Search

• This ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations for managing oesophageal cancer. • The guideline covers clinical and pathological diagnosis, staging and risk assessment, treatment and follow-up. • Algorithms for the management of locoregional and advanced/metastatic disease are provided. • The author group encompasses a multidisciplinary group of experts from different institutions in Europe and Australia. • Recommendations are based on available scientific data and the authors' collective expert opinion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Improved access to rehabilitation is highlighted as a key pathway to achieving the World Health Organisation's (WHO) goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all (Sustainable Development Goal 3). This article is the second in a two-part series outlining the findings from the Rehabilitation Choices study, which aimed to identify how health professionals and consumers in Australia are informed to make decisions about rehabilitation, and their experience with barriers and enablers to accessing that rehabilitation. In this study, we present the perspectives of consumers with different health conditions and a range of experiences with rehabilitation services., Methods: This was a qualitative study using focus groups and semi-structured interviews. People with self-reported lived experience of rehabilitation and carers were recruited using maximum variation sampling. Thematic analysis of data was conducted using an inductive approach., Results: Fifty-six consumers with diverse lived experiences of rehabilitation (19-80 years, 49 patients, 7 carers) participated in focus groups and interviews to discuss how they sourced information about rehabilitation and their experiences of what made it hard or easy to access rehabilitative care to meet their needs. Four themes were produced from the data: (1) service-centricity of options limits access, (2) access is the patient's responsibility, (3) enabling decision-making about rehabilitation with appropriate information and (4) provision of a psychologically safe environment., Conclusions: Any planned (re)design of services to improve consumer access to rehabilitation should consider the themes identified in this study. This will ensure that consumers are provided with rehabilitation options that suit their holistic and unique needs beyond consideration of their medical diagnoses, and are actively supported to navigate this access, provided with information to help them make informed choices and provided a psychologically safe environment to engage effectively with rehabilitation., Patient or Public Contribution: Three consumer research partners with lived experience of rehabilitation as patients or carers were core team members. They were involved in the design and implementation of the recruitment and communications strategies, design of the interview approach and discussion guide, contributed to the interpretation and contextualisation of findings and writing of this manuscript and are included as co-authors (A. O., T. W. and S. W.)., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Question: Is it feasible and safe to conduct an exercise dose-finding study in people with stroke? Is it possible to determine a minimal dose of exercise required to see clinically meaningful improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness?, Methods: Dose-escalation study. Twenty people with stroke (n=5 per cohort) who were able to walk independently participated in home-based, telehealth-supervised aerobic exercise sessions 3 d/week at moderate-vigorous intensity for 8 weeks. Dose parameters of frequency (3 d/week), intensity (55-85% of heart rate peak) and program length (8 weeks) were kept constant. The duration of exercise sessions was increased by 5 min per session from Dose 1 (10 min/session) to Dose 4 (25 min/session). Doses were escalated if safe and tolerable (< 33% of a cohort reaching a dose-limiting threshold). Doses were efficacious if ≥ 67% of a cohort increased peak oxygen consumption ≥ 2mL/kg/min., Results: Target exercise doses were well adhered to, and the intervention was safe (480 exercise sessions delivered; one fall resulting in minor laceration) and tolerable (no participants met the dose-limiting threshold). None of the exercise doses met our criterion for efficacy., Conclusions: It is possible to conduct a dose-escalation trial for people with stroke. The small cohort sizes may have limited the ability to determine an efficacious minimum dose of exercise. Providing supervised exercise session at these prescribed doses via telehealth was safe., Registration: The study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12617000460303)., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Professor Coralie English reports financial support was provided by Stroke Foundation Australia. Professor Coralie English reports financial support was provided by National Heart Foundation of Australia. Professor Coralie English reports a relationship with Stroke Foundation Australia that includes: board membership., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Research impact is an emerging measure of research achievement alongside traditional academic outputs such as publications. We present the results of applying the Framework to Assess the Impact from Translational health research (FAIT) to the Centre for Research Excellence (CRE) in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Recovery (CRE-Stroke, 2014-2019) and report on the feasibility and lessons from the application of FAIT to a CRE rather than a discrete research project., Methods: Data were gathered via online surveys, in-depth interviews, document analysis and review of relevant websites/databases to report on the three major FAIT methods: the modified Payback Framework, an assessment of costs against monetized consequences, and a narrative account of the impact generated from CRE-Stroke activities. FAIT was applied during the last 4 years of CRE-Stroke operation., Results: With an economic investment of AU$ 3.9 million over 5 years, CRE-Stroke delivered a return on investment