Search

Background A previous efficacy trial found benefit from inhaled budesonide for COVID-19 in patients not admitted to hospital, but effectiveness in high-risk individuals is unknown. We aimed to establish whether inhaled budesonide reduces time to recovery and COVID-19-related hospital admissions or deaths among people at high risk of complications in the community. Methods PRINCIPLE is a multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial done remotely from a central trial site and at primary care centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 65 years or older or 50 years or older with comorbidities, and unwell for up to 14 days with suspected COVID-19 but not admitted to hospital. Participants were randomly assigned to usual care, usual care plus inhaled budesonide (800 μg twice daily for 14 days), or usual care plus other interventions, and followed up for 28 days. Participants were aware of group assignment. The coprimary endpoints are time to first self-reported recovery and hospital admission or death related to COVID-19, within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. The primary analysis population included all eligible SARS-CoV-2-positive participants randomly assigned to budesonide, usual care, and other interventions, from the start of the platform trial until the budesonide group was closed. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN86534580) and is ongoing. Findings The trial began enrolment on April 2, 2020, with randomisation to budesonide from Nov 27, 2020, until March 31, 2021, when the prespecified time to recovery superiority criterion was met. 4700 participants were randomly assigned to budesonide (n=1073), usual care alone (n=1988), or other treatments (n=1639). The primary analysis model includes 2530 SARS-CoV-2-positive participants, with 787 in the budesonide group, 1069 in the usual care group, and 974 receiving other treatments. There was a benefit in time to first self-reported recovery of an estimated 2·94 days (95% Bayesian credible interval [BCI] 1·19 to 5·12) in the budesonide group versus the usual care group (11·8 days [95% BCI 10·0 to 14·1] vs 14·7 days [12·3 to 18·0]; hazard ratio 1·21 [95% BCI 1·08 to 1·36]), with a probability of superiority greater than 0·999, meeting the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·99. For the hospital admission or death outcome, the estimated rate was 6·8% (95% BCI 4·1 to 10·2) in the budesonide group versus 8·8% (5·5 to 12·7) in the usual care group (estimated absolute difference 2·0% [95% BCI –0·2 to 4·5]; odds ratio 0·75 [95% BCI 0·55 to 1·03]), with a probability of superiority 0·963, below the prespecified superiority threshold of 0·975. Two participants in the budesonide group and four in the usual care group had serious adverse events (hospital admissions unrelated to COVID-19). Interpretation Inhaled budesonide improves time to recovery, with a chance of also reducing hospital admissions or deaths (although our results did not meet the superiority threshold), in people with COVID-19 in the community who are at higher risk of complications. Funding National Institute of Health Research and United Kingdom Research Innovation.

Background Doxycycline is often used for treating COVID-19 respiratory symptoms in the community despite an absence of evidence from clinical trials to support its use. We aimed to assess the efficacy of doxycycline to treat suspected COVID-19 in the community among people at high risk of adverse outcomes. Methods We did a national, open-label, multi-arm, adaptive platform randomised trial of interventions against COVID-19 in older people (PRINCIPLE) across primary care centres in the UK. We included people aged 65 years or older, or 50 years or older with comorbidities (weakened immune system, heart disease, hypertension, asthma or lung disease, diabetes, mild hepatic impairment, stroke or neurological problem, and self-reported obesity or body-mass index of 35 kg/m2 or greater), who had been unwell (for ≤14 days) with suspected COVID-19 or a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the community. Participants were randomly assigned using response adaptive randomisation to usual care only, usual care plus oral doxycycline (200 mg on day 1, then 100 mg once daily for the following 6 days), or usual care plus other interventions. The interventions reported in this manuscript are usual care plus doxycycline and usual care only; evaluations of other interventions in this platform trial are ongoing. The coprimary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery, and hospitalisation or death related to COVID-19, both measured over 28 days from randomisation and analysed by intention to treat. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ISRCTN, 86534580. Findings The trial opened on April 2, 2020. Randomisation to doxycycline began on July 24, 2020, and was stopped on Dec 14, 2020, because the prespecified futility criterion was met; 2689 participants were enrolled and randomised between these dates. Of these, 2508 (93·3%) participants contributed follow-up data and were included in the primary analysis: 780 (31·1%) in the usual care plus doxycycline group, 948 in the usual care only group (37·8%), and 780 (31·1%) in the usual care plus other interventions group. Among the 1792 participants randomly assigned to the usual care plus doxycycline and usual care only groups, the mean age was 61·1 years (SD 7·9); 999 (55·7%) participants were female and 790 (44·1%) were male. In the primary analysis model, there was little evidence of difference in median time to first self-reported recovery between the usual care plus doxycycline group and the usual care only group (9·6 [95% Bayesian Credible Interval [BCI] 8·3 to 11·0] days vs 10·1 [8·7 to 11·7] days, hazard ratio 1·04 [95% BCI 0·93 to 1·17]). The estimated benefit in median time to first self-reported recovery was 0·5 days [95% BCI −0·99 to 2·04] and the probability of a clinically meaningful benefit (defined as ≥1·5 days) was 0·10. Hospitalisation or death related to COVID-19 occurred in 41 (crude percentage 5·3%) participants in the usual care plus doxycycline group and 43 (4·5%) in the usual care only group (estimated absolute percentage difference −0·5% [95% BCI −2·6 to 1·4]); there were five deaths (0·6%) in the usual care plus doxycycline group and two (0·2%) in the usual care only group. Interpretation In patients with suspected COVID-19 in the community in the UK, who were at high risk of adverse outcomes, treatment with doxycycline was not associated with clinically meaningful reductions in time to recovery or hospital admissions or deaths related to COVID-19, and should not be used as a routine treatment for COVID-19. Funding UK Research and Innovation, Department of Health and Social Care, National Institute for Health Research.

© 2020 The Authors. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society. BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Randomized controlled trials are used to inform clinical guidelines on the management of hypertension in older adults, but it is unclear to what extent these trials represent the general population attending routine clinical practice. This study aimed to define the proportion and characteristics of patients eligible for hypertension trials conducted in older people. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: A total of 24 general practices in England. PARTICIPANTS: Anonymized electronic health record data from all individuals aged 80 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive statistics were used to define the proportion and characteristics of patients eligible for two previous medication intensification trials (HYVET, SPRINT) and one medication reduction trial (OPTiMISE). A logistic regression model was constructed to estimate predictors of eligibility for each trial. RESULTS: Of 15,376 patients identified, 268 (1.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5–2.0%), 5,290 (34.4%; 95%CI = 33.7–35.2%), and 3,940 (25.6%; 95%CI = 24.9–26.3%) were eligible for the HYVET, SPRINT, and OPTiMISE trials, respectively. Between 5.6% and 30.7% of exclusions from each trial were due to eligibility criteria excluding those with high or uncontrolled blood pressure. Frailty (odds ratio [OR] =.44; 95%CI =.36–.54 [OPTiMISE]), cardiovascular polypharmacy (OR =.61; 95%CI =.55–.68 [SPRINT]) and multimorbidity (OR =.72; 95%CI =.64–.82 [SPRINT]) were associated with a lower likelihood of being eligible for one or more of the trials. CONCLUSION: A possible unintended consequence of blood pressure criteria used by trials attempting to answer different primary questions is that for many older patients, no trial evidence exists to inform treatment decisions in routine practice. Caution should be exercised when applying results from existing trials to patients with frailty or multimorbidity.

Unnecessary antibiotic prescribing contributes to Antimicrobial Resistance posing a major public health risk. Estimates suggest as many as half of antibiotics prescribed for respiratory infections may be unnecessary. We conducted a three-armed unblinded cluster randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN trial registry 83322985). Interventions were a commitment poster (CP) advocating safe antibiotic prescribing or a CP plus an antimicrobial stewardship message (AM) on telephone appointment booking lines, tested against a usual care control group. The primary outcome measure was antibiotic item dispensing rates per 1000 population adjusted for practice demographics. The outcome measures for post-hoc analysis were dispensing rates of antibiotics usually prescribed for upper respiratory tract infections and broad spectrum antibiotics. In total, 196 practice units were randomized to usual care (n = 60), CP (n = 66), and CP&amp, AM (n = 70). There was no effect on the overall dispensing rates for either interventions compared to usual care (CP 5.673, 95%CI &minus, 9.768 to 21.113, p = 0.458, CP&amp, AM, &minus, 12.575, 95%CI &minus, 30.726 to 5.576, p = 0.167). Secondary analysis, which included pooling the data into one model, showed a significant effect of the AM (&minus, 18.444, 95%CI &minus, 32.596 to &minus, 4.292, p = 0.012). Fewer penicillins and macrolides were prescribed in the CP&amp, AM intervention compared to usual care (&minus, 12.996, 95% CI &minus, 34.585 to &minus, 4.913, p = 0.018). Commitment posters did not reduce antibiotic prescribing. An automated patient antimicrobial stewardship message showed effects and requires further testing.

