Search

Background Intensive rehabilitation of patients with severe traumatic brain injury is generally applied in the subacute stages of the hospital stay. Few studies have assessed the association between early and intensive physical rehabilitation and functional outcomes. The aim of this trial is to assess the feasibility of an intensive physical rehabilitation intervention focusing on mobilisation to the upright position, starting as early as clinically possible versus standard care in the intensive care unit. The feasibility study is intended to inform a subsequent randomised clinical trial that will investigate benefits and harms of the intervention. Methods This randomised clinical feasibility trial with a follow-up period of 1 year will use blinded outcome assessors for the Coma Recovery Scale–Revised. A maximum of 60 patients admitted to the neurointensive care unit at Rigshospitalet, Denmark, with traumatic brain injury (age of at least 18 years), a low level of consciousness, and stable intracranial pressure will be included in the trial. Patients will be randomly assigned to experimental intervention versus standard care (1:1) stratified according to their Glasgow Coma Score. The intervention group will receive daily mobilisation in a tilt table with an integrated stepping device (ERIGO®). Feasibility is declared if more than 60% (the lower 95% confidence interval of the proportion) of eligible patients are included in the trial and more than 52% (the lower 95% confidence interval of the proportion) of patients in the intervention group receive more than 60% of the planned interventions. Safety is assessed by the occurrence of adverse events and adverse reactions. Exploratory clinical outcomes consist of cerebral haemodynamics (blood flow velocity and pressure autoregulation) and baroreceptor sensitivity in the early phase as well as functional outcomes (Coma Recovery Scale–Revised, Early Functional Ability scale, and Functional Independence Measure). Discussion Our findings will inform a future, larger-scale randomised clinical trial on early mobilisation using a tilt table early after severe traumatic brain injury. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02924649. Registered on 3 October 2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-3004-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundSexual dysfunction is common in patients with either ischaemic heart disease (IHD) or implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and has a negative impact on quality of life. Non-pharmacological treatment options are lacking. The purpose of this trial was to assess the effect of sexual rehabilitation versus usual care for males with erectile dysfunction and either IHD and/or ICD.MethodsParticipants with erectile dysfunction and IHD and/or ICD were randomised to 12 weeks of sexual rehabilitation consisting of physical exercise training, pelvic floor exercise and psychoeducation, or usual care. Primary outcome: sexual function by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF). Secondary outcome: sexual function by the Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale. Exploratory outcomes: exercise capacity, pelvic floor strength/endurance, self-reported health and mental health.Results154 participants were included, mean age 61.6 years (SD 6.1). Sexual rehabilitation compared with usual care improved sexual function with a mean difference IIEF score of 6.7 (95% CI 3.1 to 10.4, pConclusionSexual rehabilitation compared with usual care improves sexual function and exercise capacity.Trial registrationNCT01796353; Results.

