Search

Abstract Background Gram-negative bacteria resistant to carbapenems are also known as critical antimicrobial resistant organisms. Their emergence at Colonial War Memorial Hospital (CWMH), the largest hospital in Fiji, is a major clinical concern. This study was conducted to determine the knowledge, attitudes, and readiness of healthcare workers (HCW) at CWMH regarding management of patients with infections caused by critical antimicrobial resistant organisms. Methods A questionnaire was designed using a Likert scale to assess knowledge, attitudes, and readiness. Two cross-sectional studies were conducted, before and after the implementation of targeted educational activities which were informed by the pre-intervention study findings. Results A total of 393 and 420 HCW participated in the pre- and post-intervention studies, respectively. The majority of respondents were female (77.3%) and 18–34 years of age (67%). HCW professional roles included nurses (56.3%), doctors (31.6%), and laboratory personnel (12.2%). In the post-intervention study, significantly more HCW reported having received infection prevention and control (IPC) and antimicrobial resistance education and training (26.8% in pre to 45.5% in post intervention, p 85% to ≥ 95%) were aware of how AMR organisms spread in healthcare settings and knew the IPC measures to prevent transmission of AMR infections including hand hygiene, standard and transmission-based precautions. Attitudes towards AMR were positive, with 84.2% pre intervention and 84.8% of HCW post intervention expressing their willingness to change their work environment to assist with AMR prevention. Perceived readiness to address the problem showed mixed results. Improvements in laboratory AMR surveillance data availability were noted (29.4–52.4%, p

Objectives: We analysed 4 y of laboratory data to characterise the species and determine the antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of enterococci as human pathogens in Fiji. The study also investigated the molecular epidemiology amongst the subset of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). Methods: This retrospective study reviewed bacteriological data from Colonial War Memorial Hospital (CWMH) and other healthcare facilities in the Central and Eastern divisions of Fiji. Phenotypic, antimicrobial susceptibility and vanA and vanB PCR testing were performed using locally approved protocols. The first clinical isolates per patient with antimicrobial susceptibility testing results in a single year were included in the analysis. Data was analysed using WHONET software and Microsoft Excel. Results: A total of 1817 enterococcal isolates were reported, 1415 from CWMH and 402 from other healthcare facilities. The majority of isolates, 75% (n = 1362) were reported as undifferentiated Enterococcus spp., 17.8% (n = 324) were specifically identified as Enterococcus faecalis and 6.7% (n = 122) as E. faecium. Overall, 10% of the enterococci isolates were from blood cultures. Among isolates from CWMH,

Abstract Background The multidimensional and dynamically complex process of ageing presents key challenges to economic evaluation of geriatric interventions, including: (1) accounting for indirect, long-term effects of a geriatric shock such as a fall; (2) incorporating a wide range of societal, non-health outcomes such as informal caregiver burden; and (3) accounting for heterogeneity within the demographic group. Measures of frailty aim to capture the multidimensional and syndromic nature of geriatric health. Using a case study of community-based falls prevention, this article explores how incorporating a multivariate frailty index in a decision model can help address the above key challenges. Methods A conceptual structure of the relationship between geriatric shocks and frailty was developed. This included three key associations involving frailty: (A) the shock-frailty feedback loop; (B) the secondary effects of shock via frailty; and (C) association between frailty and intervention access. A case study of economic modelling of community-based falls prevention for older persons aged 60 + was used to show how parameterising these associations contributed to addressing the above three challenges. The English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) was the main data source for parameterisation. A new 52-item multivariate frailty index was generated from ELSA. The main statistical methods were multivariate logistic and linear regressions. Estimated regression coefficients were inputted into a discrete individual simulation with annual cycles to calculate the continuous variable value or probability of binary event given individuals’ characteristics. Results All three conceptual associations, in their parameterised forms, contributed to addressing challenge (1). Specifically, by worsening the frailty progression, falls incidence in the model increased the risk of falling in subsequent cycles and indirectly impacted the trajectories and levels of EQ-5D-3 L, mortality risk, and comorbidity care costs. Intervention access was positively associated with frailty such that the greater access to falls prevention by frailer individuals dampened the falls-frailty feedback loop. Association (B) concerning the secondary effects of falls via frailty was central to addressing challenge (2). Using this association, the model was able to estimate how falls prevention generated via its impact on frailty paid and unpaid productivity gains, out-of-pocket care expenditure reduction, and informal caregiving cost reduction. For challenge (3), frailty captured the variations within demographic groups of key model outcomes including EQ-5D-3 L, QALY, and all-cause care costs. Frailty itself was shown to have a social gradient such that it mediated socially inequitable distributions of frailty-associated outcomes. Conclusion The frailty-based conceptual structure and parameterisation methods significantly improved upon the methods previously employed by falls prevention models to address the key challenges for geriatric economic evaluation. The conceptual structure is applicable to other geriatric and non-geriatric intervention areas and should inform the data selection and statistical methods to parameterise structurally valid economic models of geriatric interventions.