IntroductionInsomnia is a prevalent sleep disorder that negatively affects quality of life. Multicomponent cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is the recommended treatment but access remains limited, particularly in primary care. Sleep restriction therapy (SRT) is one of the principal active components of CBT and could be delivered by generalist staff in primary care. The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to establish whether nurse-delivered SRT for insomnia disorder is clinically and cost-effective compared with sleep hygiene advice.Methods and analysisIn the HABIT (Health-professional Administered Brief Insomnia Therapy) trial, 588 participants meeting criteria for insomnia disorder will be recruited from primary care in England and randomised (1:1) to either nurse-delivered SRT (plus sleep hygiene booklet) or sleep hygiene booklet on its own. SRT will be delivered over 4 weekly sessions; total therapy time is approximately 1 hour. Outcomes will be collected at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome is self-reported insomnia severity using the Insomnia Severity Index at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include health-related and sleep-related quality of life, depressive symptoms, use of prescribed sleep medication, diary and actigraphy-recorded sleep parameters, and work productivity. Analyses will be intention-to-treat. Moderation and mediation analyses will be conducted and a cost-utility analysis and process evaluation will be performed.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by the Yorkshire and the Humber - Bradford Leeds Research Ethics Committee (reference: 18/YH/0153). We will publish our primary findings in high-impact, peer-reviewed journals. There will be further outputs in relation to process evaluation and secondary analyses focussed on moderation and mediation. Trial results could make the case for the introduction of nurse-delivered sleep therapy in primary care, increasing access to evidence-based treatment for people with insomnia disorder.Trial registration numberISRCTN42499563

BACKGROUND Many people are accessing digital self-help for mental health problems, often with little evidence of effectiveness. Social anxiety is one of the most common sources of mental distress in the population, and many people with symptoms do not seek help for what represents a significant public health problem. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a self-guided cognitive behavioral internet intervention for people with social anxiety symptoms in the general population. METHODS We conducted a two-group randomized controlled trial in England between May 11, 2016, and June 27, 2018. Adults with social anxiety symptoms who were not receiving treatment for social anxiety were recruited using online advertisements. All participants had unrestricted access to usual care and were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either a Web-based unguided self-help intervention based on cognitive behavioral principles or a waiting list control group. All outcomes were collected through self-report online questionnaires. The primary outcome was the change in 17-item Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN-17) score from baseline to 6 weeks using a linear mixed-effect model that used data from all time points (6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months). RESULTS A total of 2122 participants were randomized, and 6 were excluded from analyses because they were ineligible. Of the 2116 eligible randomized participants (mean age 37 years; 80.24%, 1698/2116 women), 70.13% (1484/2116) had follow-up data available for analysis, and 56.95% (1205/2116) had data on the primary outcome, although attrition was higher in the intervention arm. At 6 weeks, the mean (95% CI) adjusted difference in change in SPIN-17 score in the intervention group compared with control was −1.94 (−3.13 to −0.75; P=.001), a standardized mean difference effect size of 0.2. The improvement was maintained at 12 months. Given the high dropout rate, sensitivity analyses explored missing data assumptions, with results that were consistent with those of the primary analysis. The economic evaluation demonstrated cost-effectiveness with a small health status benefit and a reduction in health service utilization. CONCLUSIONS For people with social anxiety symptoms who are not receiving other forms of help, this study suggests that the use of an online self-help tool based on cognitive behavioral principles can provide a small improvement in social anxiety symptoms compared with no intervention, although dropout rates were high. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02451878; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02451878

Background and Purpose— Oral anticoagulants (OAC) substantially reduce risk of stroke in atrial fibrillation, but uptake is suboptimal. Electronic health records enable automated identification of people at risk but not receiving treatment. We investigated the effectiveness of a software tool (AURAS-AF [Automated Risk Assessment for Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation]) designed to identify such individuals during routine care through a cluster-randomized trial. Methods— Screen reminders appeared each time the electronic health records of an eligible patient was accessed until a decision had been taken over OAC treatment. Where OAC was not started, clinicians were prompted to indicate a reason. Control practices continued usual care. The primary outcome was the proportion of eligible individuals receiving OAC at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included rates of cardiovascular events and reports of adverse effects of the software on clinical decision-making. Results— Forty-seven practices were randomized. The mean proportion–prescribed OAC at 6 months was 66.3% (SD=9.3) in the intervention arm and 63.9% (9.5) in the control arm (adjusted difference 1.21% [95% confidence interval −0.72 to 3.13]). Incidence of recorded transient ischemic attack was higher in the intervention practices (median 10.0 versus 2.3 per 1000 patients with atrial fibrillation; P =0.027), but at 12 months, we found a lower incidence of both all cause stroke ( P =0.06) and hemorrhage ( P =0.054). No adverse effects of the software were reported. Conclusions— No significant change in OAC prescribing occurred. A greater rate of diagnosis of transient ischemic attack (possibly because of improved detection or overdiagnosis) was associated with a reduction (of borderline significance) in stroke and hemorrhage over 12 months. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.isrctn.com . Unique Identifier: ISRCTN55722437.

Summary Background Closure of an abdominal stoma, a common elective operation, is associated with frequent complications; one of the commonest and impactful is incisional hernia formation. We aimed to investigate whether biological mesh (collagen tissue matrix) can safely reduce the incidence of incisional hernias at the stoma closure site. Methods In this randomised controlled trial (ROCSS) done in 37 hospitals across three European countries (35 UK, one Denmark, one Netherlands), patients aged 18 years or older undergoing elective ileostomy or colostomy closure were randomly assigned using a computer-based algorithm in a 1:1 ratio to either biological mesh reinforcement or closure with sutures alone (control). Training in the novel technique was standardised across hospitals. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was occurrence of clinically detectable hernia 2 years after randomisation (intention to treat). A sample size of 790 patients was required to identify a 40% reduction (25% to 15%), with 90% power (15% drop-out rate). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02238964. Findings Between Nov 28, 2012, and Nov 11, 2015, of 1286 screened patients, 790 were randomly assigned. 394 (50%) patients were randomly assigned to mesh closure and 396 (50%) to standard closure. In the mesh group, 373 (95%) of 394 patients successfully received mesh and in the control group, three patients received mesh. The clinically detectable hernia rate, the primary outcome, at 2 years was 12% (39 of 323) in the mesh group and 20% (64 of 327) in the control group (adjusted relative risk [RR] 0·62, 95% CI 0·43–0·90; p=0·012). In 455 patients for whom 1 year postoperative CT scans were available, there was a lower radiologically defined hernia rate in mesh versus control groups (20 [9%] of 229 vs 47 [21%] of 226, adjusted RR 0·42, 95% CI 0·26–0·69; p

Background Evidence is conflicting about a causal role of inflammation in psychosis and, specifically, regarding antibodies binding to neuronal membrane targets, especially N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors. NMDAR, LGI1 and GABA-A antibodies were found more prevalent in people with psychosis than in healthy controls. We aim to test whether these antibodies are pathogenic and may cause isolated psychosis. The SINAPPS2 phase IIa double-blinded randomised controlled trial will test the efficacy and safety of immunoglobulin and rituximab treatment versus placebo for patients with acute psychosis symptoms as added to psychiatric standard of care. Methods We will screen approximately 2500 adult patients with acute psychosis to identify 160 with antibody-positive psychosis without co-existing neurological disease and recruit about 80 eligible participants to the trial in the period from September 2017 to September 2021 across the UK. Eligible patients will be randomised 1:1 either to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) followed by rituximab or to placebo infusions of 1% albumin followed by 0.9% sodium chloride, respectively. To detect a time-to-symptomatic-recovery hazard ratio of 0.322 with a power of 80%, 56 participants are needed to complete the trial, allowing for up to 12 participants to drop out of each group. Eligible patients will be randomised and assessed at baseline within 4 weeks of their eligibility confirmation. The treatment will start with IVIG or 1% albumin placebo infusions over 2–4 consecutive days no later than 7 days from baseline. It will continue 4–5 weeks later with a rituximab or sodium chloride placebo infusion and will end 2–3 weeks after this with another rituximab or placebo infusion. The primary outcome is the time to symptomatic recovery defined as symptomatic remission sustained for at least 6 months on the following Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale items: P1, P2, P3, N1, N4, N6, G5 and G9. Participants will be followed for 12 months from the first day of treatment or, where sustained remission begins after the first 6 months, for an additional minimum of 6 months to assess later response. Discussion The SINAPPS2 trial aims to test whether immunotherapy is efficacious and safe in psychosis associated with anti-neuronal membrane antibodies. Trial registration ISRCTN, 11177045. Registered on 2 May 2017. EudraCT, 2016-000118-31. Registered on 22 November 2016. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03194815. Registered on 21 June 2017. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3336-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Severe asthma exacerbations are costly to patients and the NHS, and occur frequently in severely allergic patients. Objective To ascertain whether or not nocturnal temperature-controlled laminar airflow (TLA) device usage over 12 months can reduce severe exacerbations and improve asthma control and quality of life compared with a placebo device, while being cost-effective and acceptable to adults with severe allergic asthma. Design A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, superiority trial with qualitative interviews. The trial included an internal pilot with qualitative focus groups. Setting Fourteen hospitals in the UK that manage patients with severe asthma. Participants Adults (16–75 years) with severe, poorly controlled, exacerbation-prone asthma despite high-intensity treatment, and who are sensitised to a perennial indoor aeroallergen. Intervention Nocturnal, home-based TLA treatment using an Airsonett® (Airsonett AB, Ängelholm, Sweden) device. The comparator was a placebo device that was identical to the active device except that it did not deliver the laminar airflow. Participants were allocated 1 : 1 to TLA therapy or placebo, minimised by site, origin of case, baseline severe exacerbation frequency, maintenance oral corticosteroid use and pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second. Main outcome measures Primary outcome – frequency of severe asthma exacerbations occurring within the 12-month follow-up period, defined as worsening of asthma requiring systemic corticosteroids [≥ 30 mg of prednisolone or equivalent daily (or ≥ 50% increase in dose if on maintenance dose of ≥ 30 mg of prednisolone)] for ≥ 3 days. Secondary outcomes – changes in asthma control, lung function, asthma-specific and global quality of life for participants, adherence to the intervention, device acceptability, health-care resource use and cost-effectiveness. Results Between May 2014 and January 2016, 489 patients consented to participate in the trial, of whom 249 failed screening and 240 were randomised (n = 119 in the treatment group and n = 121 in the placebo group); all were analysed. In total, 202 participants (84%) reported use of the device for 9–12 months. Qualitative analyses showed high levels of acceptability. The mean [standard deviation (SD)] rate of severe exacerbations did not differ between groups [active 1.39 (1.57), placebo 1.48 (2.03); risk ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.27; p = 0.616]. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes for lung function, except for a reduction in mean daily peak expiratory flow [mean (SD) difference 14.7 l/minute (7.35 l/minute), 95% CI 0.32 to 29.1 l/minute; p = 0.045) for those in the active device group. There were no differences in asthma control or airway inflammation and no serious harms related to the device. No significant difference between the groups in quality-adjusted life-years gained over 1 year was observed. In addition, there was no difference in generic or disease-specific health-related quality of life overall, although statistically significant higher quality of life at month 6 was observed. Increases in quality of life were not sufficient to offset the annual costs associated with use of the TLA device. Limitations Missing outcome data could have resulted in an underestimation of exacerbations and rendered the study inconclusive. Conclusions Within the limits of the data, no consistent benefits of the active device were demonstrated, and the differences observed were not sufficient to make the device cost-effective. The types of patients who may benefit from the TLA device, and the reasons for large reductions in exacerbation frequency in severe asthma trials, which also incorporate other methods of recording exacerbations, need to be explored. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN46346208. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: Health outcomes for people treated for type 2 diabetes could be substantially improved in sub-Saharan Africa. Failure to take medicine regularly to treat diabetes has been identified as a major problem. Resources to identify and support patients who are not making the best use of medicine in low- and middle-income settings are scarce. Mobile phones are widely available in these settings, including among people with diabetes; linked technologies, such as short message service (SMS) text messaging, have shown promise in delivering low-cost interventions efficiently. However, evidence showing that these interventions will work when carried out at a larger scale and measuring the extent to which they will improve health outcomes when added to usual care is limited.\ud \ud Objective: The objective of this trial is to test the effectiveness of sending brief, automated SMS text messages for improving health outcomes and medication adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to an active control.\ud \ud Methods: We will carry out a randomized trial recruiting from clinics in two contrasting settings in sub-Saharan Africa: Cape Town, South Africa, and Lilongwe, Malawi. Intervention messages will advise people about the benefits of their diabetes treatment and offer motivation and encouragement around lifestyle and use of medication. We allocated patients, using randomization with a minimization algorithm, to receive either three to four intervention messages per week or non-health-related messages every 6 weeks. We will follow up with participants for 12 months, measuring important risk factors for poor health outcomes and complications in diabetes. This will enable us to estimate potential health benefits, including the primary outcome of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels as a marker for long-term blood glucose control and a secondary outcome of blood pressure control. We will record the costs of performing these activities and estimate cost-effectiveness. We will also use process evaluation to capture the collection of medication and assess the reception of the intervention by participants and health care workers.\ud \ud Results: Recruitment to the trial began in September 2016 and follow-up of participants was completed in October 2018. Data collection from electronic health records and other routinely collected sources is continuing. The database lock is anticipated in June 2019, followed by analysis and disclosing of group allocation.\ud \ud Conclusions: The knowledge gained from this study will have wide applications and advance the evidence base for effectiveness of mobile phone-based, brief text messaging on clinical outcomes and in large-scale, operational settings. It will provide evidence for cost-effectiveness and acceptability that will further inform policy development and decision making. We will work with a wide network that includes patients, clinicians, academics, industry, and policy makers to help us identify opportunities for informing people about the work and raise awareness of what is being developed and studied.\ud \ud Trial Registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN70768808; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN70768808 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/786316Zqk)\ud \ud International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/12377