Background Prolonged treatment with benzodiazepines is common practice despite clinical recommendations of short-term use. Benzodiazepines are used by approximately 4% of the general population, with increased prevalence in psychiatric populations and the elderly. After long-term use it is often difficult to discontinue benzodiazepines due to psychological and physiological dependence. This review investigated if pharmacological interventions can facilitate benzodiazepine tapering. Objectives To assess the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions to facilitate discontinuation of chronic benzodiazepine use. Search methods We searched the following electronic databases up to October 2017: Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group's Specialised Register of Trials, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and ISI Web of Science. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO ICTRP, and ISRCTN registry, and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological treatment versus placebo or no intervention or versus another pharmacological intervention in adults who had been treated with benzodiazepines for at least two months and/or fulfilled criteria for benzodiazepine dependence (any criteria). Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Main results We included 38 trials (involving 2543 participants), but we could only extract data from 35 trials with 2295 participants. Many different interventions were studied, and no single intervention was assessed in more than four trials. We extracted data on 18 different comparisons. The risk of bias was high in all trials but one. Trial Sequential Analysis showed imprecision for all comparisons. For benzodiazepine discontinuation, we found a potential benefit of valproate at end of intervention (1 study, 27 participants; risk ratio (RR) 2.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 6.03; very low-quality evidence) and of tricyclic antidepressants at longest follow-up (1 study, 47 participants; RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.82; low-quality evidence). We found potentially positive effects on benzodiazepine withdrawal symptoms of pregabalin (1 study, 106 participants; mean difference (MD) -3.10 points, 95% CI -3.51 to -2.69; very low-quality evidence), captodiame (1 study, 81 participants; MD -1.00 points, 95% CI -1.13 to -0.87; very low-quality evidence), paroxetine (2 studies, 99 participants; MD -3.57 points, 95% CI -5.34 to -1.80; very low-quality evidence), tricyclic antidepressants (1 study, 38 participants; MD -19.78 points, 95% CI -20.25 to -19.31; very low-quality evidence), and flumazenil (3 studies, 58 participants; standardised mean difference -0.95, 95% CI -1.71 to -0.19; very low-quality evidence) at end of intervention. However, the positive effect of paroxetine on benzodiazepine withdrawal symptoms did not persist until longest follow-up (1 study, 54 participants; MD -0.13 points, 95% CI -4.03 to 3.77; very low-quality evidence). The following pharmacological interventions reduced symptoms of anxiety at end of intervention: carbamazepine (1 study, 36 participants; MD -6.00 points, 95% CI -9.58 to -2.42; very low-quality evidence), pregabalin (1 study, 106 participants; MD -4.80 points, 95% CI -5.28 to -4.32; very low-quality evidence), captodiame (1 study, 81 participants; MD -5.70 points, 95% CI -6.05 to -5.35; very low-quality evidence), paroxetine (2 studies, 99 participants; MD -6.75 points, 95% CI -9.64 to -3.86; very low-quality evidence), and flumazenil (1 study, 18 participants; MD -1.30 points, 95% CI -2.28 to -0.32; very low-quality evidence). Two pharmacological treatments seemed to reduce the proportion of participants that relapsed to benzodiazepine use: valproate (1 study, 27 participants; RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.90; very low-quality evidence) and cyamemazine (1 study, 124 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.78; very low-quality evidence). Alpidem decreased the proportion of participants with benzodiazepine discontinuation (1 study, 25 participants; RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.99; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 2.3 participants; low-quality evidence) and increased the occurrence of withdrawal syndrome (1 study, 145 participants; RR 4.86, 95% CI 1.12 to 21.14; NNTH 5.9 participants; low-quality evidence). Likewise, magnesium aspartate decreased the proportion of participants discontinuing benzodiazepines (1 study, 144 participants; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.96; NNTH 5.8; very low-quality evidence). Generally, adverse events were insufficiently reported. Specifically, one of the flumazenil trials was discontinued due to severe panic reactions. Authors' conclusions Given the low or very low quality of the evidence for the reported outcomes, and the small number of trials identified with a limited number of participants for each comparison, it is not possible to draw firm conclusions regarding pharmacological interventions to facilitate benzodiazepine discontinuation in chronic benzodiazepine users. Due to poor reporting, adverse events could not be reliably assessed across trials. More randomised controlled trials are required with less risk of systematic errors ('bias') and of random errors ('play of chance') and better and full reporting of patient-centred and long-term clinical outcomes. Such trials ought to be conducted independently of industry involvement.

OBJECTIVE: Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) is a psychosocial intervention with a recovery-oriented approach. The program has been evaluated in different settings; however evidence for the effects of IMR is still deficient. The aim of this trial was to investigate the benefits and harms of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual in Danish patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.METHOD: The trial was designed as a randomized, assessor-blinded, multi-center, clinical trial investigating the IMR program compared with usual treatment. 198 people diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder participated. The primary outcome was the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF-F) at the end of intervention and the secondary and explorative outcomes included severity of symptoms and service utilization.RESULTS: IMR had no significant effect on functioning, symptoms, substance use or service utilization.CONCLUSION: This randomized trial contributes to the evidence base of IMR by providing a methodological solid base for its conclusions; however the trial has some important limitations. More research is needed to get a firm answer on the effectiveness of the IMR.

Background The CLARICOR trial reported that clarithromycin compared with placebo increased all-cause mortality in patients with stable coronary heart disease. This study investigates the effects of clarithromycin versus placebo during 10 years follow up. Methods The CLARICOR trial is a randomised, placebo-controlled trial including 4373 patients with stable coronary heart disease. The interventions were 2 weeks of clarithromycin 500 mg a day versus placebo. 10 year follow up was performed through Danish public registers and analysed with Cox regression. Results Clarithromycin increased all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR): 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00-1.21) and cerebrovascular disease during 10 years (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.02-1.38). The increased mortality and morbidity were restricted to patients not on statin at entry (HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.04-1.31, and HR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.03-1.50). The assumption of constant HR during the 10 years was violated for cardiovascular death (P = 0.01) and cardiovascular death outside hospital (P < 0.0005). Analyses of the effects over time showed that clarithromycin increased cardiovascular mortality during the first three years (HR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.84) due to increased cardiovascular mortality outside hospital in patients not on statin (HR: 2.36, 95% CI: 1.60-3.50). During the last 4 years, cardiovascular death outside hospital was lower in the clarithromycin group (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.46-0.88). Conclusion Clarithromycin increased mortality due to cardiovascular death outside hospital and cerebrovascular morbidity in patients with stable coronary heart disease who were not on statin. The increased cardiovascular mortality was years later compensated, likely through frailty attrition.