Abstract Background Motor neuron disease (MND) is a fatal, progressive neurodegenerative disease that causes progressive weakening and wasting of limb, bulbar, thoracic and abdominal muscles. Clear evidence-based guidance on how psychological distress should be managed in people living with MND (plwMND) is lacking. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is a form of psychological therapy that may be particularly suitable for this population. However, to the authors' knowledge, no study to date has evaluated ACT for plwMND. Consequently, the primary aim of this uncontrolled feasibility study was to examine the feasibility and acceptability of ACT for improving the psychological health of plwMND. Methods PlwMND aged ≥ 18 years were recruited from 10 UK MND Care Centres/Clinics. Participants received up to 8 one-to-one ACT sessions, developed specifically for plwMND, plus usual care. Co-primary feasibility and acceptability outcomes were uptake (≥ 80% of the target sample [N = 28] recruited) and initial engagement with the intervention (≥ 70% completing ≥ 2 sessions). Secondary outcomes included measures of quality of life, anxiety, depression, disease-related functioning, health status and psychological flexibility in plwMND and quality of life and burden in caregivers. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and 6 months. Results Both a priori indicators of success were met: 29 plwMND (104%) were recruited and 76% (22/29) attended ≥ 2 sessions. Attrition at 6-months was higher than anticipated (8/29, 28%), but only two dropouts were due to lack of acceptability of the intervention. Acceptability was further supported by good satisfaction with therapy and session attendance. Data were possibly suggestive of small improvements in anxiety and psychological quality of life from baseline to 6 months in plwMND, despite a small but expected deterioration in disease-related functioning and health status. Conclusions There was good evidence of acceptability and feasibility. Limitations included the lack of a control group and small sample size, which complicate interpretation of findings. A fully powered RCT to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of ACT for plwMND is underway. Trial registration The study was pre-registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN12655391).

Abstract Background Falls significantly harm geriatric health and impose substantial costs on care systems and wider society. Decision modelling can inform the commissioning of falls prevention but face methodological challenges, including: (1) capturing non-health outcomes and societal intervention costs; (2) considering heterogeneity and dynamic complexity; (3) considering theories of human behaviour and implementation; and (4) considering issues of equity. This study seeks methodological solutions in developing a credible economic model of community-based falls prevention for older persons (aged 60 +) to inform local falls prevention commissioning as recommended by UK guidelines. Methods A framework for conceptualising public health economic models was followed. Conceptualisation was conducted in Sheffield as a representative local health economy. Model parameterisation used publicly available data including English Longitudinal Study of Ageing and UK-based falls prevention trials. Key methodological developments in operationalising a discrete individual simulation model included: (1) incorporating societal outcomes including productivity, informal caregiving cost, and private care expenditure; (2) parameterising dynamic falls-frailty feedback loop whereby falls influence long-term outcomes via frailty progression; (3) incorporating three parallel prevention pathways with unique eligibility and implementation conditions; and (4) assessing equity impacts through distributional cost-effectiveness analysis (DCEA) and individual-level lifetime outcomes (e.g., number reaching ‘fair innings’). Guideline-recommended strategy (RC) was compared against usual care (UC). Probabilistic sensitivity, subgroup, and scenario analyses were conducted. Results RC had 93.4% probability of being cost-effective versus UC at cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained under 40-year societal cost-utility analysis. It increased productivity and reduced private expenditure and informal caregiving cost, but productivity gain and private expenditure reduction were outstripped by increases in intervention time opportunity costs and co-payments, respectively. RC reduced inequality delineated by socioeconomic status quartile. Gains in individual-level lifetime outcomes were small. Younger geriatric age groups can cross-subsidise their older peers for whom RC is cost-ineffective. Removing the falls-frailty feedback made RC no longer efficient or equitable versus UC. Conclusion Methodological advances addressed several key challenges associated with falls prevention modelling. RC appears cost-effective and equitable versus UC. However, further analyses should confirm whether RC is optimal versus other potential strategies and investigate feasibility issues including capacity implications.