Background The Brief Intervention for Weight Loss Trial enrolled 1882 consecutively attending primary care patients who were obese and participants were randomised to physicians opportunistically endorsing, offering, and facilitating a referral to a weight loss programme (support) or recommending weight loss (advice). After one year, the support group lost 1.4 kg more (95%CI 0.9 to 2.0): 2.4 kg versus 1.0 kg. We use a cohort simulation to predict effects on disease incidence, quality of life, and healthcare costs over 20 years. Methods Randomly sampling from the trial population, we created a virtual cohort of 20 million adults and assigned baseline morbidity. We applied the weight loss observed in the trial and assumed weight regain over four years. Using epidemiological data, we assigned the incidence of 12 weight-related diseases depending on baseline disease status, age, gender, body mass index. From a healthcare perspective, we calculated the quality adjusted life years (QALYs) accruing and calculated the incremental difference between trial arms in costs expended in delivering the intervention and healthcare costs accruing. We discounted future costs and benefits at 1.5% over 20 years. Results Compared with advice, the support intervention reduced the cumulative incidence of weight-related disease by 722/100,000 people, 0.33% of all weight-related disease. The incremental cost of support over advice was £2.01million/100,000. However, the support intervention reduced health service costs by £5.86 million/100,000 leading to a net saving of £3.85 million/100,000. The support intervention produced 992 QALYs/100,000 people relative to advice. Conclusions A brief intervention in which physicians opportunistically endorse, offer, and facilitate a referral to a behavioural weight management service to patients with a BMI of at least 30 kg/m2 reduces healthcare costs and improves health more than advising weight loss.

Summary Background Nepalese infants receive ten-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV10) with a 1 month interval between priming doses for programmatic reasons. We aimed to investigate whether immune responses to PCV10 serotypes were non-inferior if the second priming dose of PCV10 was delivered at a 1 month interval as opposed to a 2 month interval. Methods We did an open-label, randomised, parallel group trial in healthy Nepalese infants aged 40–60 days at Patan Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal. Children were eligible for inclusion if they were healthy, were born at more than or equal to 37 weeks' gestation, were residing in Kathmandu, and had not had any previous vaccinations other than BCG, and oral polio vaccine. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of a computer-generated list with randomly varying permuted block sizes accessed through a validated web-based interface, to receive PCV10 either at 6 weeks and 10 weeks of age (6 + 10 group) or at 6 weeks and 14 weeks of age (6 + 14 group), with both groups receiving a booster at 9 months of age. Laboratory staff, masked to study intervention, analysed serum samples for antibodies against PCV10 serotypes by ELISA. The primary outcome was to determine whether the 6 + 10 schedule was non-inferior to the 6 + 14 schedule at 9 months of age, on the basis of the proportion of infants with serotype-specific IgG greater than or equal to 0·35 μg/mL. Non-inferiority was established with a 10% margin, and the primary endpoint was measured in a modified intention-to-treat population, which included only participants who successfully had a blood sample collected. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02385513 . Findings Between Aug 21, 2015, and April 4, 2016, 304 Nepalese children were randomly assigned to either the 6 + 10 group (n=152) or the 6 + 14 group (n=152). At 9 months of age, the 6 + 10 schedule was non-inferior for serotype 5 (79 [55·2%] of 143 vs 78 [53·4%] of 146, difference 1·82% [95% CI −9·6 to 13·25], p=0·021), serotype 9V (66 [46·1%] of 143 vs 55 [37·6%] of 146, difference 8·48% [−2·84 to 19·8], p=0·001), serotype 14 (110 [77·4%] of 142 vs 110 [74·8%] of 147, difference 2·63% [−7·27 to 12·54], p=0·006), and serotype 19F (135 [95%] of 142 vs 146 [100%] of 146, difference −4·92% [−9·86 to 0], p=0·022). At the same timepoint, non-inferiority was not shown for serotype 1 (36 [25·1%] of 143 vs 42 [28·5%] of 147, difference −3·39% [95% CI −13·56 to 6·77], p=0·102), serotype 4 (70 [48·9%] of 143 vs 87 [59·1%] of 147, difference −10·23% [−21·64 to 1·18], p=0·516), serotype 6B (96 [67·1%] of 143 vs 114 [77·5%] of 147, difference −10·41% [−20·65 to −0·18], p=0·532), serotype 7F (99 [69·2%] of 143 vs 109 [74·1%] of 147, difference −4·91% [−15·26 to 5·42], p=0·168), serotype 18C (89 [62·2%] of 143 vs 114 [77·5%] of 147, difference −15·31% [−25·78 to −4·83], p=0·840), and serotype 23F (37 [25·8%] of 143 vs 41 [27·8%] of 147, difference −2·01% [−12·19 to 8·16], p=0·062). After the booster dose, at 10 months of age, there were no significant differences in immunogenicity (proportion of children with antibody greater than or equal to 0.35 μg/mL) for any of the ten serotypes, when comparing the two schedules. Serious adverse events occurred in 32 participants, 11 (7%) of 152 in the 6 + 10 group and 21 (14%) of 152 in the 6 + 14 group. Interpretation The 6 week, 14 week, and 9 month schedule should be implemented where possible. However, post-booster responses, which are thought to drive herd immunity, were similar in the two schedules. Therefore, the 6 week, 10 week, and 9 month schedule is an alternative that can be used when logistically necessary, and is expected to provide herd protection. Funding Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.

Summary Background The effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination programme depends on mass participation: the greater the number of people vaccinated, the less risk to the population. Concise, persuasive messaging is crucial, particularly given substantial levels of vaccine hesitancy in the UK. Our aim was to test which types of written information about COVID-19 vaccination, in addition to a statement of efficacy and safety, might increase vaccine acceptance. Methods For this single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, we aimed to recruit 15 000 adults in the UK, who were quota sampled to be representative. Participants were randomly assigned equally across ten information conditions stratified by level of vaccine acceptance (willing, doubtful, or strongly hesitant). The control information condition comprised the safety and effectiveness statement taken from the UK National Health Service website; the remaining conditions addressed collective benefit, personal benefit, seriousness of the pandemic, and safety concerns. After online provision of vaccination information, participants completed the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (outcome measure; score range 7–35) and the Oxford Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale (mediation measure). The primary outcome was willingness to be vaccinated. Participants were analysed in the groups they were allocated. p values were adjusted for multiple comparisons. The study was registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN37254291. Findings From Jan 19 to Feb 5, 2021, 15 014 adults were recruited. Vaccine hesitancy had reduced from 26·9% the previous year to 16·9%, so recruitment was extended to Feb 18 to recruit 3841 additional vaccine-hesitant adults. 12 463 (66·1%) participants were classified as willing, 2932 (15·6%) as doubtful, and 3460 (18·4%) as strongly hesitant (ie, report that they will avoid being vaccinated for as long as possible or will never get vaccinated). Information conditions did not alter COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in those willing or doubtful (adjusted p values >0·70). In those strongly hesitant, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was reduced, in comparison to the control condition, by personal benefit information (mean difference –1·49, 95% CI –2·16 to –0·82; adjusted p=0·0015), directly addressing safety concerns about speed of development (−0·91, –1·58 to –0·23; adjusted p=0·0261), and a combination of all information (−0·86, –1·53 to –0·18; adjusted p=0·0313). In those strongly hesitant, provision of personal benefit information reduced hesitancy to a greater extent than provision of information on the collective benefit of not personally getting ill (−0·97, 95% CI –1·64 to –0·30; adjusted p=0·0165) or the collective benefit of not transmitting the virus (−1·01, –1·68 to –0·35; adjusted p=0·0150). Ethnicity and gender were found to moderate information condition outcomes. Interpretation In the approximately 10% of the population who are strongly hesitant about COVID-19 vaccines, provision of information on personal benefit reduces hesitancy to a greater extent than information on collective benefits. Where perception of risk from vaccines is most salient, decision making becomes centred on the personal. As such, messaging that stresses the counterbalancing personal benefits is likely to prove most effective. The messaging from this study could be used in public health communications. Going forwards, the study highlights the need for future health campaigns to engage with the public on the terrain that is most salient to them. Funding National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.