Background The prevalence of disease-related malnutrition in Western European hospitals is estimated to be about 30%. There is no consensus whether poor nutritional status causes poorer clinical outcome or if it is merely associated with it. The intention with all forms of nutrition support is to increase uptake of essential nutrients and improve clinical outcome. Previous reviews have shown conflicting results with regard to the effects of nutrition support. Objectives To assess the benefits and harms of nutrition support versus no intervention, treatment as usual, or placebo in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk. Search methods We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid SP), Embase (Ovid SP), LILACS (BIREME), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science). We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp); ClinicalTrials.gov; Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP); Google Scholar; and BIOSIS, as well as relevant bibliographies of review articles and personal files. All searches are current to February 2016. Selection criteria We include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of publication type, publication date, and language, comparing nutrition support versus control in hospitalised adults at nutritional risk. We exclude trials assessing non-standard nutrition support. Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group. We used trial domains to assess the risks of systematic error (bias). We conducted Trial Sequential Analyses to control for the risks of random errors. We considered a P value of 0.025 or less as statistically significant. We used GRADE methodology. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Main results We included 244 randomised clinical trials with 28,619 participants that met our inclusion criteria. We considered all trials to be at high risk of bias. Two trials accounted for one-third of all included participants. The included participants were heterogenous with regard to disease (20 different medical specialties). The experimental interventions were parenteral nutrition (86 trials); enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) (80 trials); oral nutrition support (55 trials); mixed experimental intervention (12 trials); general nutrition support (9 trials); and fortified food (2 trials). The control interventions were treatment as usual (122 trials); no intervention (107 trials); and placebo (15 trials). In 204/244 trials, the intervention lasted three days or more. We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term mortality (end of intervention). The absolute risk was 8.3% across the control groups compared with 7.8% (7.1% to 8.5%) in the intervention groups, based on the risk ratio (RR) of 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.03, P = 0.16, 21,758 participants, 114 trials, low quality of evidence). We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for long-term mortality (maximum follow-up). The absolute risk was 13.2% in the control group compared with 12.2% (11.6% to 13%) following nutritional interventions based on a RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99, P = 0.03, 23,170 participants, 127 trials, low quality of evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected. We found no evidence of a difference between nutrition support and control for short-term serious adverse events. The absolute risk was 9.9% in the control groups versus 9.2% (8.5% to 10%), with nutrition based on the RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.01, P = 0.07, 22,087 participants, 123 trials, low quality of evidence). At long-term follow-up, the reduction in the risk of serious adverse events was 1.5%, from 15.2% in control groups to 13.8% (12.9% to 14.7%) following nutritional support (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97, P = 0.004, 23,413 participants, 137 trials, low quality of evidence). However, the Trial Sequential Analysis showed we only had enough information to assess a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more. A risk ratio reduction of 10% or more could be rejected. Trial Sequential Analysis of enteral nutrition alone showed that enteral nutrition might reduce serious adverse events at maximum follow-up in people with different diseases. We could find no beneficial effect of oral nutrition support or parenteral nutrition support on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events in any subgroup. Only 16 trials assessed health-related quality of life. We performed a meta-analysis of two trials reporting EuroQoL utility score at long-term follow-up and found very low quality of evidence for effects of nutritional support on quality of life (mean difference (MD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; 3961 participants, two trials). Trial Sequential Analyses showed that we did not have enough information to confirm or reject clinically relevant intervention effects on quality of life. Nutrition support may increase weight at short-term follow-up (MD 1.32 kg, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.00, 5445 participants, 68 trials, very low quality of evidence). Authors' conclusions There is low-quality evidence for the effects of nutrition support on mortality and serious adverse events. Based on the results of our review, it does not appear to lead to a risk ratio reduction of approximately 10% or more in either all-cause mortality or serious adverse events at short-term and long-term follow-up. There is very low-quality evidence for an increase in weight with nutrition support at the end of treatment in hospitalised adults determined to be at nutritional risk. The effects of nutrition support on all remaining outcomes are unclear. Despite the clinically heterogenous population and the high risk of bias of all included trials, our analyses showed limited signs of statistical heterogeneity. Further trials may be warranted, assessing enteral nutrition (tube-feeding) for different patient groups. Future trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic errors and low risks of random errors, and they also ought to assess health-related quality of life.

OBJECTIVE To investigate the effect of client feedback in group psychotherapy on attendance and treatment outcome for patients with eating disorders. METHOD We conducted a randomized clinical trial with central randomization stratified for diagnosis and treatment type according to a computer-generated allocation sequence concealed to the investigators. One-hundred and 59 adult participants, diagnosed with bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder, or eating disorder not otherwise specified according to DSM-IV, were included. Eighty participants were allocated to the experimental group, and 79 participants to the control group. Both groups received 20-25 weekly group psychotherapy sessions. In the experimental group, participants gave and received feedback about therapy progress and alliance, measured before and after each session using the Outcome Rating Scale and the Group Session Rating Scale. The primary outcome was rate of attendance to treatment sessions; the secondary outcome was severity of eating disorder symptoms measured with the Eating Disorder Examination interview. Exploratory outcomes were psychological distress measured with the Symptom Checklist-90-R and the Outcome Rating Scale, social functioning measured with the Sheehan Disability Scale, and episodes of self-harm and suicide measured with a modified version of the Self-Harm Inventory. RESULTS Feedback compared with control did not affect the rate of attendance (0.59 vs. 0.58; p = .96), the severity of symptoms (2.03 vs. 2.02; p = .46), or any of the exploratory outcomes (p values from 0.06 to 0.67). CONCLUSIONS Feedback neither increased attendance nor improved outcomes for outpatients in group psychotherapy for eating disorders. The results are discussed from different perspectives. (PsycINFO Database Record