Abstract Background Motor neuron disease (MND) is a rapidly progressive, fatal neurodegenerative disease that predominantly affects motor neurons from the motor cortex to the spinal cord and causes progressive wasting and weakening of bulbar, limb, abdominal and thoracic muscles. Prognosis is poor and median survival is 2–3 years following symptom onset. Psychological distress is relatively common in people living with MND. However, formal psychotherapy is not routinely part of standard care within MND Care Centres/clinics in the UK, and clear evidence-based guidance on improving the psychological health of people living with MND is lacking. Previous research suggests that Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) may be particularly suitable for people living with MND and may help improve their psychological health. Aims To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of ACT modified for MND plus usual multidisciplinary care (UC) in comparison to UC alone for improving psychological health in people living with MND. Methods The COMMEND trial is a multi-centre, assessor-blind, parallel, two-arm RCT with a 10-month internal pilot phase. 188 individuals aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of definite, laboratory-supported probable, clinically probable, or possible familial or sporadic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and additionally the progressive muscular atrophy and primary lateral sclerosis variants, will be recruited from approximately 14 UK-based MND Care Centres/clinics and via self-referral. Participants will be randomly allocated to receive up to eight 1:1 sessions of ACT plus UC or UC alone by an online randomisation system. Participants will complete outcome measures at baseline and at 6- and 9-months post-randomisation. The primary outcome will be quality of life at six months. Secondary outcomes will include depression, anxiety, psychological flexibility, health-related quality of life, adverse events, ALS functioning, survival at nine months, satisfaction with therapy, resource use and quality-adjusted life years. Primary analyses will be by intention to treat and data will be analysed using multi-level modelling. Discussion This trial will provide definitive evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of ACT plus UC in comparison to UC alone for improving psychological health in people living with MND. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN12655391. Registered 17 July 2017, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12655391 . Protocol version: 3.1 (10/06/2020).

Abstract Background Falls impose significant health and economic burdens on community-dwelling older persons. Decision modelling can inform commissioning of alternative falls prevention strategies. Several methodological challenges arise when modelling public health interventions including community-based falls prevention. This study aims to conduct a systematic review (SR) to: systematically identify community-based falls prevention economic models; synthesise and critically appraise how the models handled key methodological challenges associated with public health modelling; and suggest areas for further methodological research. Methods The SR followed the 2021 PRISMA reporting guideline and covered the period 2003–2020 and 12 academic databases and grey literature. The extracted methodological features of included models were synthesised by their relevance to the following challenges: (1) capturing non-health outcomes and societal intervention costs; (2) considering heterogeneity and dynamic complexity; (3) considering theories of human behaviour and implementation; and (4) considering equity issues. The critical appraisal assessed the prevalence of each feature across models, then appraised the methods used to incorporate the feature. The methodological strengths and limitations stated by the modellers were used as indicators of desirable modelling practice and scope for improvement, respectively. The methods were also compared against those suggested in the broader empirical and methodological literature. Areas of further methodological research were suggested based on appraisal results. Results 46 models were identified. Comprehensive incorporation of non-health outcomes and societal intervention costs was infrequent. The assessments of heterogeneity and dynamic complexity were limited; subgroup delineation was confined primarily to demographics and binary disease/physical status. Few models incorporated heterogeneity in intervention implementation level, efficacy and cost. Few dynamic variables other than age and falls history were incorporated to characterise the trajectories of falls risk and general health/frailty. Intervention sustainability was frequently based on assumptions; few models estimated the economic/health returns from improved implementation. Seven models incorporated ethnicity- and severity-based subgroups but did not estimate the equity-efficiency trade-offs. Sixteen methodological research suggestions were made. Conclusion Existing community-based falls prevention models contain methodological limitations spanning four challenge areas relevant for public health modelling. There is scope for further methodological research to inform the development of falls prevention and other public health models.