that included AU$ 18.8 million in leveraged grants, fellowships and consultancies. Collectively, CRE-Stroke members produced 354 publications that were accessed 470,000 times and cited over 7220 times. CRE-Stroke supported 26 PhDs, 39 postdocs and seven novice clinician researchers. There were 59 capacity-building events benefiting 744 individuals including policy-makers and consumers. CRE-Stroke created research infrastructure (including a research register of stroke survivors and a brain biobank), and its global leadership produced international consensus recommendations to influence the stroke research landscape worldwide. Members contributed to the Australian Living Stroke Guidelines: four researchers' outputs were directly referenced. Based only on the consequences that could be monetized, CRE-Stroke returned AU$ 4.82 for every dollar invested in the CRE., Conclusion: This case example in the developing field of impact assessment illustrates how researchers can use evidence to demonstrate and report the impact of and returns on research investment. The prospective application of FAIT by a dedicated research impact team demonstrated impact in broad categories of knowledge-gain, capacity-building, new infrastructure, input to policy and economic benefits. The methods can be used by other research teams to provide comprehensive evidence to governments and other research funders about what has been generated from their research investment but requires dedicated resources to complete., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Physical activity is essential to improve health and reduce the risk of recurrence of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Still, people post stroke or TIA are often physically inactive and the availability of physical activity promotion services are often limited. This study builds on an existing Australian telehealth-delivered programme (i-REBOUND- Let's get moving) which provides support for home-based physical activity for people post stroke or TIA. The aim of this study is to test the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects of a mobile Health (mHealth) version of the i-REBOUND programme for the promotion of physical activity in people post stroke or TIA living in Sweden., Methods: One hundred and twenty participants with stroke or TIA will be recruited via advertisement. A parallel-group feasibility randomised controlled trial design with a 1:1 allocation ratio to 1) i-REBOUND programme receiving physical exercise and support for sustained engagement in physical activity through behavioural change techniques, or 2) behavioural change techniques for physical activity. Both interventions will proceed for six months and be delivered digitally through a mobile app. The feasibility outcomes (i.e., reach, adherence, safety and fidelity) will be monitored throughout the study. Acceptability will be assessed using the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire and further explored through qualitative interviews with a subset of both study participants and the physiotherapists delivering the intervention. Clinical outcomes on preliminary effects of the intervention will include blood pressure, engagement in physical activity, self-perceived exercise self-efficacy, fatigue, depression, anxiety, stress and health-related quality of life and will be measured at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months after the baseline assessments., Discussion: We hypothesise that the mHealth delivery of the i-REBOUND programme will be feasible and acceptable in people post stroke/TIA living in rural and urban regions of Sweden. The results of this feasibility trial will inform the development of full-scale and appropriately powered trial to test the effects and costs of mHealth delivered physical activity for people after stroke or TIA., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05111951. Registered November 8, 2021., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: It is unclear how acute care influences patient outcomes in those who receive rehabilitation. We aimed to determine the associations between acute stroke therapies, outcomes during inpatient rehabilitation and self-reported outcomes at 90-180 days after stroke., Materials and Methods: Patient-level data from adults with acute stroke registered in the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (AuSCR, 2014-2017) were linked with data from the Australasian Rehabilitation Outcomes Centre (AROC). The main outcome was relative function gain (RFG), which is a measure of the FIM change achieved between admission to discharge as a proportion of the total gain possible based on admission FIM, relative to the maximum achievable score. Multilevel logistic/median regression analyses were used to investigate the association between RFG achieved in rehabilitation and (1) acute stroke therapies; (2) 90-180 day outcomes (health-related quality of life using EuroQoL-5D-3L; independence according to modified Rankin Scale (score 0-2) and self-reported hospital readmission)., Results: Overall, 8397/8507 eligible patients from the AuSCR were linked with corresponding AROC data (95% linkage rate; median age 75 years, 43% female); 4239 had 90-180 days survey data. Receiving thrombolysis (16% of the cohort) had a minimal association with RFG in rehabilitation (coefficient: 0.03; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.01, 0.05). Greater RFG achieved whilst in in-patient rehabilitation was associated with better longer-term HR-QoL (coefficient 21.77, 95% CI 17.8, 25.8) including fewer problems with mobility, self-care, pain, usual activities and anxiety/depression; greater likelihood of independence (adjusted Odds Ratio: 10.66; 95% CI 7.86, 14.45); and decreased odds of self-reported hospital readmission (adjusted Odds Ratio: 0.53; 95% CI 0.41, 0.70) within 90-180 days post-stroke., Conclusions: Stroke survivors who achieved greater RFG during inpatient rehabilitation had better HR-QoL and were more likely to be independent at follow-up. Acute care processes did not appear to impact RFG or long-term outcomes for those who accessed