Background: Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation may benefit adults with atrial fibrillation or those who had been treated for atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation is caused by multiple micro re-entry circuits within the atrial tissue, which result in chaotic rapid activity in the atria. Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based rehabilitation programmes, alone or with another intervention, compared with no-exercise training controls in adults who currently have AF, or have been treated for AF. Search methods: We searched the following electronic databases; CENTRAL and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, PsycINFO Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection Thomson Reuters, CINAHL EBSCO, LILACS Bireme, and three clinical trial registers on 14 July 2016. We also checked the bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews identified by the searches. We imposed no language restrictions. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) that investigated exercise-based interventions compared with any type of no-exercise control. We included trials that included adults aged 18 years or older with atrial fibrillation, or post-treatment for atrial fibrillation. Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently extracted data. We assessed the risk of bias using the domains outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We assessed clinical and statistical heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots, and by using standard Chi 2 and I 2 statistics. We performed meta-analyses using fixed-effect and random-effects models; we used standardised mean differences where different scales were used for the same outcome. We assessed the risk of random errors with trial sequential analysis (TSA) and used the GRADE methodology to rate the quality of evidence, reporting it in the 'Summary of findings' table. Main results: We included six RCTs with a total of 421 patients with various types of atrial fibrillation. All trials were conducted between 2006 and 2016, and had short follow-up (eight weeks to six months). Risks of bias ranged from high risk to low risk.The exercise-based programmes in four trials consisted of both aerobic exercise and resistance training, in one trial consisted of Qi-gong (slow and graceful movements), and in another trial, consisted of inspiratory muscle training. For mortality, very low-quality evidence from six trials suggested no clear difference in deaths between the exercise and no-exercise groups (relative risk (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 15.78; participants = 421; I 2 = 0%; deaths = 2). Very low-quality evidence from five trials suggested no clear difference between groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05; participants = 381; I 2 = 0%; events = 8). Low-quality evidence from two trials suggested no clear difference in health-related quality of life for the Short Form-36 (SF-36) physical component summary measure (mean difference (MD) 1.96, 95% CI -2.50 to 6.42; participants = 224; I 2 = 69%), or the SF-36 mental component summary measure (MD 1.99, 95% CI -0.48 to 4.46; participants = 224; I 2 = 0%). Exercise capacity was assessed by cumulated work, or maximal power (Watt), obtained by cycle ergometer, or by six minute walking test, or ergospirometry testing measuring VO2 peak. We found moderate-quality evidence from two studies that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity, measured by VO2 peak, more than no exercise (MD 3.76, 95% CI 1.37 to 6.15; participants = 208; I 2 = 0%); and very low-quality evidence from four studies that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity more than no exercise, measured by the six-minute walking test (MD 75.76, 95% CI 14.00 to 137.53; participants = 272; I 2 = 85%). When we combined the different assessment tools for exercise capacity, we found very low-quality evidence from six trials that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity more than no exercise (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.26; participants = 359; I 2 = 65%). Overall, the quality of the evidence for the outcomes ranged from moderate to very-low. Authors' conclusions: Due to few randomised patients and outcomes, we could not evaluate the real impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality or serious adverse events. The evidence showed no clinically relevant effect on health-related quality of life. Pooled data showed a positive effect on the surrogate outcome of physical exercise capacity, but due to the low number of patients and the moderate to very low-quality of the underpinning evidence, we could not be certain of the magnitude of the effect. Future high-quality randomised trials are needed to assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults with atrial fibrillation on patient-relevant outcomes.

Prospective parents widely use education to gain information about, e.g., labour and parenting skills. It is unknown if antenatal education in small classes is more beneficial for parenting stress and parenting alliance compared with other types of antenatal education. In the present randomised trial, we examined the effect of antenatal education in small classes versus auditorium-based lectures on perceived stress, parenting stress, and parenting alliance. A total of 1,766 pregnant women were randomised to receive: antenatal education in small classes three times in pregnancy and one time after delivery, each session lasted 2.5 hours, versus standard care consisting of two times two hours auditorium-based lectures. Previous analysis of the primary outcome showed no difference between intervention and control group. Here we conduct an exploratory analysis of three secondary outcomes. Effects of the interventions on parents' global feelings of stress at 37 weeks gestation and nine weeks and six months postpartum and parenting stress nine weeks and six months postpartum were examined using linear regression analyses and mixed models with repeated measurements. The effect on parenting alliance six months postpartum was examined using the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Antenatal education in small classes had a small beneficial main effect on global feelings of stress six months postpartum and a statistically significant interaction between time and group favoring antenatal education in small classes. The P values of intervention effects on parenting stress and parenting alliance were all larger than the threshold value (0.05).