Abstract Background Falls impose significant health and economic burdens among older populations, making their prevention a priority. Health economic models can inform whether the falls prevention intervention represents a cost-effective use of resources and/or meet additional objectives such as reducing social inequities of health. This study aims to conduct a systematic review (SR) of community-based falls prevention economic models to: (i) systematically identify such models; (ii) synthesise and critically appraise modelling methods/results; and (iii) formulate methodological and commissioning recommendations. Methods The SR followed PRISMA 2021 guideline, covering the period 2003–2020, 12 academic databases and grey literature. A study was included if it: targeted community-dwelling persons aged 60 and over and/or aged 50–59 at high falls risk; evaluated intervention(s) designed to reduce falls or fall-related injuries; against any comparator(s); reported outcomes of economic evaluation; used decision modelling; and had English full text. Extracted data fields were grouped by: (A) model and evaluation overview; (B) falls epidemiology features; (C) falls prevention intervention features; and (D) evaluation methods and outcomes. A checklist for falls prevention economic evaluations was used to assess reporting/methodological quality. Extracted fields were narratively synthesised and critically appraised to inform methodological and commissioning recommendations. The SR protocol is registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021232147). Results Forty-six models were identified. The most prevalent issue according to the checklist was non-incorporation of all-cause care costs. Based on general population, lifetime models conducting cost-utility analyses, seven interventions produced favourable ICERs relative to no intervention under the cost-effectiveness threshold of US$41,900 (£30,000) per QALY gained; of these, results for (1) combined multifactorial and environmental intervention, (2) physical activity promotion for women, and (3) targeted vitamin D supplementation were from validated models. Decision-makers should explore the transferability and reaches of interventions in their local settings. There was some evidence that exercise and home modification exacerbate existing social inequities of health. Sixteen methodological recommendations were formulated. Conclusion There is significant methodological heterogeneity across falls prevention models. This SR’s appraisals of modelling methods should facilitate the conceptualisation of future falls prevention models. Its synthesis of evaluation outcomes, though limited to published evidence, could inform commissioning.

Abstract Background Falls impose significant health and economic burdens on older people. The volume of falls prevention economic evaluations has increased, the findings from which have been synthesised by systematic reviews (SRs). Such SRs can inform commissioning and design of future evaluations; however, their findings can be misleading and incomplete, dependent on their pre-specified criteria. This study aims to conduct a systematic overview (SO) to: (1) systematically identify SRs of community-based falls prevention economic evaluations; (2) describe the methodology and findings of SRs; (3) critically appraise the methodology of SRs; and (4) suggest commissioning recommendations based on SO findings. Methods The SO followed the PRISMA guideline and the Cochrane guideline on SO, covering 12 databases and grey literature for the period 2003–2020. Eligible studies were SRs with 50% or more included studies that were economic evaluations of community-based falls prevention (against any comparator) for older persons (aged 60 +) or high-risk individuals aged 50–59. Identified SRs’ aims, search strategies and results, extracted data fields, quality assessment methods/results, and commissioning and research recommendations were synthesised. The comprehensiveness of previous SRs’ data synthesis was judged against criteria drawn from literature on falls prevention/public health economic evaluation. Outcomes of general population, lifetime decision models were re-analysed to inform commissioning recommendations. The SO protocol is registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021234379). Results Seven SRs were identified, which extracted 8 to 33 data fields from 44 economic evaluations. Four economic evaluation methodological/reporting quality checklists were used; three SRs narratively synthesised methodological features to varying extent and focus. SRs generally did not appraise decision modelling features, including methods for characterising dynamic complexity of falls risk and intervention need. Their commissioning recommendations were based mainly on cost-per-unit ratios (e.g., incremental cost-effectiveness ratios) and neglected aggregate impact. There is model-based evidence of multifactorial and environmental interventions, home assessment and modification and Tai Chi being cost-effective but also the risk that they exacerbate social inequities of health. Conclusions Current SRs of falls prevention economic evaluations do not holistically inform commissioning and evaluation. Accounting for broader decisional factors and methodological nuances of economic evaluations, particularly decision models, is needed.