Aim Hernia formation occurs at closed stoma sites in up to 30% of patients. The Reinforcement of Closure of Stoma Site (ROCSS) randomized controlled trial is evaluating whether placement of biological mesh during stoma closure safely reduces hernia rates compared with closure without mesh, without increasing surgical or wound complications. This paper aims to report recruitment, deliverability and safety from the internal feasibility study. Method A multicentre, patient and assessor blinded, randomized controlled trial, delivered through surgical trainee research networks. A 90-patient internal feasibility study assessed recruitment, randomization, deliverability and early (30 day) safety of the novel surgical technique (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02238964). Results The feasibility study recruited 90 patients from the 104 considered for entry (45 to mesh, 45 to no mesh). Seven of eight participating centres randomized patients within 30 days of opening. Overall, 41% of stomas were created for malignant disease and 73% were ileostomies. No mesh-specific complications occurred. Thirty-one postoperative adverse events were experienced by 31 patients, including surgical site infection (9%) and postoperative ileus (6%). One mesh was removed for re-access to the abdominal cavity, for reasons unrelated to the mesh. Independent review by the Data Monitoring and Ethics Committee of adverse event data by treatment allocation found no safety concerns. Conclusion Multicentre randomization to this trial of biological mesh is feasible, with no early safety concerns. Progression to the full Phase III trial has continued. ROCSS shows that trainee research networks can efficiently develop and deliver complex interventional surgical trials.

Long term follow-up of vaccine trials is essential to establish the duration of protection. In the context of worldwide concern about rising pertussis incidence, estimates of antibody persistence after vaccination, which do not account for the rise in antibody due to natural boosting or infection, may overestimate the degree of protection afforded by pertussis vaccines.This was a 5year follow up study of a randomised controlled trial of diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio booster vaccines in UK children aged 3.5-5years. Antibody persistence was measured at 1month, 1, 3, and 5years after vaccination and the kinetics of antibody decline were modelled longitudinally. Estimates of predicted antibody persistence 9years after the pre-school booster were derived from model parameters.Antibody levels 9years after vaccination were predicted to be above accepted thresholds for protection for diphtheria, tetanus and polio. Antibody responses to pertussis toxoid were undetectable in 49% of children at the 5year follow up visit, and responses were predicted to be undetectable in 69% (95% CI 45-88%) of children by the time of their teenage booster at 13-14years of age.There is no defined correlate of protection for pertussis. However, the large proportion of participants in this study with undetectable pertussis antibody levels at both measured and predicted timepoints suggests sub-optimal immunity in adolescence. Adding pertussis to the teenage booster for UK children as is done in other countries, would enhance immunity in adolescence.

Background— We assessed the effect of automated treatment adherence support delivered via mobile phone short message system (SMS) text messages on blood pressure. Methods and Results— In this pragmatic, single-blind, 3-arm, randomized trial (SMS-Text Adherence Support [StAR]) undertaken in South Africa, patients treated for high blood pressure were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to information only, interactive SMS text messaging, or usual care. The primary outcome was change in systolic blood pressure at 12 months from baseline measured with a validated oscillometric device. All trial staff were masked to treatment allocation. Analyses were intention to treat. Between June 26, 2012, and November 23, 2012, 1372 participants were randomized to receive information-only SMS text messages (n=457), interactive SMS text messages (n=458), or usual care (n=457). Primary outcome data were available for 1256 participants (92%). At 12 months, the mean adjusted change in systolic blood pressure compared with usual care was −2.2 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, −4.4 to −0.04) with information-only SMS and −1.6 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, −3.7 to 0.6) with interactive SMS. Odds ratios for the proportion of participants with a blood pressure Conclusions— In this randomized trial of an automated adherence support program delivered by SMS text message in a general outpatient population of adults with high blood pressure, we found a small reduction in systolic blood pressure control compared with usual care at 12 months. There was no evidence that an interactive intervention increased this effect. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02019823. South African National Clinical Trials Register, number SANCTR DOH-27-1212-386; Pan Africa Trial Register, number PACTR201411000724141.

Importance Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is recommended for some older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity when the benefits of continued treatment may not outweigh the harms. Objective This study aimed to establish whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible without significant changes in systolic blood pressure control or adverse events during 12-week follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants The Optimising Treatment for Mild Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (OPTIMISE) study was a randomized, unblinded, noninferiority trial conducted in 69 primary care sites in England. Participants, whose primary care physician considered them appropriate for medication reduction, were aged 80 years and older, had systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg, and were receiving at least 2 antihypertensive medications were included. Participants enrolled between April 2017 and September 2018 and underwent follow-up until January 2019. Interventions Participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to a strategy of antihypertensive medication reduction (removal of 1 drug [intervention], n = 282) or usual care (control, n = 287), in which no medication changes were mandated. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12-week follow-up. The prespecified noninferiority margin was a relative risk (RR) of 0.90. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants maintaining medication reduction and differences in blood pressure, frailty, quality of life, adverse effects, and serious adverse events. Results Among 569 patients randomized (mean age, 84.8 years; 276 [48.5%] women; median of 2 antihypertensive medications prescribed at baseline), 534 (93.8%) completed the trial. Overall, 229 (86.4%) patients in the intervention group and 236 (87.7%) patients in the control group had a systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12 weeks (adjusted RR, 0.98 [97.5% 1-sided CI, 0.92 to ∞]). Of 7 prespecified secondary end points, 5 showed no significant difference. Medication reduction was sustained in 187 (66.3%) participants at 12 weeks. Mean change in systolic blood pressure was 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.1 to 5.8 mm Hg) higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. Twelve (4.3%) participants in the intervention group and 7 (2.4%) in the control group reported at least 1 serious adverse event (adjusted RR, 1.72 [95% CI, 0.7 to 4.3]). Conclusions and Relevance Among older patients treated with multiple antihypertensive medications, a strategy of medication reduction, compared with usual care, was noninferior with regard to systolic blood pressure control at 12 weeks. The findings suggest antihypertensive medication reduction in some older patients with hypertension is not associated with substantial change in blood pressure control, although further research is needed to understand long-term clinical outcomes. Trial Registration EudraCT Identifier:2016-004236-38; ISRCTN identifier:97503221

IntroductionRecent evidence suggests that larger blood pressure reductions and multiple antihypertensive drugs may be harmful in older people, particularly frail individuals with polypharmacy and multimorbidity. However, there is a lack of evidence to support deprescribing of antihypertensives, which limits the practice of medication reduction in routine clinical care. The aim of this trial is to examine whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible in older patients without significant changes in blood pressure control at follow-up.Methods and analysisThis trial will use a primary care-based, open-label, randomised controlled trial design. A total of 540 participants will be recruited, aged ≥80 years, with systolic blood pressure Ethics and disseminationThe protocol, informed consent form, participant information sheet and all other participant facing material have been approved by the Research Ethics Committee (South Central—Oxford A; ref 16/SC/0628), Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (ref 21584/0371/001–0001), host institution(s) and Health Research Authority. All research outputs will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberEudraCT 2016-004236-38;ISRCTN97503221; Pre-results.

UNSTRUCTURED Background: Health outcomes for people treated for type 2 diabetes could be substantially improved in sub-Saharan Africa. Failure to take medicines regularly to treat diabetes has been identified as a major problem. Resources to identify and support patients who are not making best use of medicine in low and middle-income settings are scarce. Mobile phones are widely available in these settings including among people with diabetes, and linked technologies such as SMS-text messaging have shown promise in delivering low-cost interventions efficiently. However, evidence that these interventions will work when carried out at a larger scale, and of the extent to which they will improve health outcomes when added to usual care is limited. Methods: We will carry out a randomised clinical trial in two contrasting settings in sub-Saharan Africa, Cape Town in South Africa and Lilongwe in Malawi, to provide information about the impact of sending brief automated messages via SMS text-messaging. The messages will advise people about the benefits of their diabetes treatment and offer motivation and encouragement around lifestyle and use of medication. We will allocate patients using a randomly-generated assignment plan to receive either intervention messages, or an active control. We will follow up people for twelve months measuring important risk factors for poor health outcomes and complications in diabetes so we can estimate potential health benefits, including HbA1c as a marker for long-term blood glucose control and blood pressure control, We will record the costs of doing this, and estimate cost-effectiveness. We will also capture collection of medication and assess the reception of the intervention by participants and health care workers. Discussion: The knowledge gained will have wide application and advance the evidence base for effectiveness of mobile-phone based brief text-messaging on clinical outcomes and in large-scale, operational settings. It will provide evidence for cost-effectiveness that will further inform policy development and decision-making. We will work with a wide network that includes patients, clinicians, academics, industry, and policy makers to help us identify opportunities for informing people about the work and raise awareness of what is being developed and studied. Trial Registration: ISRCTN70768808 (Registered on 3 August 2015)