Background: Beneficial effects of early palliative care have been found in advanced cancer, but the evidence is not unequivocal. Aim: To investigate the effect of early specialist palliative care among advanced cancer patients identified in oncology departments. Setting/participants: The Danish Palliative Care Trial (DanPaCT) (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01348048) is a multicentre randomised clinical trial comparing early referral to a specialist palliative care team plus standard care versus standard care alone. The planned sample size was 300. At five oncology departments, consecutive patients with advanced cancer were screened for palliative needs. Patients with scores exceeding a predefined threshold for problems with physical, emotional or role function, or nausea/vomiting, pain, dyspnoea or lack of appetite according to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) were eligible. The primary outcome was the change in each patient’s primary need (the most severe of the seven QLQ-C30 scales) at 3- and 8-week follow-up (0–100 scale). Five sensitivity analyses were conducted. Secondary outcomes were change in the seven QLQ-C30 scales and survival. Results: Totally 145 patients were randomised to early specialist palliative care versus 152 to standard care. Early specialist palliative care showed no effect on the primary outcome of change in primary need (−4.9 points (95% confidence interval −11.3 to +1.5 points); p = 0.14). The sensitivity analyses showed similar results. Analyses of the secondary outcomes, including survival, also showed no differences, maybe with the exception of nausea/vomiting where early specialist palliative care might have had a beneficial effect. Conclusion: We did not observe beneficial or harmful effects of early specialist palliative care, but important beneficial effects cannot be excluded.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery often experience a range of symptoms. Studies indicate that non-pharmacological interventions such as exercise training and psychoeducation have a positive physiological and psychological effect in early outpatient rehabilitation. The SheppHeartCABG trial will investigate the effect of early comprehensive rehabilitation in early phase rehabilitation versus usual care. The aim of this paper is to present the protocol for the SheppHeartCABG trial.METHODS/ANALYSIS: SheppHeartCABG is an investigator-initiated randomised clinical superiority trial with blinded outcome assessment, employing 1:1 central randomisation to rehabilitation plus usual care versus usual care alone. On the basis of a sample size calculation, 326 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting will be included from two clinical sites. All patients receive usual care and patients allocated to the experimental intervention follow 4 weeks rehabilitation consisting of an exercise programme, psycho-educative consultations and a compact mindfulness programme. The primary outcome is physical function measured by the 6-min walk test. The secondary outcomes are mental health and physical activity measured by the Medical Outcome Study Short Form (SF-12), anxiety and depression measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire, physical, emotional and global scores by the HeartQoL questionnaire, sleep measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, pain measured by the Örebro Musculoskeletal Screening Questionnaire and muscle endurance measured by the sit-to-stand test. A number of explorative analyses will also be conducted.ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: SheppHeartCABG is approved by the regional ethics committee (no. H-4-2014-109) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (no. 30-1309) and is performed in accordance with good clinical practice and the Declaration of Helsinki in its latest form. Positive, neutral and negative results of the trial will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals. Furthermore, results will be presented at national and international conferences relevant to the subject fields.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02290262; pre-results.

Objectives The effect of Individual Placement and Support (IPS) on return to work or education among people with mood or anxiety disorders is unclear, while IPS increases return to work for people with severe mental illness. We examined the effect of IPS modified for people with mood and anxiety disorders (IPS-MA) on return to work and education compared with services as usual (SAU). Methods In a randomised clinical superiority trial, 326 participants with mood and anxiety disorders were centrally randomised to IPS-MA, consisting of individual mentor support and career counselling (n=162) or SAU (n=164). The primary outcome was competitive employment or education at 24 months, while weeks of competitive employment or education, illness symptoms and level of functioning, and well-being were secondary outcomes. Results After 24 months, 44.4% (72/162) of the participants receiving IPS-MA had returned to work or education compared with 37.8% (62/164) following SAU (OR=1.34, 95% CI: 0.86 to 2.10, p=0.20). We found no difference in mean number of weeks in employment or education (IPS-MA 32.4 weeks vs SAU 26.7 weeks, p=0.14), level of depression (Hamilton Depression 6-Item Scale score IPS-MA 5.7 points vs SAU 5.0 points, p=0.12), level of anxiety (Hamilton Anxiety 6-Item Scale score IPS-MA 5.8 points vs SAU 5.1 points, p=0.17), level of functioning (Global Assessment of Functioning IPS-MA 59.1 points vs SAU 59.5 points, p=0.81) or well-being measured by WHO-Five Well-being Index (IPS-MA 49.6 points vs SAU 48.5 points, p=0.83) at 24 months. Conclusion The modified version of IPS, IPS-MA, was not superior to SAU in supporting people with mood or anxiety disorders in return to work at 24 months. Trial registration number NCT01721824.

