Search

Introduction Pain and disability after meniscectomy can be a substantial lifelong problem. There are few treatment options, especially for young people. Non-surgical management (rehabilitation) is an option but increasingly surgeons are performing meniscal allograft transplants (MATs) for these individuals. However, this is still an uncommon procedure, and availability and usage of MAT vary widely both in the UK and internationally. It is not known which treatment option is the most effective and cost-effective.Methods and analysis The Meniscal Transplant surgery or Optimised Rehabilitation trial is an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. The aim is to compare the clinical and cost effectiveness of MAT versus an optimised package of individualised, progressive, rehabilitation that we have called personalised knee therapy (PKT).Participants will be recruited from sites across the UK, Australia, Canada and Belgium. The planned 144 participants provide at least 90% power to detect a 10-point difference in the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS4) at 24-months post randomisation (primary outcome). A prospectively planned economic evaluation will be conducted from a healthcare system and personal social services perspective. Secondary outcome data including health utility, occupational status, sports participation, mental well-being, further treatment, and adverse events will be collected at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis and reported in-line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement.Ethics and dissemination The trial was approved by the London—Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee on 19 August 2022 (22/LO/0327) and Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee, NSW, Australia on the 13 March 2023 (2022/ETH01890).Trial results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, in lay summaries and using social media as appropriate.This protocol adheres to the recommended Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) checklist.Trial registration number ISRCTN87336549.

Objective To determine the socio-demographic profile of all students enrolled to study medicine in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ).Design and setting Observational, cross-sectional study. Data were sought from the Universities of Auckland and Otago, the two NZ tertiary education institutions providing medical education, for the period 2016–2020 inclusive. These data are a subset of the larger project ‘Mirror on Society’ examining all regulated health professional enrolled students in NZ. Variables of interest: gender, citizenship, ethnicity, rural classification, socioeconomic deprivation, school type and school socioeconomic scores. NZ denominator population data (18–29 years) were sourced from the 2018 census.Participants 2858 students were enrolled to study medicine between 2016 and 2020 inclusive.Results There were more women (59.1%) enrolled to study medicine than men (40.9%) and the majority (96.5%) were in the 18–29 years age range. Māori students (rate ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.0) and Pacific students (rate ratio 0.85; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.98) had lower overall rates of enrolment. For all ethnic groups, irrespective of rural or urban origin, enrolment rates had a nearly log-linear negative relationship with increasing socioeconomic deprivation. Enrolments were lower for students from rural areas compared with those from urban areas (rate ratio 0.53; 95% CI 0.46–0.61). Overall NZ’s medical students do not reflect the diverse communities they will serve, with under-representation of Māori and Pacific students and students who come from low socioeconomic and rural backgrounds.Conclusions To meaningfully address these issues, we suggest the following policy changes: universities commit and act to Indigenise institutional ways of knowing and being; selection policies are reviewed to ensure that communities in greatest need of doctors are prioritised for enrolment into medicine (specifically, the impact of low socioeconomic status should be factored into selection decisions); and the government fund more New Zealanders to study medicine.

Introduction Housing-related factors can be predictors of health, including of diabetes outcomes. We analysed the association between subsidised housing residency and diabetes mortality among a large cohort of low-income adults in Brazil.Research design and methods A cohort of 9 961 271 low-income adults, observed from January 2010 to December 2015, was created from Brazilian administrative records of social programmes and death certificates. We analysed the association between subsidised housing residency and time to diabetes mortality using a Cox model with inverse probability of treatment weighting and regression adjustment. We assessed inequalities in this association by groups of municipality Human Development Index. Diabetes mortality included diabetes both as the underlying or a contributory cause of death.Results At baseline, the mean age of the cohort was 40.3 years (SD 15.6 years), with a majority of women (58.4%). During 29 238 920 person-years of follow-up, there were 18 775 deaths with diabetes as the underlying or a contributory cause. 340 683 participants (3.4% of the cohort) received subsidised housing. Subsidised housing residents had a higher hazard of diabetes mortality compared with non-residents (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.31). The magnitude of this association was more pronounced among participants living in municipalities with lower Human Development Index (HR 1.30; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.62).Conclusions Subsidised housing residents had a greater risk of diabetes mortality, particularly those living in low socioeconomic status municipalities. This finding suggests the need to intensify diabetes prevention and control actions and prompt treatment of the diabetes complications among subsidised housing residents, particularly among those living in low socioeconomic status municipalities.