IntroductionType 2 diabetes is common, affecting over 400 million people worldwide. Risk of serious complications can be reduced through use of effective treatments and active self-management. However, people are often concerned about starting new medicines and face difficulties in taking them regularly. Use of brief messages to provide education and support self-management, delivered through mobile phone-based text messages, can be an effective tool for some long-term conditions. We have developed messages aiming to support patients’ self-management of type 2 diabetes in the use of medications and other aspects of self-management, underpinned by theory and evidence. The aim of this trial is to determine the feasibility of a large-scale clinical trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention, compared with usual care.Methods and analysisThe feasibility trial will be a multicentre individually randomised, controlled trial in primary care recruiting adults (≥35 years) with type 2 diabetes in England. Consenting participants will be randomised to receive short text messages three times a week with messages designed to produce change in medication adherence or non-health-related messages for 6 months. The aims are to test recruitment methods, retention to the study, the feasibility of data collection and the mobile phone and web-based processes of a proposed definitive trial and to refine the text messaging intervention. The primary outcome is the rate of recruitment to randomisation of participants to the trial. Data, including patient reported measures, will be collected online at baseline and the end of the 6-month follow-up period. With 200 participants (100 in each group), this trial is powered to estimate 80% follow-up within 95% CIs of 73.8% to 85.3%. The analysis will follow a prespecified plan.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 05. The results will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed journals and will be published on the trial website: www.summit-d.org (SuMMiT-D (SUpport through Mobile Messaging and digital health Technology for Diabetes)).Trial registration numberISRCTN13404264.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating titration of antihypertensive medication using self-monitoring give contradictory findings and the precise place of telemonitoring over self-monitoring alone is unclear. The TASMINH4 trial aimed to assess the efficacy of self-monitored blood pressure, with or without telemonitoring, for antihypertensive titration in primary care, compared with usual care.METHODS: This study was a parallel randomised controlled trial done in 142 general practices in the UK, and included hypertensive patients older than 35 years, with blood pressure higher than 140/90 mm Hg, who were willing to self-monitor their blood pressure. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to self-monitoring blood pressure (self-montoring group), to self-monitoring blood pressure with telemonitoring (telemonitoring group), or to usual care (clinic blood pressure; usual care group). Randomisation was by a secure web-based system. Neither participants nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was clinic measured systolic blood pressure at 12 months from randomisation. Primary analysis was of available cases. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN 83571366.FINDINGS: 1182 participants were randomly assigned to the self-monitoring group (n=395), the telemonitoring group (n=393), or the usual care group (n=394), of whom 1003 (85%) were included in the primary analysis. After 12 months, systolic blood pressure was lower in both intervention groups compared with usual care (self-monitoring, 137·0 [SD 16·7] mm Hg and telemonitoring, 136·0 [16·1] mm Hg vs usual care, 140·4 [16·5]; adjusted mean differences vs usual care: self-monitoring alone, -3·5 mm Hg [95% CI -5·8 to -1·2]; telemonitoring, -4·7 mm Hg [-7·0 to -2·4]). No difference between the self-monitoring and telemonitoring groups was recorded (adjusted mean difference -1·2 mm Hg [95% CI -3·5 to 1·2]). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses including multiple imputation. Adverse events were similar between all three groups.INTERPRETATION: Self-monitoring, with or without telemonitoring, when used by general practitioners to titrate antihypertensive medication in individuals with poorly controlled blood pressure, leads to significantly lower blood pressure than titration guided by clinic readings. With most general practitioners and many patients using self-monitoring, it could become the cornerstone of hypertension management in primary care.FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research via Programme Grant for Applied Health Research (RP-PG-1209-10051), Professorship to RJM (NIHR-RP-R2-12-015), Oxford Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care, and Omron Healthcare UK.

Background There is concern that existing models of acute hospital care will become unworkable as the health service admits an increasing number of frail older people with complex health needs, and that there is inadequate evidence to guide the planning of acute hospital level services. We aim to evaluate whether geriatrician-led admission avoidance to hospital at home is an effective alternative to hospital admission. Methods/Design We are conducting a multi-site randomised open trial of geriatrician-led admission avoidance hospital at home, compared with admission to hospital. We are recruiting older people with markers of frailty or prior dependence who have been referred to admission avoidance hospital at home for an acute medical event. This includes patients presenting with delirium, functional decline, dependence, falls, immobility or a background of dementia presenting with physical disease. Participants are randomised using a computerised random number generator to geriatrician-led admission avoidance hospital at home or a control group of inpatient admission in a 2:1 ratio in favour of the intervention. The primary endpoint ‘living at home’ (the inverse of death or living in a residential care setting) is measured at 6 months follow-up, and we also collect data on this outcome at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of delirium, mortality, new long-term residential care, cognitive impairment, activities of daily living, quality of life and quality-adjusted survival, length of stay, readmission or transfer to hospital. We will conduct a parallel economic evaluation, and a process evaluation that includes an interview study to explore the experiences of patients and carers. Discussion Health systems around the world are examining how to provide acute hospital-level care to older adults in greater numbers with a fixed or shrinking hospital resource. This trial is the first large multi-site randomised trial of geriatrician-led admission avoidance hospital at home, and will provide evidence on alternative models of healthcare for older people who require hospital admission. Trial registration ISRCTN60477865: Registered on 10 March 2014. Trial Sponsor: University of Oxford. Version 3.1, 14/06/2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2214-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a randomized controlled trial of a digital health system supporting clinical care through monitoring and self-management support in community-based patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a fully automated Internet-linked, tablet computer-based system of monitoring and self-management support (EDGE' sElf-management anD support proGrammE) in improving quality of life and clinical outcomes.METHODS: We compared daily use of EDGE with usual care for 12 months. The primary outcome was COPD-specific health status measured with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-C).RESULTS: A total of 166 patients were randomized (110 EDGE, 56 usual care). All patients were included in an intention to treat analysis. The estimated difference in SGRQ-C at 12 months (EDGE-usual care) was -1.7 with a 95% CI of -6.6 to 3.2 (P=.49). The relative risk of hospital admission for EDGE was 0.83 (0.56-1.24, P=.37) compared with usual care. Generic health status (EQ-5D, EuroQol 5-Dimension Questionnaire) between the groups differed significantly with better health status for the EDGE group (0.076, 95% CI 0.008-0.14, P=.03). The median number of visits to general practitioners for EDGE versus usual care were 4 versus 5.5 (P=.06) and to practice nurses were 1.5 versus 2.5 (P=.03), respectively.CONCLUSIONS: The EDGE clinical trial does not provide evidence for an effect on COPD-specific health status in comparison with usual care, despite uptake of the intervention. However, there appears to be an overall benefit in generic health status; and the effect sizes for improved depression score, reductions in hospital admissions, and general practice visits warrants further evaluation and could make an important contribution to supporting people with COPD.TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 40367841; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN40367841 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6pmfIJ9KK).

Design and objective This paper describes the protocol for a large-scale pragmatic, randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the self-directed E-Couch social anxiety module versus a waiting list control condition, for reducing sub-clinical social anxiety symptoms in the general population. Study population Community-based adults (aged 18þ) with social anxiety symptoms that do not meet the criteria for social anxiety disorder recruited via a direct-to-consumer advertisement on national websites. Intervention and control Intervention is the self-guided E-Couch social anxiety module. Control group participants are placed on a waiting list to receive the intervention at the end of the trial. Both groups receive email and text message reminders. Outcome measures The primary outcome will be change in self-reported social anxiety score using the Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN). Secondary outcomes will be the changes in the following self-report measures: Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation scale (BFNE-S); depression (CES-D); mental wellbeing (SWEMWEBS); health status (SF36); use of health services; safety events; and adherence, retention, and attrition rates. All measures will be administered at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months. Analysis A mixed effects model will be used to analyse the effect of the intervention on the primary and secondary outcomes (intention to treat analysis). Secondary analyses will explore moderators and mediators of effect. A prospective economic evaluation, conducted from a NHS and social care perspective, will provide estimates of cost utility and costeffectiveness. An interview study will be conducted with 20 participants to explore issues including acceptability, adherence, retention and attrition.

Meningococcal conjugate vaccines are today successfully deployed in universal programs for children and adolescents in different geographic regions to control meningitis and septicemia. However, in adults, the advantages of these conjugates over the older polysaccharide vaccines are less clear. In this randomized clinical trial, we demonstrated that both conjugate and polysaccharide quadrivalent meningococcal vaccines elicit protective antibody responses in adults aged 18 to 70. (This study has been registered atwww.clinicaltrials.govunder registration no. NCT00901940.)

IntroductionMany patients with psychosis experience everyday social situations as anxiety-provoking. The fears can arise, for example, from paranoia, hallucinations, social anxiety or negative-self beliefs. The fears lead patients to withdraw from activities, and this isolation leads to a cycle of worsening physical and mental health. Breaking this cycle requires highly active treatment directly in the troubling situations so that patients learn that they can safely and confidently enter them. However patients with psychosis seldom receive such life-changing interventions. To solve this problem we have developed an automated psychological treatment delivered in virtual reality (VR). It allows patients to experience computer simulations of the situations that they find anxiety-provoking. A virtual coach guides patients, using cognitive techniques, in how to overcome their fears. Patients are willing to enter VR simulations of anxiety-provoking situations because they know the simulations are not real, but the learning made transfers to the real world.Methods and analysis432 patients with psychosis and anxious avoidance of social situations will be recruited from National Health Service (NHS) secondary care services. In the gameChange trial, they will be randomised (1:1) to the six-session VR cognitive treatment added to treatment as usual or treatment as usual alone. Assessments will be conducted at 0, 6 (post-treatment) and 26 weeks by a researcher blind to allocation. The primary outcome is avoidance and distress in real-life situations, using a behavioural assessment task, at 6 weeks. The secondary outcomes are psychiatric symptoms, activity levels and quality of life. All main analyses will be intention-to-treat. Moderation and mediation will be tested. An economic evaluation will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationThe trial has received ethical approval from the NHS South Central - Oxford B Research Ethics Committee (19/SC/0075). A key output will be a high-quality automated VR treatment for patients to overcome anxious avoidance of social situations.Trial registration numberISRCTN17308399.