inpatient rehabilitation., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All other authors report no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This study was designed to assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a teacher-facilitated high-intensity interval training intervention for older adolescents (ie, 16-18 y)., Methods: Two secondary schools from New South Wales, Australia were recruited, and participants (ie, grade 11 students; 16.2 [0.4] y) were randomized at the school level to the Burn 2 Learn intervention (n = 38), or a wait-list control group (n = 30). Teachers were trained to facilitate the delivery of the novel high-intensity interval training program, which involved 3 sessions per week (∼12-20 min) for 14 weeks. A range of process measures were used to assess intervention feasibility (ie, recruitment, retention, attendance, and program satisfaction). Primary (cardiorespiratory fitness, determined using the progressive aerobic cardiovascular endurance run shuttle run test) and secondary outcomes were assessed at baseline and posttest (14-wk)., Results: Sixty-eight grade 11 students were recruited at baseline (85% of target sample), 61 participants completed posttest assessments (90% retention) and on average, participants performed 1.9 sessions per week. Overall, teachers (4.0/5) and students (4.0/5) were satisfied with the Burn 2 Learn program. Group by time effects were observed for cardiorespiratory fitness (8.9 laps; 95% confidence intervals, 1.7-16.2) and a selection of secondary outcomes., Conclusion: This study provides evidence for the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a teacher-facilitated high-intensity interval training intervention for older adolescents.

Objective: There is a growing need for researchers to demonstrate impact, which is reliant on successful research translation. The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council funded a Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Recovery (CRE-Stroke) to enhance collaborations between researchers conducting different types of stroke rehabilitation research. The purpose of this study was to explore opinions about research translation held by CRE-Stroke researchers conducting preclinical and clinical research, in terms of scope, importance, responsibility and perceived skills and knowledge., Design: Mixed-methods study, comprising a paper-based survey and semistructured interviews. Interview data were inductively coded and thematically analysed. Survey and interview data were compared and synthesised., Participants: 55 (7 preclinical, 48 clinical) researchers attending a CRE-Stroke research forum completed a paper-based survey. Semistructured interviews with 22 CRE-Stroke (5 preclinical, 17 clinical) researchers were conducted., Results: Research translation was described as translating to other research and translating to clinical practice and policy. Most researchers (n=54, 98%) reported that research translation was important, particularly in terms of generating research impact, but the most common sign of project completion reported by researchers (n=7, 100% preclinical; n=37, 77% clinical) was publication. Most researchers (preclinical n=4, 57%; clinical n=37, 77%) reported having responsibility for translating research, but less than half reported having the necessary skills (n=1, 14% preclinical; n=17, 35% clinical) and knowledge (n=3, 43% preclinical; n=19, 40% clinical). Differing opinions about who should be responsible for translating findings to clinical practice were expressed., Conclusions: Stroke rehabilitation researchers appear confident to translate their research via the traditional mechanism of publications. To optimise impact, clarity is needed regarding who is best placed to translate research findings to clinical practice and policy. Education and skills development to apply broader translation processes are needed to maximise the use of research at all stages., Competing Interests: Competing interests: EAL was employed by CRE-Stroke at the time data were collected and analysed., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: There is growing recognition that the wider benefits of research (economic, social and health impacts) should be assessed and valued alongside traditional research performance metrics such as peer-reviewed papers. Translation of findings into policy and practice needs to accelerate and pathways to impact need to be better understood. This research protocol outlines a mixed methods study to apply the Framework to Assess the Impact from Translational health research (FAIT) to the Centre for Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Recovery (CRE-Stroke). FAIT is purpose-designed to encourage research translation and assess research impact but lacks validation., Methods/design: Phase 1 involves application of the FAIT-modified programme logic model to each CRE-Stroke research stream including identifying process, output and impact metrics, as well as end users of the research. A scoping review will inform potential impacts anticipated from CRE-Stroke. In Phase 2, audit and feedback on achievements against plans will track and encourage research translation. Logic models will be updated to account for changes in the research pathways over time. In Phase 3, three proven methods for measuring research impact - Payback, economic assessment and narratives - will be applied to each research stream and the data triangulated and reported in Phase 4. The feasibility of applying FAIT will also be assessed as part of Phase 3., Discussion: Use of prospective, comprehensive research impact frameworks for large interdisciplinary programmes of research is rare. FAIT's application to CRE-Stroke will provide opportunity for the impact of CRE-Stroke to be assessed and a range of impacts beyond standard academic achievements to be reliably reported. The feasibility of FAIT's application will also be assessed and, if necessary, refined. The usefulness of FAIT for encouraging research translation will also be described and may prove useful for other programmes looking to implement a research impact framework.