Objectives To provide a sociodemographic profile of students enrolled in their first year of a health professional pre-registration programme offered within New Zealand (NZ) tertiary institutions.Design Observational, cross-sectional study. Data were sought from NZ tertiary education institutions for all eligible students accepted into the first ‘professional’ year of a health professional programme for the 5-year period 2016–2020 inclusive. Variables of interest: gender, citizenship, ethnicity, rural classification, socioeconomic deprivation, school type and school socioeconomic scores. Analyses were carried out using the R statistics software.Setting Aotearoa NZ.Participants All students (domestic and international) accepted into the first ‘professional’ year of a health professional programme leading to registration under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003.Results NZ’s health workforce pre-registration students do not reflect the diverse communities they will serve in several important dimensions. There is a systematic under-representation of students who identify as Māori and Pacific, and students who come from low socioeconomic and rural backgrounds. The enrolment rate for Māori students is about 99 per 100 000 eligible population and for some Pacific ethnic groups is lower still, compared with 152 per 100 000 for NZ European students. The unadjusted rate ratio for enrolment for both Māori students and Pacific students versus ‘NZ European and Other’ students is approximately 0.7.Conclusions We recommend that: (1) there should be a nationally coordinated system for collecting and reporting on the sociodemographic characteristics of the health workforce pre-registration; (2) mechanisms be developed to allow the agencies that fund tertiary education to base their funding decisions directly on the projected health workforce needs of the health system and (3) tertiary education funding decisions be based on Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the foundational constitutional agreement between the Indigenous people, Māori and the British Crown signed in 1840) and have a strong pro-equity focus.

Objectives Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (PIs) are a source of morbidity and mortality, and many are potentially preventable.Design This study prospectively evaluated the prevalence and the associated factors of PIs in adult critical care patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) in the UK.Setting This service evaluation was part of a larger, international, single-day point prevalence study of PIs in adult ICU patients. Training was provided to healthcare givers using an electronic platform to ensure standardised recognition and staging of PIs across all sites.Participants The characteristics of the ICUs were recorded before the survey; deidentified patient data were collected using a case report form and uploaded onto a secure online platform.Primary and secondary outcome measures Factors associated with ICU-acquired PIs in the UK were analysed descriptively and using mixed multiple logistic regression analysis.Results Data from 1312 adult patients admitted to 94 UK ICUs were collected. The proportion of individuals with at least one PI was 16% (211 out of 1312 patients), of whom 8.8% (n=115/1312) acquired one or more PIs in the ICU and 7.3% (n=96/1312) prior to ICU admission. The total number of PIs was 311, of which 148 (47.6%) were acquired in the ICU. The location of majority of these PIs was the sacral area, followed by the heels. Braden score and prior length of ICU stay were associated with PI development.Conclusions The prevalence and the stage of severity of PIs were generally low in adult critically ill patients admitted to participating UK ICUs during the study period. However, PIs are a problem in an important minority of patients. Lower Braden score and longer length of ICU stay were associated with the development of injuries; most ICUs assess risk using tools which do not account for this.Trial registration number NCT03270345.

Introduction The UK social security system is being transformed by the implementation of Universal Credit (UC), which combines six existing benefits and tax credits into a single payment for low-income households. Despite extensive reports of hardship associated with the introduction of UC, no previous studies have comprehensively evaluated its impact on mental health. Because payments are targeted at low-income households, impacts on mental health will have important consequences for health inequalities.Methods and analysis We will conduct a mixed methods study. Work package (WP) 1 will compare health outcomes for new recipients of UC with outcomes for legacy benefit recipients in two large population surveys, using the phased rollout of UC as a natural experiment. We will also analyse the relationship between the proportion of UC claimants in small areas and a composite measure of mental health. WP2 will use data collected by Citizen’s Advice to explore the sociodemographic and health characteristics of people who seek advice when claiming UC and identify features of the claim process that prompt advice-seeking. WP3 will conduct longitudinal in-depth interviews with up to 80 UC claimants in England and Scotland to explore reasons for claiming and experiences of the claim process. Up to 30 staff supporting claimants will also be interviewed. WP4 will use a dynamic microsimulation model to simulate the long-term health impacts of different implementation scenarios. WP5 will undertake cost–consequence analysis of the potential costs and outcomes of introducing UC and cost–benefit analyses of mitigating actions.Ethics and dissemination We obtained ethical approval for the primary data gathering from the University of Glasgow, College of Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee, application number 400200244. We will use our networks to actively disseminate findings to UC claimants, the public, practitioners and policy-makers, using a range of methods and formats.Trial registration number The study is registered with the Research Registry: researchregistry6697.

Objectives To identify aspects of the organisation and delivery of acute inpatient services for people with dementia that are associated with shorter length of hospital stay.Design and setting Retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to 200 general hospitals in England and Wales.Participants 10 106 people with dementia who took part in the third round of National Audit of Dementia.Main outcome measure Length of admission to hospital.Results The median length of stay was 12 days (IQR=6–23 days). People with dementia spent less time in hospital when discharge planning was initiated within 24 hours of admission (estimated effect −0.24, 95% CI: −0.29 to −0.18, p