Objectives: Although antimicrobial resistance (AMR) disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), primary clinical data on AMR burden from LMICs are lacking, particularly from the Pacific Islands. We adapted recent World Health Organization methodology to measure the impact of third-generation cephalosporin (3GC) resistance on mortality and excess length of hospital stay among inpatients with Enterobacterales bloodstream infection (BSI) in Fiji. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study of inpatients with Enterobacterales BSIs at Colonial War Memorial Hospital in Suva. We collected demographic, clinical, and microbiological data, and we stored bacterial isolates for confirmatory testing and molecular genomics in Melbourne, Australia. We employed cause-specific Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the effect of 3GC-resistance on hazard of in-hospital mortality and discharge alive (competing outcomes), and we used multistate modelling to estimate the excess length of hospital stay associated with 3GCR. Results: From July 2020 to February 2021, we identified 162 consecutive Enterobacterales BSIs, and 66 (40.7%) were 3GC resistant. The crude mortality rates for patients with 3GC-susecptible and 3GC-resistant BSIs were 16.7% (16 of 96) and 30.3% (20 of 66), respectively. Also, 3GC resistance was not associated with either in-hospital mortality (aHR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.80–3.49) or discharge alive (aHR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.50–1.12). However, patient comorbidities and acuity of illness were associated with in-hospital mortality. Furthermore, 3GC-resistance was associated with an increased length of stay of 2.6 days (95% CI, 2.5–2.8). Overall, 3GC-resistance was more common among patients with hospital-associated than community-acquired infection, but genomics did not identify clonal transmission. Conclusions: Among patients with Enterobacterales BSIs, mortality was relatively high, and 3GC resistance was common. Also, 3GC resistance was associated with increased hospital length of stay but not with in-hospital mortality after adjusting for potential confounders. Accurate estimates of the burden of AMR are important, especially from LMICs. Such knowledge can inform policy decisions, guide allocation of limited resources, and assist the evaluation of future interventions to address AMR.

Background: The mainstay of treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain is pharmacotherapy, but the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline is not based on robust evidence, as the treatments and their combinations have not been directly compared. Objectives: To determine the most clinically beneficial, cost-effective and tolerated treatment pathway for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Design: A randomised crossover trial with health economic analysis. Setting: Twenty-one secondary care centres in the UK. Participants: Adults with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain with a 7-day average self-rated pain score of ≥ 4 points (Numeric Rating Scale 0–10). Interventions: Participants were randomised to three commonly used treatment pathways: (1) amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, (2) duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin and (3) pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline. Participants and research teams were blinded to treatment allocation, using over-encapsulated capsules and matching placebos. Site pharmacists were unblinded. Outcomes: The primary outcome was the difference in 7-day average 24-hour Numeric Rating Scale score between pathways, measured during the final week of each pathway. Secondary end points included 7-day average daily Numeric Rating Scale pain score at week 6 between monotherapies, quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-36 items), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score, the proportion of patients achieving 30% and 50% pain reduction, Brief Pain Inventory – Modified Short Form items scores, Insomnia Severity Index score, Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory score, tolerability (scale 0–10), Patient Global Impression of Change score at week 16 and patients’ preferred treatment pathway at week 50. Adverse events and serious adverse events were recorded. A within-trial cost–utility analysis was carried out to compare treatment pathways using incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years from an NHS and social care perspective. Results: A total of 140 participants were randomised from 13 UK centres, 130 of whom were included in the analyses. Pain score at week 16 was similar between the arms, with a mean difference of –0.1 points (98.3% confidence interval –0.5 to 0.3 points) for duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, a mean difference of –0.1 points (98.3% confidence interval –0.5 to 0.3 points) for pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline compared with amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin and a mean difference of 0.0 points (98.3% confidence interval –0.4 to 0.4 points) for pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin. Results for tolerability, discontinuation and quality of life were similar. The adverse events were predictable for each drug. Combination therapy (weeks 6–16) was associated with a further reduction in Numeric Rating Scale pain score (mean 1.0 points, 98.3% confidence