BACKGROUND: The internet is frequently used to share experiences of health and illness, but this phenomenon has not been harnessed as an intervention to achieve health behaviour change. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of a randomised trial assessing the effects of a novel, experience-based website as a smoking cessation intervention. The secondary aim was to measure the potential impact on smoking behaviour of both the intervention and a comparator website. METHODS: A feasibility randomised controlled single-blind trial assessed a novel, experience-based website containing personal accounts of quitting smoking as a cessation intervention, and a comparator website providing factual information. Feasibility measures including recruitment, and usage of the interventions were recorded, and the following participant-reported outcomes were also measured: Smoking Abstinence Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, the single-item Motivation to Stop Scale, self-reported abstinence, quit attempts and health status outcomes. Eligible smokers from two English regions were entered into the trial and given access to their allocated website for two weeks. RESULTS: Eighty-seven smokers were randomised, 65 completed follow-up (75 %). Median usage was 15 min for the intervention, and 5 min for the comparator (range 0.5-213 min). Median logins for both sites was 2 (range 1-20). All participant-reported outcomes were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: It was technically feasible to deliver a novel intervention harnessing the online sharing of personal experiences as a tool for smoking cessation, but recruitment was slow and actual use was relatively low, with attrition from the trial. Future work needs to maximize engagement and to understand how best to assess the value of such interventions in everyday use, rather than as an isolated 'dose of information'. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN29549695 DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN29549695 . Registered 17/05/2013.

Objective To determine the feasibility of a randomised control trial (RCT) assessing the effects of an experience-based website as a resource for the self-management of chronic asthma. Design and setting Feasibility, single-blind RCT in 2 regions of England. Randomisation used computer-generated random number sequence in a 1:1 ratio, after baseline data collection, to website access for 2 weeks. Participants Adults (age ≥18 years) with clinically diagnosed asthma as coded in their primary care electronic record, prescribed inhaled corticosteroids for at least 3 months in the previous year were recruited from 9 general practices. Intervention The EXPERT asthma intervention is an interactive PC/laptop/tablet/smartphone compatible website designed with extensive input from adults with asthma. It provides experience-based information and aims to support subjective perception of self-efficacy, self-management and improve health status. Outcome measures Primary outcomes were consent/recruitment, website usage and completion of outcome measures. Secondary outcomes included Partners in Health (PIH) questionnaire, the Chronic Disease Self-Efficacy Scale (CDSES), the SF36 and the E-Health Impact Questionnaire (eHIQ). Participant blinding postrandomisation was not possible. The analysis was blind to allocation. Results Recruitment target exceeded. 148 participants randomised (73 intervention group). Age range 19-84 years; 59% female. 121/148 (84%; 62 intervention group) followed up. Median number of logins was 2 (IQR 2-3, range 1-48). Minimal differences of change from baseline between groups; both showed improvement in health state or management of their condition with no significant differences between arms. No adverse events. Conclusions Recruitment and retention confirmed feasibility. The trends towards improved outcomes suggest that further research on digital interventions based on exposure to others’ personal experiences may be of value in the self-management of chronic asthma.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of Provent, an expiratory nasal resistance valve, to prevent the recurrence of OSA following CPAP withdrawal. DESIGN: Randomised, partially blinded, parallel, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient sleep clinics in the UK (Oxford) and Switzerland (Zurich). PARTICIPANTS: 67 patients with OSA receiving CPAP were randomised to one of three groups for 2 weeks: continuing CPAP, Provent or placebo Provent. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included for Provent versus placebo Provent, OSA severity (oxygen desaturation index (ODI), apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI)) and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score. Secondary outcomes for Provent versus placebo Provent included ODI from ambulatory pulse oximetry and blood pressure (BP). For CPAP versus Provent, or CPAP versus placebo Provent, secondary outcomes included ODI/AHI, ESS and BP. RESULTS: 63 patients were included in the per protocol analysis. OSA recurred in the Provent (ODI 35.8, SD 17.4) and placebo Provent (ODI 28.2, SD 18.3) groups, and there was no significant difference in ODI, AHI and ESS between Provent and placebo Provent at 2 weeks (mean difference ODI -1.0, 95% CI -10.0 to +12.0, p=0.85; AHI +3.2, 95% CI -7.7 to +14.1, p=0.52; and ESS -1.4, 95% CI -4.1 to +1.4, p=0.33). ODI from ambulatory pulse-oximetry and BP at 2 weeks were not different in the Provent versus placebo Provent groups. ODI, AHI and BP, but not ESS, were significantly higher in the Provent and placebo Provent groups compared with CPAP. CONCLUSIONS: Provent cannot be recommended as an alternative short-term therapy for patients with moderate to severe OSA already on CPAP. TRIALREGNO: NCT01332175.

Background: The multicomponent serogroup B meningococcal (4CMenB) vaccine was recently licensed for use in Europe. There are currently no data on the persistence of bactericidal antibodies induced by use of this vaccine in infants. Our objective was to evaluate serogroup B–specific bactericidal antibodies in children aged 40–44 months previously vaccinated at 2, 4, 6 and 12 months of age. Methods: Participants given 4 doses of 4CMenB as infants received a fifth dose of the vaccine at 40–44 months of age. Age-matched participants who were MenB vaccine–naive received 4CMenB and formed the control group. We evaluated human complement serum bactericidal activity (hSBA) titres at baseline and 1 month after each dose of 4CMenB. Results: Before a booster dose at enrolment, 41%–76% of 17 participants previously vaccinated with 4CMenB in infancy had hSBA titres of 4 or greater against 4 reference strains. Before vaccination in the control group (n = 40) these proportions were similar for strains 44/76-SL (63%) and M10713 (68%) but low for strains NZ98/254 (0%) and 5/99 (3%). A booster dose in the 4CMenB-primed participants generated greater increases in hSBA titres than in controls. Interpretation: As has been observed with other meningococcal vaccines, bactericidal antibodies waned after vaccination with 4CMenB administered according to an approved infant vaccination schedule of 2, 4, 6 and 12 months of age, but there was an anamnestic response to a booster dose at 40–44 months of age. If 4CMenB were introduced into routine vaccination schedules, assessment of the need for a booster dose would require data on the impact of these declining titres on vaccine effectiveness. ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01027351

Study Design. A review of the surgical costs and results in a group of patients randomly allocated to surgery as part of a large prospective randomized trial of patients with chronic back pain. Objective. To report the observational data from the surgical arm of a randomized trial comparing surgery with intensive rehabilitation for chronic low back pain. Clinical and economic data are reported. Summary of Background Data. Surgery for chronic low back pain is a well established but unproven intervention. The most cost-effective technique for spinal stabilization is still not established. Methods. One hundred six patients with chronic low back pain were randomized to the surgical group of a randomized trial comparing spinal fusion of the lumbar with a 3 week intensive rehabilitation program. The primary outcomes were the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Shuttle Walking Test measured at baseline and 2 years postrandomization. Patients were stratified by preoperative diagnosis, smoking habit, and litigation. Complications were assessed and costs analyzed. Results. Of the 176 surgical patients, 56 underwent postern-lateral fusion, 57 underwent interbody fusion, and 24 underwent flexible stabilization of the spine. The mean ODI for all patients in the surgical arm of the trial improved from a baseline of 46.5 (SD 14.6) to 34.2 (SD 21) at 2 years. Health care costs were higher ( 3109 difference) for more complex procedures, and nearly 6 times as many early complications occurred with the more complex procedures. Smoking and unemployment were associated with worse results whereas litigation did not adversely affect the outcome. Conclusion. These observational changes in the ODI after surgery are similar to those reported from other studies of spinal fusion. More complex surgery is more expensive with more complications than postern-lateral fusion.

Summary Background Two types of treatment are being used for patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: endovascular detachable-coil treatment or craniotomy and clipping. We undertook a randomised, multicentre trial to compare these treatments in patients who were suitable for either treatment because the relative safety and efficacy of these approaches had not been established. Here we present clinical outcomes 1 year after treatment. Methods 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms, who were admitted to 42 neurosurgical centres, mainly in the UK and Europe, took part in the trial. They were randomly assigned to neurosurgical clipping (n=1070) or endovascular coiling (n=1073). The primary outcome was death or dependence at 1 year (defined by a modified Rankin scale of 3–6). Secondary outcomes included rebleeding from the treated aneurysm and risk of seizures. Long-term follow up continues. Analysis was in accordance with the randomised treatment. Findings We report the 1-year outcomes for 1063 of 1073 patients allocated to endovascular treatment, and 1055 of 1070 patients allocated to neurosurgical treatment. 250 (23·5%) of 1063 patients allocated to endovascular treatment were dead or dependent at 1 year, compared with 326 (30·9%) of 1055 patients allocated to neurosurgery, an absolute risk reduction of 7·4% (95% CI 3·6–11·2, p=0·0001). The early survival advantage was maintained for up to 7 years and was significant (log rank p=0·03). The risk of epilepsy was substantially lower in patients allocated to endovascular treatment, but the risk of late rebleeding was higher. Interpretation In patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms suitable for both treatments, endovascular coiling is more likely to result in independent survival at 1 year than neurosurgical clipping; the survival benefit continues for at least 7 years. The risk of late rebleeding is low, but is more common after endovascular coiling than after neurosurgical clipping.

BackgroundAsthma affects more than 5 million patients in the United Kingdom. Nearly 500,000 of these patients have severe asthma with severe symptoms and frequent exacerbations that are inadequately controlled with available treatments. The burden of severe asthma on the NHS is enormous, accounting for 80 % of the total asthma cost (£1 billion), with frequent exacerbations and expensive medications generating much of this cost.Of those patients with severe asthma, 70 % are sensitised to indoor aeroallergens, and the level of exposure to allergens determines the symptoms; patients exposed to high levels are therefore most at risk of exacerbations and hospital admissions.The LASER trial aims to assess whether a new treatment, temperature controlled laminar airflow (TLA) delivered by the Airsonett™ device, can reduce the frequency of exacerbations in patients with severe allergic asthma by reducing exposure to aeroallergens overnight.MethodsThis multicentre study is a placebo-controlled, blinded, randomised controlled, parallel group trial. A total of 222 patients with a new or current diagnosis of severe allergic asthma will be assigned with a random element in a 1:1 ratio to receive either an active device for one year or a placebo device. The primary outcome is the frequency of severe asthma exacerbations occurring over a 12-month period, defined in accordance with the American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society (ATS/ERS) guidelines. Secondary outcomes include changes in asthma control, lung function, asthma-specific and global quality of life for participants and their carers, adherence to intervention, healthcare resource use and costs, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative interviews will be conducted to elicit participant’s and their partner’s perceptions of the treatment.DiscussionEffective measures of allergen avoidance have, to date, proved elusive. The LASER trial aims to address this. The study will ascertain whether home-based nocturnal TLA usage over a 12-month period can reduce the frequency of exacerbations and improve asthma control and quality of life as compared to placebo, whilst being cost-effective and acceptable to adults with poorly controlled, severe allergic asthma. The results of this study will be widely applicable to the many patients with allergic asthma both in the UK and internationally.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials ISRCTN46346208 (Date assigned 22 January 2014).