Objectives: To examine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of group based antenatal education for improving childbirth and parenting resources compared to auditorium based education. Methods: Participants: 2350 Danish pregnant women and their partners ≥18. years old, recruited before 20. +. 0 gestational weeks.Population-based individually randomised superiority trial with two parallel arms: Four sessions of birth and parent preparation in small groups (experimental group); two lectures in an auditorium (control group).Data is collected by (1) questionnaires at baseline (≈18. weeks of gestation), 37. weeks of gestation, 9. weeks-, 6. months-, and 1. year post-partum, (2) the hospital obstetric database, (3) national registers. Primary outcome: use of epidural analgesia. Secondary outcomes: stress, parenting alliance; explorative outcomes: depressive symptoms, use of health care services, self-efficacy, well-being, family break-ups.Analyses will be intention-to-treat as well as per protocol. Process evaluation will be conducted using questionnaires and qualitative interviews. The incremental societal cost of the intervention will be computed and compared to the measured outcomes in a cost-effectiveness analysis. Conclusion: To the best of our knowledge this is the largest well-designed randomised trial of its kind to date. The trial will bring much-needed evidence for decision makers of the content and form of antenatal education.

Psychoeducational interventions for people with severe mental illness are developed to enable them to manage their illness effectively to improve prognosis and recovery.The aim was to investigate the benefits and harms of the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program among people with severe mental illness in Denmark. IMR builds among other approaches on a psychoeducational approach.A randomized, multi-center, clinical trial of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual among 198 participants with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder investigating outcomes related to illness self-management assessed by the IMR scale, recovery, hope and participants' satisfaction at the end of the 9 months intervention period.No statistical differences were seen between the two groups regarding illness self-management, hope, recovery, or satisfaction with treatment.IMR appears not to be better than treatment as usual in any of the outcomes. Further studies with a longer follow-up period, better assessments of recovery and a systematic review of the existing trials are needed to assess if the program is effective.

Background To assess the effects of comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation compared with usual care on physical activity and mental health for patients treated with catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Methods The patients were randomized 1:1 stratified by paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation and sex to cardiac rehabilitation consisting of 12 weeks physical exercise and four psycho-educational consultations plus usual care (cardiac rehabilitation group) versus usual care. The primary outcome was Vo 2 peak. The secondary outcome was self-rated mental health measured by the Short Form-36 questionnaire. Exploratory outcomes were collected. Results 210 patients were included (mean age: 59 years, 74% men), 72% had paroxysmal atrial fibrillation prior to ablation. Compared with usual care, the cardiac rehabilitation group had a beneficial effect on Vo 2 peak at four months (24.3mL kg −1 min −1 versus 20.7mL kg −1 min −1 , p of main effect=0.003, p of interaction between time and intervention=0.020). No significant difference between groups on Short Form-36 was found (53.8 versus 51.9 points, P =.20). Two serious adverse events (atrial fibrillation in relation to physical exercise and death unrelated to rehabilitation) occurred in the cardiac rehabilitation group versus one in the usual care group (death unrelated to intervention) ( P =.56). In the cardiac rehabilitation group 16 patients versus 7 in the usual care group reported non-serious adverse events ( P =.047). Conclusion Comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation had a positive effect on physical capacity compared with usual care, but not on mental health. Cardiac rehabilitation caused more non-serious adverse events.

Background: The impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) following heart valve surgery is uncertain. We conducted an update of this systematic review and a meta-analysis to assess randomised controlled trial evidence for the use of exercise-based CR following heart valve surgery. Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based CR compared with no exercise training in adults following heart valve surgery or repair, including both percutaneous and surgical procedures. We considered CR programmes consisting of exercise training with or without another intervention (such as an intervention with a psycho-educational component). Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (Ovid); Embase (Ovid); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCO); PsycINFO (Ovid); Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS; Bireme); and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) on the Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) on 10 January 2020. We searched for ongoing trials from ClinicalTrials.gov, Clinical-trials.com, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 15 May 2020. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials that compared exercise-based CR interventions with no exercise training. Trial participants comprised adults aged 18 years or older who had undergone heart valve surgery for heart valve disease (from any cause) and had received heart valve replacement or heart valve repair. Both percutaneous and surgical procedures were included. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently extracted data. We assessed the risk of systematic errors (‘bias’) by evaluating risk domains using the 'Risk of bias' (RoB2) tool. We assessed clinical and statistical heterogeneity. We performed meta-analyses using both fixed-effect and random-effects models. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence for primary outcomes (all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalisation, and health-related quality of life). Main results: We included six trials with a total of 364 participants who have had open or percutaneous heart valve surgery. For this updated review, we identified four additional trials (216 participants). One trial had an overall low risk of bias, and we classified the remaining five trials as having some concerns. Follow-up ranged across included trials from 3 to 24 months. Based on data at longest follow-up, a total of nine participants died: 4 CR versus 5 control (relative risk (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 2.68; 2 trials, 131 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low). No trials reported on cardiovascular mortality. One trial reported one cardiac-related hospitalisation in the CR group and none in the control group (RR 2.72, 95% CI 0.11 to 65.56; 1 trial, 122 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low). We are uncertain about health-related quality of life at completion of the intervention in CR compared to control (Short Form (SF)-12/36 mental component: mean difference (MD) 1.28, 95% CI -1.60 to 4.16; 2 trials, 150 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low; and SF-12/36 physical component: MD 2.99, 95% CI -5.24 to 11.21; 2 trials, 150 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low), or at longest follow-up (SF-12/36 mental component: MD -1.45, 95% CI -4.70 to 1.80; 2 trials, 139 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low; and SF-12/36 physical component: MD -0.87, 95% CI -3.57 to 1.83; 2 trials, 139 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low). Authors' conclusions: Due to lack of evidence and the very low quality of available evidence, this updated review is uncertain about the impact of exercise-CR in this population in terms of mortality, hospitalisation, and health-related quality of life. High-quality (low risk of bias) evidence on the impact of CR is needed to inform clinical guidelines and routine practice.