Background COVID-19 was declared a worldwide pandemic on 11 March 2020. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust provides 1412 inpatient beds staffed by 1200 junior doctors and faced a large burden of COVID-19 admissions.Local problem A survey of doctors revealed only 20% felt confident that they would know to whom they could raise concerns and that most were getting information from a combination of informal work discussions, trust emails, social media and medical literature.Methods This quality improvement project was undertaken aligning with Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence 2.0 guidelines. Through an iterative process, a digital network (Imperial Covid cOmmunications Network; ICON) using existing smartphone technologies was developed. Concerns were collated from the junior body and conveyed to the leadership team (vertical—bottom-up using Google Form) and responses were conveyed from leadership to the junior body (vertical—top-down using WhatsApp and Zoom). Quantitative analysis on engagement with the network (members of the group and number of issues raised) and qualitative assessment (thematic analysis on issues) were undertaken.Results Membership of the ICON WhatsApp group peaked at 780 on 17 May 2020. 197 concerns were recorded via the Google Form system between 20 March and 14 June 2020. There were five overarching themes: organisational and logistics; clinical strategy concerns; staff safety and well-being; clinical (COVID-19) and patient care; and facilities. 94.4% of members agreed ICON was helpful in receiving updates and 88.9% agreed ICON improved collaboration.Conclusions This work demonstrates that a coordinated network using existing smartphone technologies and a novel communications structure can improve collaboration between senior leadership and junior doctors. Such a network could play an important role during times of pressure in a healthcare system.

Introduction Social housing programmes have been shown to influence health, but their effects on cardiovascular mortality and incidence of infectious diseases, such as leprosy and tuberculosis, are unknown. We will use individual administrative data to evaluate the effect of the Brazilian housing programme Minha Casa Minha Vida (MCMV) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality and incidence of leprosy and tuberculosis.Methods and analysis We will link the baseline of the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort (2001–2015), which includes information on socioeconomic and demographic variables, to the MCMV (2009–2015), CVD mortality (2007–2015), leprosy (2007–2015) and tuberculosis (2007–2015) registries. We will define our exposed population as individuals who signed the contract to receive a house from MCMV, and our non-exposed group will be comparable individuals within the cohort who have not signed a contract for a house at that time. We will estimate the effect of MCMV on health outcomes using different propensity score approaches to control for observed confounders. Follow-up time of individuals will begin at the date of exposure ascertainment and will end at the time a specific outcome occurs, date of death or end of follow-up (31 December 2015). In addition, we will conduct stratified analyses by the follow-up time, age group, race/ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic position.Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the ethic committees from Instituto Gonçalo Muniz-Oswaldo Cruz Foundation and University of Glasgow Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences College. Data analysis will be carried out using an anonymised dataset, accessed by researchers in a secure computational environment according to the Centre for Integration of Data and Health Knowledge procedures. Study findings will be published in high quality peer-reviewed research journals and will also be disseminated to policy makers through stakeholder events and policy briefs.

Introduction Complex population health interventions that are effective in one context may not be effective elsewhere, and may even be harmful. As such, an intervention may require adaptation to ensure it fits with a new context. To date, there is no overarching guidance to help researchers to adapt and evaluate interventions in new contexts, and no criteria to support research funders or journals assess proposed or reported adaptations or evaluation. There is limited assistance for policy-makers and practitioners to decide if evidence-informed interventions are appropriate to their context, or if adaptation and further evaluation is needed. This Delphi exercise will contribute to the development of guidance for these communities to support the adaptation, implementation and/or re-evaluation of complex population health interventions in new contexts.Methods We will conduct a Delphi consensus exercise to gather expert opinion from researchers, research funders, journal editors and policy-makers. Expert opinion will be sought on: appropriate definitions and concepts, identifying key methodological considerations and establishing adaptations and processes to be undertaken during adaptation of complex population health interventions in new contexts.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval for the Delphi exercise has been obtained from the University of Glasgow and and the RAND institutional research board. Dissemination of the results of this study will be through peer-reviewed publications, workshops at national and international conferences, and a summary of the guidance developed for key organisations and stakeholders.

It is common to undertake qualitative research alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) when evaluating complex interventions. Researchers tend to analyse these datasets one by one and then consider their findings separately within the discussion section of the final report, rarely integrating quantitative and qualitative data or findings, and missing opportunities to combine data in order to add rigour, enabling thorough and more complete analysis, provide credibility to results, and generate further important insights about the intervention under evaluation. This paper reports on a 2 day expert meeting funded by the United Kingdom Medical Research Council Hubs for Trials Methodology Research with the aims to identify current strengths and weaknesses in the integration of quantitative and qualitative methods in clinical trials, establish the next steps required to provide the trials community with guidance on the integration of mixed methods in RCTs and set-up a network of individuals, groups and organisations willing to collaborate on related methodological activity. We summarise integration techniques and go beyond previous publications by highlighting the potential value of integration using three examples that are specific to RCTs. We suggest that applying mixed methods integration techniques to data or findings from studies involving both RCTs and qualitative research can yield insights that might be useful for understanding variation in outcomes, the mechanism by which interventions have an impact, and identifying ways of tailoring therapy to patient preference and type. Given a general lack of examples and knowledge of these techniques, researchers and funders will need future guidance on how to undertake and appraise them.