Background: The question of how to measure, assess and optimise the returns from investment in health and medical research (HMR) is a highly policy-relevant issue. Research Impact Assessment Frameworks (RIAFs) provide a conceptual measurement framework to assess the impact from HMR. The aims of this study were (1) to elicit the views of Medical Research Institutes (MRIs) regarding objectives, definitions, methods, barriers, potential scope and attitudes towards RIAFs, and (2) to investigate whether an assessment framework should represent a retrospective reflection of research impact or a prospective approach integrated into the research process. The wider objective was to inform the development of a draft RIAF for Australia's MRIs., Methods: Purposive sampling to derive a heterogeneous sample of Australian MRIs was used alongside semi-structured interviews with senior executives responsible for research translation or senior researchers affected by research impact initiatives. Thematic analysis of the interview transcriptions using the framework approach was then performed., Results: Interviews were conducted with senior representatives from 15 MRIs. Participants understood the need for greater research translation/impact, but varied in their comprehension and implementation of RIAFs. Common concerns included the time lag to the generation of societal impacts from basic or discovery science, and whether impact reflected a narrow commercialisation agenda. Broad support emerged for the use of metrics, case study and economic methods. Support was also provided for the rationale of both standardised and customised metrics. Engendering cultural change in the approach to research translation was acknowledged as both a barrier to greater impact and a critical objective for the assessment process. Participants perceived that the existing research environment incentivised the generation of academic publications and track records, and often conflicted with the generation of wider impacts. The potential to improve the speed of translation through prospective implementation of impact assessment was supported, albeit that the mechanism required development., Conclusion: The study found that the issues raised regarding research impact assessment are less about methods and metrics, and more about the research activities that the measurement of research translation and impact may or may not incentivise. Consequently, if impact assessment is to contribute to optimisation of the health gains from the public, corporate and philanthropic investment entrusted to the institutes, then further inquiry into how the assessment process may re-align research behaviour must be prioritised.

Background: Realising the economic potential of research institutions, including medical research institutes, represents a policy imperative for many Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations. The assessment of research impact has consequently drawn increasing attention. Research impact assessment frameworks (RIAFs) provide a structure to assess research translation, but minimal research has examined whether alternative RIAFs realise the intended policy outcomes. This paper examines the objectives presented for RIAFs in light of economic imperatives to justify ongoing support for health and medical research investment, leverage productivity via commercialisation and outcome-efficiency gains in health systems, and ensure that translation and impact considerations are embedded into the research process. This paper sought to list the stated objectives for RIAFs, to identify existing frameworks and to evaluate whether the identified frameworks possessed the capabilities necessary to address the specified objectives., Methods: A scoping review of the literature to identify objectives specified for RIAFs, inform upon descriptive criteria for each objective and identify existing RIAFs. Criteria were derived for each objective. The capability for the existing RIAFs to realise the alternative objectives was evaluated based upon these criteria., Results: The collated objectives for RIAFs included accountability (top-down), transparency/accountability (bottom-up), advocacy, steering, value for money, management/learning and feedback/allocation, prospective orientation, and speed of translation. Of the 25 RIAFs identified, most satisfied objectives such as accountability and advocacy, which are largely sufficient for the first economic imperative to justify research investment. The frameworks primarily designed to optimise the speed of translation or enable the prospective orientation of research possessed qualities most likely to optimise the productive outcomes from research. However, the results show that few frameworks met the criteria for these objectives., Conclusion: It is imperative that the objective(s) for an assessment framework are explicit and that RIAFs are designed to realise these objectives. If the objectives include the capability to pro-actively drive productive research impacts, the potential for prospective orientation and a focus upon the speed of translation merits prioritisation. Frameworks designed to optimise research translation and impact, rather than simply assess impact, offer greater promise to contribute to the economic imperatives compelling their implementation.