Objective The evidence for cardiac rehabilitation after valve surgery remains sparse. Current recommendations are therefore based on patients with ischaemic heart disease. The aim of this randomised clinical trial was to assess the effects of cardiac rehabilitation versus usual care after heart valve surgery. Methods The trial was an investigator-initiated, randomised superiority trial (The CopenHeart VR trial, VR; valve replacement or repair). We randomised 147 patients after heart valve surgery 1:1 to 12 weeks of cardiac rehabilitation consisting of physical exercise and monthly psycho-educational consultations (intervention) versus usual care without structured physical exercise or psycho-educational consultations (control). Primary outcome was physical capacity measured by VO 2 peak and secondary outcome was self-reported mental health measured by Short Form-36. Results 76% were men, mean age 62 years, with aortic (62%), mitral (36%) or tricuspid/pulmonary valve surgery (2%). Cardiac rehabilitation compared with control had a beneficial effect on VO 2 peak at 4 months (24.8 mL/kg/min vs 22.5 mL/kg/min, p=0.045) but did not affect Short Form-36 Mental Component Scale at 6 months (53.7 vs 55.2 points, p=0.40) or the exploratory physical and mental outcomes. Cardiac rehabilitation increased the occurrence of self-reported non-serious adverse events (11/72 vs 3/75, p=0.02). Conclusions Cardiac rehabilitation after heart valve surgery significantly improves VO 2 peak at 4 months but has no effect on mental health and other measures of exercise capacity and self-reported outcomes. Further research is needed to justify cardiac rehabilitation in this patient group. Trial registration number NCT01558765, Results.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of an antenatal education programme in small classes versus standard auditorium-based lectures.DESIGN: Randomised trial using random-generated web-based 1:1 allocation.SETTING: The largest birth site in the Capital Region of Denmark, from August 2012 to May 2014.PARTICIPANTS: 1766 pregnant women. Inclusion criteria ≥18 years, pregnant with a single child, and able to speak and understand Danish. Women were enrolled in the trial from 10+0 to 20+0 weeks of gestation.INTERVENTIONS: The intervention programme consisted of three times 2.5 hours of antenatal education in small classes (n=6-8 women), and focused on improving information and problem-solving skills for expectant parents in order to ease birth and the transition to parenthood. The control group received standard auditorium-based lectures consisting of two times 2 hours in an auditorium with participation of ∼250 people.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary trial outcome was use of epidural analgesia. Other types of pain relief and obstetric interventions were analysed as explorative outcomes.RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in use of epidural analgesia between participants in the intervention group (30.9%) versus the control group (29.1%), adjusted OR 1.10 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.34). Also, the two groups did not differ regarding other types of pain relief or obstetric interventions. Concomitant birth preparation was common in both groups and highest in the control group, but did not seem to influence our results noticeably.CONCLUSIONS: Antenatal education in small groups versus standard auditorium-based lectures did not differ regarding use of epidural analgesia, other pain relief, or obstetric interventions.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01672437; Results.