Objectives: A number of risk factors have been recognised for postoperative renal dysfunction following on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). There are, however, few studies that have evaluated the potential reno-protective effects of off-pump CABG in the presence of other confounding risk factors. The aim of this study was to determine if off-pump CABG reduces the risk of renal injury. Methods: Serum creatinine values (preoperatively and day 1, 2 and 4 postoperatively) and other clinical data were prospectively collected on 1580 consecutive patients who underwent first-time CABG from 2002 to 2005. Creatinine clearance was calculated using the Cockcroft and Gault equation. The effect of on-pump vs. off-pump CABG on renal function was analysed, adjusting for age, gender, diabetes mellitus, left ventricular (LV) function and preoperative creatinine clearance, using multiple regression analysis. Results: One thousand one hundred and forty-five (73%) patients underwent on-pump CABG and 435 (27%) underwent off-pump CABG. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender and diabetes. Two hundred and seventy-four (17%) patients were females and 274 (17%) patients had diabetes. Multivariate analysis demonstrated significantly lower creatinine clearance postoperatively in patients with diabetes (P Conclusion: Off-pump surgery is associated with a reduction in postoperative renal injury.

Studies evaluating titration of antihypertensive medication using self-monitoring give contradictory findings and the precise place of telemonitoring over self-monitoring alone is unclear. The TASMINH4 trial aimed to assess the efficacy of self-monitored blood pressure, with or without telemonitoring, for antihypertensive titration in primary care, compared to usual care.

Objectives: Our aim was to determine the effects of high-dose (2 g) nicotinic acid (NA) on progression of atherosclerosis and measures of vascular function.Background: NA raises high-density lipopr...

There is lack of consensus on whether analysis of RCT data should adjust for important baseline covariates. For binary outcomes, the estimated treatment effect can differ when logistic regression is carried out, even when the covariates are balanced between treatment groups. Simulation studies for RCTs with binary outcomes have shown that adjusting for a single baseline prognostic covariate increases the power to detect treatment effects. The impact on the size of the treatment effect was only notable when a strong prognostic covariate was included. The impact of adjustment for two covariates with different prognostic strengths and directions of the prognostic relationship to the outcome is not known. We present a detailed examination of factors affecting the impact of adjusted analysis. In particular, an adjusted logistic regression model with two covariates (1 continuous and 1 binary) are considered simultaneously. The simulation study addresses different levels of event rate and treatment effect, different distributions for the binary and continuous variables, variable prognostic strength of the covariates, and correlation between covariates. These simulations suggest that adjustment will only have a notable effect in extreme scenarios such as, treatment effect is very large and covariates are highly prognostic. We found that the relative difference between the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios could be larger than 50%, though only under these scenarios. Otherwise the impact of adjustment is small.

Background: The outcome is reported of a prospective uncontrolled study based on a stepwise treatment protocol during an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Hong Kong. Method: One hundred and thirty eight patients were treated with broad spectrum antibiotics, a combination of ribavirin and low dose corticosteroid, and then intravenous high dose methylprednisolone according to responses. Sustained response to treatment was defined as (1) defervescence for ≥4 consecutive days, (2) resolution of lung consolidation by >25%, and (3) oxygen independence by the fourth day without fever. Patients with defervescence who achieved either criterion 2 or 3 were classified as partial responders. Patients who fell short of criteria 2 and 3 were non-responders. Results: Laboratory confirmation of SARS coronavirus infection was established in 132 (95.7%). None responded to antibiotics but 25 (18.1%) responded to ribavirin + low dose corticosteroid. Methylprednisolone was used in 107 patients, of whom 95 (88.8%) responded favourably. Evidence of haemolytic anaemia was observed in 49 (36%). A high level of C-reactive protein at presentation was the only independent predictor for use of methylprednisolone (odds ratio 2.18 per 10 mg/dl increase, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 4.25, p = 0.02). Thirty seven patients (26.8%) required admission to the intensive care unit and 21 (15.2%) required invasive mechanical ventilation. There were 15 deaths (mortality rate 10.9%), most with significant co-morbidities, whereas 122 (88.4%) had been discharged home 4 months after the outbreak onset. Conclusion: The use of high dose pulse methylprednisolone during the clinical course of a SARS outbreak was associated with clinical improvement, but randomised controlled trials are needed to ascertain its efficacy in this condition., published_or_final_version

Background: In a previous UK multi-center randomized study 278 children received three doses of 7-valent (PCV-7) or 13-\ud valent (PCV-13) pneumococcal conjugate vaccine at 2, 4 and 12 months of age. At 13 months of age, most of these children had pneumococcal serotype-specific IgG concentrations $0.35 mg/ml and opsonophagocytic assay (OPA) titers $8.\ud \ud Methods: Children who had participated in the original study were enrolled again at 3.5 years of age. Persistence of immunity following infant immunization with either PCV-7 or PCV-13 and the immune response to a PCV-13 booster at preschool age were investigated.\ud \ud Results: In total, 108 children were followed-up to the age of 3.5 years and received a PCV-13 booster at this age. At least 76% of children who received PCV-7 or PCV-13 in infancy retained serotype-specific IgG concentrations $0.35 mg/ml against each of 5/7 shared serotypes. For serotypes 4 and 18C, persistence was lower at 22–42%. At least 71% of PCV-13 group participants had IgG concentrations $0.35 mg/ml against each of 4/6 of the additional PCV-13 serotypes; for serotypes 1 and 3 this proportion was 45% and 52%. In the PCV-7 group these percentages were significantly lower for serotypes 1, 5 and 7F. A pre-school PCV-13 booster was highly immunogenic and resulted in low rates of local and systemic adverse effects.\ud \ud Conclusion: Despite some decline in antibody from 13 months of age, these data suggest that a majority of pre-school\ud children maintain protective serotype-specific antibody concentrations following conjugate vaccination at 2, 4 and 12 months of age.\ud \ud Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01095471

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is a very common presentation in primary care. Evidence of benefit for subacromial corticosteroid injection is inconclusive and confined largely to studies with short follow-up. We plan a large, definitive, primary-care-based trial to determine efficacy and safety in patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy, and conducted a pilot trial to explore feasibility. METHODS: Six general practitioners (GPs) from Oxfordshire, UK underwent update training in assessing painful shoulders and injecting the subacromial space. Each then recruited patients aged 35 to 74 years from primary care complaining of shoulder pain lasting no more than 6 months. Eligible participants were randomized to receive either methylprednisolone acetate 40 mg with lidocaine 1% (total volume 1 ml), or lidocaine 1% alone (total volume 1 ml), injected into the subacromial space. The participants were blinded to treatment allocation. Feasibility outcomes were rates of recruitment, withdrawal, adherence to the protocol, completeness of follow-up, and success of patient masking. Clinical outcomes were the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) at baseline and at 4 and 12 weeks, and responses to three satisfaction questions at 2, 4 and 12 weeks. Outcome data were collected by postal questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 40 participants were randomized (80% of the target 50 participants) over 26 weeks giving an overall recruitment rate of 1.5 participants per week. Rates of follow-up were maintained to a high level for the full 12 weeks. Four participants requested a 'rescue' corticosteroid injection but no patients withdrew. The trial GPs gave high scores for their confidence that the patient had remained blinded to treatment allocation during the procedure. The OSS at 4 and 12 weeks and the responses to the satisfaction questions are reported. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to recruit participants with shoulder pain in the primary care setting for a blinded, randomized trial of corticosteroid injection. Online randomization of participants from the practice is also feasible, and postal questionnaires provide an effective means of gathering outcome data in this area of study. The lessons learned from this pilot will usefully inform the design of a large, definitive efficacy trial in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Clinical Trials ISRCTN82357435.

Introduction Infectious and immune-mediated encephalitides are important but under-recognised causes of morbidity and mortality in childhood, with a 7% death rate and up to 50% morbidity after prolonged follow-up. There is a theoretical basis for ameliorating the immune response with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), which is supported by empirical evidence of a beneficial response following its use in the treatment of viral and autoimmune encephalitis. In immune-mediated encephalitis, IVIG is often used after a delay (by weeks in some cases), while diagnosis is confirmed. Wider use of IVIG in infectious encephalitis and earlier use in immune-mediated encephalitis could improve outcomes for these conditions. We describe the protocol for the first ever randomised control trial of IVIG treatment for children with all-cause encephalitis. Methods and analysis 308 children (6 months to 16 years) with a diagnosis of acute/subacute encephalitis will be recruited in ∼30 UK hospitals and randomised to receive 2 doses (1 g/kg/dose) of either IVIG or matching placebo, in addition to standard treatment. Recruitment will be over a 42-month period and follow-up of each participant will be for 12 months post randomisation. The primary outcome is ‘good recovery’ (score of 2 or lower on the Glasgow Outcome Score Extended—paediatric version), at 12 months after randomisation. Additional secondary neurological measures will be collected at 4–6 weeks after discharge from acute care and at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Safety, radiological, other autoimmune and tertiary outcomes will also be assessed. Ethics and dissemination This trial has been approved by the UK National Research Ethics committee (South Central—Oxford A; REC 14/SC/1416). Current protocol: V4.0 (10/03/2016). The findings will be presented at national and international meetings and conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration numbers NCT02308982, EudraCT201400299735 and ISRCTN15791925; Pre-results.