interval 0.6 to 1.3 points) compared with those who remained on monotherapy (mean 0.2 points, 98.3% confidence interval –0.1 to 0.5 points). The pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline pathway had the fewest monotherapy discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events and was most commonly preferred (most commonly preferred by participants: amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, 24%; duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin, 33%; pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline, 43%; p = 0.26). No single pathway was superior in cost-effectiveness. The incremental gains in quality-adjusted life-years were small for each pathway comparison [amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin –0.002 (95% confidence interval –0.011 to 0.007) quality-adjusted life-years, amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline –0.006 (95% confidence interval –0.002 to 0.014) quality-adjusted life-years and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline 0.007 (95% confidence interval 0.0002 to 0.015) quality-adjusted life-years] and incremental costs over 16 weeks were similar [amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin −£113 (95% confidence interval −£381 to £90), amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline £155 (95% confidence interval −£37 to £625) and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin compared with pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline £141 (95% confidence interval −£13 to £398)]. Limitations: Although there was no placebo arm, there is strong evidence for the use of each study medication from randomised placebo-controlled trials. The addition of a placebo arm would have increased the duration of this already long and demanding trial and it was not felt to be ethically justifiable. Future work: Future research should explore (1) variations in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain management at the practice level, (2) how OPTION-DM (Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus) trial findings can be best implemented, (3) why some patients respond to a particular drug and others do not and (4) what options there are for further treatments for those patients on combination treatment with inadequate pain relief. Conclusions: The three treatment pathways appear to give comparable patient outcomes at similar costs, suggesting that the optimal treatment may depend on patients’ preference in terms of side effects. Trial registration: The trial is registered as ISRCTN17545443 and EudraCT 2016-003146-89. 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. 26, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: There are few effective interventions for dementia. Aim: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an intervention to promote self-management, independence and self-efficacy in people with early-stage dementia. Objectives: To undertake a randomised controlled trial of the Journeying through Dementia intervention compared with usual care, conduct an internal pilot testing feasibility, assess intervention delivery fidelity and undertake a qualitative exploration of participants’ experiences. Design: A pragmatic two-arm individually randomised trial analysed by intention to treat. Participants: A total of 480 people diagnosed with mild dementia, with capacity to make informed decisions, living in the community and not participating in other studies, and 350 supporters whom they identified, from 13 locations in England, took part. Intervention: Those randomised to the Journeying through Dementia intervention (n = 241) were invited to take part in 12 weekly facilitated groups and four one-to-one sessions delivered in the community by secondary care staff, in addition to their usual care. The control group (n = 239) received usual care. Usual care included drug treatment, needs assessment and referral to appropriate services. Usual care at each site was recorded. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was Dementia-Related Quality of Life score at 8 months post randomisation, with higher scores representing higher quality of life. Secondary outcomes included resource use, psychological well-being, self-management, instrumental activities of daily living and health-related quality of life. Randomisation and blinding: Participants were randomised in a 1 : 1 ratio. Staff conducting outcome assessments were blinded. Data sources: Outcome measures were administered in participants’ homes at baseline and at 8 and 12 months post randomisation. Interviews were conducted with participants, participating carers and interventionalists. Results: The mean Dementia-Related Quality of Life score at 8 months was 93.3 (standard deviation 13.0) in the intervention arm (n = 191) and 91.9 (standard deviation 14.6) in the control arm (n = 197), with a difference in means of 0.9 (95% confidence interval –1.2 to 3.0; p = 0.380) after adjustment for covariates. This effect size (0.9) was less than the 4 points defined as clinically meaningful. For other outcomes, a difference was found only for Diener’s Flourishing Scale (adjusted mean difference 1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.1 to 2.3), in favour of the intervention (i.e. in a positive direction). The Journeying through Dementia intervention cost £608 more than usual care (95% confidence interval £105 to £1179) and had negligible difference in quality-adjusted life-years (–0.003, 95% confidence interval –0.044 to 0.038). Therefore, the Journeying through Dementia intervention had a mean incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year of –£202,857 (95% confidence interval –£534,733 to £483,739); however, there is considerable uncertainty around this. Assessed fidelity was good. Interviewed participants described receiving some benefit and a minority benefited greatly. However, negative aspects were also raised by a minority. Seventeen per cent of participants in the intervention arm and 15% of participants in the control arm experienced at least one serious adverse event. None of the serious adverse events were classified as related to the intervention. Limitations: Study limitations include recruitment of an active population, delivery challenges and limitations of existing outcome measures. Conclusions: The Journeying through Dementia programme is not clinically effective, is unlikely to be cost-effective and cannot be recommended in its existing format. Future work: Research should focus on the creation of new outcome measures to assess well-being in dementia and on using elements of the intervention, such as enabling enactment in the community. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN17993825. 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. 26, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: In vitro fertilisation is a widely used reproductive technique that can be undertaken with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The endometrial scratch procedure is an in vitro fertilisation ‘add-on’ that is sometimes provided prior to the first in vitro fertilisation cycle, but there is a lack of evidence to support its use. Objectives: (1) To assess the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of endometrial scratch compared with treatment as usual in women undergoing their first in vitro fertilisation cycle (the ‘Endometrial Scratch Trial’) and (2) to undertake a systematic review to combine the results of the Endometrial Scratch Trial with those of previous trials in which endometrial scratch was provided prior to the first in vitro fertilisation cycle. Design: A pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, open-label, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomised (1 : 1) via a web-based system to receive endometrial scratch or treatment as usual using stratified block randomisation. The systematic review involved searching electronic databases (undertaken in January 2020) and clinicaltrials.gov (undertaken in September 2020) for relevant trials. Setting: Sixteen UK fertility units. Participants: Women aged 18–37 years, inclusive, undergoing their first in vitro fertilisation cycle. The exclusion criteria included severe endometriosis, body mass index ≥ 35 kg/m2 and previous trauma to the endometrium. Interventions: Endometrial scratch was undertaken in the mid-luteal phase of the menstrual cycle prior to in vitro fertilisation, and involved inserting a pipelle into the cavity of the uterus and rotating and withdrawing it three or four times. The endometrial scratch group then received usual in vitro fertilisation treatment. The treatment-as-usual group received usual in vitro fertilisation only. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was live birth after completion of 24 weeks’ gestation within 10.5 months of egg collection. Secondary outcomes included implantation, pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, pain and tolerability of the procedure, adverse events and treatment costs. Results: One thousand and forty-eight (30.3%) women were randomised to treatment as usual (n = 525) or endometrial scratch (n = 523) and were followed up between July 2016 and October 2019 and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the endometrial scratch group, 453 (86.6%) women received the endometrial scratch procedure. A total of 494 (94.1%) women in the treatment-as-usual group and 497 (95.0%) women in the endometrial scratch group underwent in vitro fertilisation. The live birth rate was 37.1% (195/525) in the treatment-as-usual group and 38.6% (202/523) in the endometrial scratch group: an unadjusted absolute difference of 1.5% (95% confidence interval –4.4% to 7.4%; p = 0.621). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes. Safety events were comparable across groups. No neonatal deaths were recorded. The cost per successful live birth was £11.90 per woman (95% confidence interval –£134 to £127). The pooled results of this trial and of eight similar trials found no evidence of a significant effect of endometrial scratch in increasing live birth rate (odds ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.22). Limitations: A sham endometrial scratch procedure was not undertaken, but it is unlikely that doing so would have influenced the results, as objective fertility outcomes were used. A total of 9.2% of women randomised to receive endometrial scratch did not undergo the procedure, which may have slightly diluted the treatment effect. Conclusions: We found no evidence to support the theory that performing endometrial scratch in the mid-luteal phase in women undergoing their first in vitro fertilisation cycle significantly improves live birth rate, although the procedure was well tolerated and safe. We recommend that endometrial scratch is not undertaken in this population. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN23800982. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.