be measured as potential underlying mechanisms., Conclusions: This study will contribute to the research field of augmentation strategies for PTSD treatment by investigating the effectiveness of physical activity added to intensive TFT., Trial Registration: This trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (Trial NL9120)., Competing Interests: Agnes Van Minnen receives income for published book chapters on PTSD and for the training of postdoctoral professionals in prolonged exposure. Ad De Jongh receives income from published books on EMDR therapy and for the training of postdoctoral professionals in this method. Eline Voorendonk, Sarita Sanches and Marieke Tollenaar have no competing interests., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.)

Background: There has been a cultural shift toward patient engagement in health, with a growing demand from patients to access their results., Objective: The Lymphoma Intervention (LIVE) trial is conducted to examine the impact of return of individual patient-reported outcome (PRO) results and a web-based self-management intervention on psychological distress, self-management, satisfaction with information, and health care use in a population-based setting., Methods: Return of PRO results included comparison with age- and sex-matched peers and was built into the Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial Treatment and Long-Term Evaluation of Survivorship registry. The self-management intervention is an adaptation of a fully automated evidence-based intervention for breast cancer survivors. Patients with lymphoma who completed the web-based questionnaire were equally randomized to care as usual, return of PRO results, and return of PRO results plus self-management intervention. Patients completed questionnaires 9 to 18 months after diagnosis (T0; n=227), 4 months (T1; n=190), 12 months (T2; n=170), and 24 months (T3; n=98)., Results: Of all invited patients, 51.1% (456/892) responded and web-based participants (n=227) were randomly assigned to care as usual (n=76), return of PRO results (n=74), or return of PRO results and access to Living with lymphoma (n=77). Return of PRO results was viewed by 76.7% (115/150) of those with access. No statistically significant differences were observed for psychological distress, self-management, satisfaction with information provision, and health care use between patients who received PRO results and those who did not (P>.05). Use of the self-management intervention was low (2/76, 3%), and an effect could therefore not be determined., Conclusions: Return of individual PRO results seems to meet patients' wishes but had no beneficial effects on patient outcome. No negative effects were found when individual PRO results were disclosed, and the return of individual PRO results can therefore be safely implemented in daily clinical practice., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR5953; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5790., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): RR2-10.1186/s13063-017-1943-2., (©Simone Oerlemans, Lindy Paulina Johanna Arts, Jacobien M Kieffer, Judith Prins, Mels Hoogendoorn, Marjolein van der Poel, Ad Koster, Chantal Lensen, Wendy Bernadina Catharina Stevens, Djamila Issa, Johannes F M Pruijt, Margriet Oosterveld, René van der Griend, Marten Nijziel, Lidwine Tick, Eduardus F M Posthuma, Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 14.12.2021.)