Summary Background Prevalence of Alzheimer's disease in people with Down's syndrome is very high, and many such individuals who are older than 40 years have pathological changes characteristic of Alzheimer's disease. Evidence to support treatment with Alzheimer's drugs is inadequate, although memantine is beneficial in transgenic mice. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of memantine on cognition and function in individuals with Down's syndrome. Methods In our prospective randomised double-blind trial, we enrolled adults (>40 years) with karyotypic or clinically diagnosed Down's syndrome, with and without dementia, at four learning disability centres in the UK and Norway. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) to receive memantine or placebo for 52 weeks by use of a computer-generated sequence and a minimisation algorithm to ensure balanced allocation for five prognostic factors (sex, dementia, age group, total Down's syndrome attention, memory, and executive function scales [DAMES] score, and centre). The primary outcome was change in cognition and function, measured with DAMES scores and the adaptive behaviour scale (ABS) parts I and II. We analysed differences in DAMES and ABS scores between groups with analyses of covariance or quantile regression in all patients who completed the 52 week assessment and had available follow-up data. This study is registered, number ISRCTN47562898. Findings We randomly allocated 88 patients to receive memantine (72 [82%] had DAMES data and 75 [85%] had ABS data at 52 weeks) and 85 to receive placebo (74 [87%] and 73 [86%]). Both groups declined in cognition and function but rates did not differ between groups for any outcomes. After adjustment for baseline score, there were non-significant differences between groups of −4·1 (95% CI −13·1 to 4·8) in DAMES scores, −8·5 (–20·1 to 3·1) in ABS I scores, and 2·0 (–7·2 to 11·3) in ABS II scores, all in favour of controls. 10 (11%) of 88 participants in the memantine group and six (7%) of 85 controls had serious adverse events (p=0·33). Five participants in the memantine group and four controls died from serious adverse events (p=0·77). Interpretation There is a striking absence of evidence about pharmacological treatment of cognitive impairment and dementia in people older than 40 years with Down's syndrome. Despite promising indications, memantine is not an effective treatment. Therapies that are effective for Alzheimer's disease are not necessarily effective in this group of patients. Funding Lundbeck.

BACKGROUND: Antibodies against Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) and serogroup C Neisseria meningitidis (MenC) wane after early infant immunization. METHODS: Children previously immunized in a randomized controlled trial at ages 2, 3, and 4 months with DTPa-IPV-Hib and MenC-CRM197 (MenC-CRM group) or DTPa-IPV and Hib-MenC-TT (Hib-MenC-TT group) had blood samples drawn at 1 and 2 years following a booster dose of Hib-MenC-TT at 12 to 15 months of age. A blood sample was also drawn at the year 2 follow-up from a separately recruited age-matched control group who had not received a booster. RESULTS: In 271 children at year 1, mean 14.6 months (range: 12-18 months) following the Hib-MenC-TT booster, MenC bactericidal titers above the protective threshold (rSBA ≥1:8) was demonstrated in 89.0% of the Hib-MenC-TT group and 69.5% of MenC-CRM participants. Antipolyribosylribitol phosphate Ig ≥1.0 μg/mL (Hib correlate for long-term protection) was seen in 94.9% and 82.5%, respectively.In 379 participants (including 72 control children) at year 2 (age: 39-43 months, 25-31 months post Hib-MenC-TT) persistence of MenC antibodies was demonstrated in 67.1% of the Hib-MenC-TT group and 40.5% of the MenC-CRM group, compared with 44.1% of control group participants. Antipolyribosylribitol phosphate Ig ≥1.0 μg/mL was seen in 89.0%, 74.7%, and 38.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A toddler Hib-MenC-TT booster helps sustain immunity against Hib to 31/2 years of age. Persistence of MenC antibody is similar in children primed with MenC-CRM197 in infancy who receive a booster Hib-MenC-TT, to those who receive no booster. Persistence of MenC antibody is better when primed and boosted with Hib-MenC-TT. © 2011 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Aims Observational data suggest that the use of bilateral internal mammary arteries (BIMA) during coronary artery bypass graft surgery provides superior revascularization to a single internal mammary artery (SIMA), but concerns about safety have prevented the widespread use of BIMA. The Arterial Revascularisation Trial (ART) is a randomized trial of BIMA vs. SIMA, with a primary outcome of survival at 10 years. This paper reports mortality, morbidity, and resource use data at 1 year. Methods and results Coronary artery bypass graft patients were enrolled in 28 hospitals in seven countries. Three thousand one hundred and two patients were randomly assigned to SIMA ( n = 1554) or BIMA ( n = 1548). The mean number of grafts was 3 for both groups. Forty per cent of the SIMA procedures and 42% of the BIMA were performed off-pump. Mortality at 30 days was 18 of 1548 (1.2%) for SIMA and 19 of 1537 (1.2%) for BIMA, and at 1 year was 36 of 1540 (2.3%) and 38 of 1529 (2.5%), respectively. The rates of stroke, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization were all ≤2% at 1 year and similar between the two groups. Sternal wound reconstruction was required in 0.6 and 1.9% of the SIMA and BIMA groups, respectively. Conclusion Data from ART demonstrate similar clinical outcomes for SIMA and BIMA at 1 year but BIMA grafts are associated with a small absolute increase (1.3%) in the need for sternal wound reconstruction. The results suggest that the use of BIMA grafts is feasible on a routine basis. The 10-year results of the ART will confirm whether BIMA grafting results in lower mortality and the need for repeat intervention. Trial registration: Controlled-trials.com ([ISRCTN46552265][1]). [1]: /external-ref?link_type=ISRCTN&access_num=ISRCTN46552265

Summary Background Data from 12-week placebo-controlled trials have led to mounting concerns about increased mortality in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) who are prescribed antipsychotics; however, there are no mortality data from long-term placebo-controlled trials. We aimed to assess whether continued treatment with antipsychotics in people with AD is associated with an increased risk of mortality. Methods Between October, 2001, and December, 2004, patients with AD who resided in care facilities in the UK were enrolled into a randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel, two-group treatment discontinuation trial. Participants were randomly assigned to continue with their antipsychotic treatment (thioridazine, chlorpromazine, haloperidol, trifluoperazine, or risperidone) for 12 months or to switch their medication to an oral placebo. The primary outcome was mortality at 12 months. An additional follow-up telephone assessment was done to establish whether each participant was still alive 24 months after the enrolment of the last participant (range 24–54 months). Causes of death were obtained from death certificates. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT) and modified intention to treat (mITT). This trial is registered with the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials/National Research Register, number ISRCTN33368770. Findings 165 patients were randomised (83 to continue antipsychotic treatment and 82 to placebo), of whom 128 (78%) started treatment (64 continued with their treatment and 64 received placebo). There was a reduction in survival in the patients who continued to receive antipsychotics compared with those who received placebo. Cumulative probability of survival during the 12 months was 70% (95% CI 58–80%) in the continue treatment group versus 77% (64–85%) in the placebo group for the mITT population. Kaplan–Meier estimates of mortality for the whole study period showed a significantly increased risk of mortality for patients who were allocated to continue antipsychotic treatment compared with those allocated to placebo (mITT log rank p=0·03; ITT p=0·02). The hazard ratio for the mITT group was 0·58 (95% CI 0·35 to 0·95) and 0·58 (0·36 to 0·92) for the ITT population. The more pronounced differences between groups during periods of follow up longer than 12 months were evident at specific timepoints (24-month survival 46% vs 71%; 36-month survival 30% vs 59%). Interpretation There is an increased long-term risk of mortality in patients with AD who are prescribed antipsychotic medication; these results further highlight the need to seek less harmful alternatives for the long-term treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in these patients. Funding UK Alzheimer's Research Trust.

Objectives To assess the clinical effectiveness of surgical stabilisation (spinal fusion) compared with intensive rehabilitation for patients with chronic low back pain. Design Multicentre randomised controlled trial. Setting 15 secondary care orthopaedic and rehabilitation centres across the United Kingdom. Participants 349 participants aged 18-55 with chronic low back pain of at least one year's duration who were considered candidates for spinal fusion. Intervention Lumbar spine fusion or an intensive rehabilitation programme based on principles of cognitive behaviour therapy. Main outcome measure The primary outcomes were the Oswestry disability index and the shuttle walking test measured at baseline and two years after randomisation. The SF-36 instrument was used as a secondary outcome measure. Results 176 participants were assigned to surgery and 173 to rehabilitation. 284 (81%) provided follow-up data at 24 months. The mean Oswestry disability index changed favourably from 46.5 (SD 14.6) to 34.0 (SD 21.1) in the surgery group and from 44.8 (SD14.8) to 36.1 (SD 20.6) in the rehabilitation group. The estimated mean difference between the groups was –4.1 (95% confidence interval –8.1 to –0.1, P = 0.045) in favour of surgery. No significant differences between the treatment groups were observed in the shuttle walking test or any of the other outcome measures. Conclusions Both groups reported reductions in disability during two years of follow-up, possibly unrelated to the interventions. The statistical difference between treatment groups in one of the two primary outcome measures was marginal and only just reached the predefined minimal clinical difference, and the potential risk and additional cost of surgery also need to be considered. No clear evidence emerged that primary spinal fusion surgery was any more beneficial than intensive rehabilitation.

A range of options are available for the conservative treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).1-4 Non-operative methods include immobilisation of the affected hand with wrist splint; local injection of steroids and drugs such as diuretics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.6-11 These oral drugs are thought to decrease the volume of swollen tissue within the CTS and are widely used, but there is limited clinical evidence for their role. This prospective randomised, double blind, placebo controlled study aimed at evaluating the effect of oral steroids in the symptomatic treatment of CTS. We recruited patients with newly diagnosed CTS of more than three months' duration with confirmatory electrophysiological results (prolonged median nerve distal motor latencies >4 ms or median ulnar palmar sensory latency difference >0.5 ms) including electromyographic recordings of the abductor …