Background Available evidence on the effects of a high fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) of 60% to 90% compared with a routine fraction of inspired oxygen of 30% to 40%, during anaesthesia and surgery, on mortality and surgical site infection has been inconclusive. Previous trials and meta-analyses have led to different conclusions on whether a high fraction of supplemental inspired oxygen during anaesthesia may decrease or increase mortality and surgical site infections in surgical patients. Objectives To assess the benefits and harms of an FIO2 equal to or greater than 60% compared with a control FIO2 at or below 40% in the perioperative setting in terms of mortality, surgical site infection, respiratory insufficiency, serious adverse events and length of stay during the index admission for adult surgical patients. We looked at various outcomes, conducted subgroup and sensitivity analyses, examined the role of bias and applied trial sequential analysis (TSA) to examine the level of evidence supporting or refuting a high FIO2 during surgery, anaesthesia and recovery. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, International Web of Science, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS), advanced Google and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) up to February 2014. We checked the references of included trials and reviews for unidentified relevant trials and reran the searches in March 2015. We will consider two studies of interest when we update the review. Selection criteria We included randomized clinical trials that compared a high fraction of inspired oxygen with a routine fraction of inspired oxygen during anaesthesia, surgery and recovery in individuals 18 years of age or older. Data collection and analysis Two review authors extracted data independently. We conducted random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses, and for dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RRs). We used published data and data obtained by contacting trial authors. To minimize the risk of systematic error, we assessed the risk of bias of the included trials. To reduce the risk of random errors caused by sparse data and repetitive updating of cumulative meta-analyses, we applied trial sequential analyses. We used Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the quality of the evidence. Main results We included 28 randomized clinical trials (9330 participants); in the 21 trials reporting relevant outcomes for this review, 7597 participants were randomly assigned to a high fraction of inspired oxygen versus a routine fraction of inspired oxygen. In trials with an overall low risk of bias, a high fraction of inspired oxygen compared with a routine fraction of inspired oxygen was not associated with all-cause mortality (random-effects model: RR 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.36; GRADE: low quality) within the longest follow-up and within 30 days of follow-up (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.99, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.60; GRADE: low quality). In a trial sequential analysis, the required information size was not reached and the analysis could not refute a 20% increase in mortality. Similarly, when all trials were included, a high fraction of inspired oxygen was not associated with all-cause mortality to the longest follow-up (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.33) or within 30 days of follow-up (Peto OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.29), both of very low quality according to GRADE. Neither was a high fraction of inspired oxygen associated with the risk of surgical site infection in trials with low risk of bias (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.17; GRADE: low quality) or in all trials (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; GRADE: low quality). A high fraction of inspired oxygen was not associated with respiratory insufficiency (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.99), serious adverse events (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.43) or length of stay (mean difference -0.06 days, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.32 days). In subgroup analyses of nine trials using preoperative antibiotics, a high fraction of inspired oxygen was associated with a decrease in surgical site infections (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97; GRADE: very low quality); a similar effect was noted in the five trials adequately blinded for the outcome assessment (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.96; GRADE: very low quality). We did not observe an effect of a high fraction of inspired oxygen on surgical site infections in any other subgroup analyses. Authors' conclusions As the risk of adverse events, including mortality, may be increased by a fraction of inspired oxygen of 60% or higher, and as robust evidence is lacking for a beneficial effect of a fraction of inspired oxygen of 60% or higher on surgical site infection, our overall results suggest that evidence is insufficient to support the routine use of a high fraction of inspired oxygen during anaesthesia and surgery. Given the risk of attrition and outcome reporting bias, as well as other weaknesses in the available evidence, further randomized clinical trials with low risk of bias in all bias domains, including a large sample size and long-term follow-up, are warranted.

BACKGROUND: Individual Placement and Support (IPS) appears to be an effective vocational intervention for obtaining competitive employment for people with severe mental illness. However, no IPS studies or trials have been conducted in Denmark, a country characterized by a specialized labor market with a higher minimum wage and fewer entry-level jobs in comparison with other countries such as the US. Furthermore, long-term job retention and economic self-sufficiency have not been clearly demonstrated. Integrating methods such as cognitive remediation and work-related social skills training may be ways to address these issues.METHODS/DESIGN: The trial design is an investigator-initiated, randomized, assessor-blinded, multi-center trial. A total of 750 patients with severe mental illness will be randomly assigned into three groups: (1) IPS, (2) IPS enhanced with cognitive remediation and work-related social skills training, and (3) service as usual. The primary outcome is number of hours in competitive employment or education at 18-month follow-up. Secondary and exploratory outcomes are money earned, days to first employment, symptoms, functional level, self-esteem, and self-efficacy at 18-month follow-up. Thirty- and 60-month follow-ups will be register-based.DISCUSSION: This will be one of the largest randomized trials investigating IPS to date. The trial will be conducted with high methodological quality in order to reduce the risk of bias. If the results of this trial show that IPS, or IPS enhanced with cognitive remediation and work-related social skills training, is superior to service as usual, this will support preliminary evidence. Furthermore, it will show that the method is generalizable to a variety of labor markets and welfare systems and provide important knowledge about the effect of adding cognitive remediation and social skills training to the IPS intervention.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials registration number: NCT01722344 (registered 2 Nov. 2012).

We assessed if prolonged-release melatonin can facilitate withdrawal of long-term benzodiazepine usage in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.Randomised, placebo-controlled, blinded, parallel superiority trial of 24 weeks duration. Participants were randomised to prolonged-release melatonin 2 mg daily versus matching placebo and were continuously guided to gradually reduce their usual benzodiazepine dosage. The primary outcome was mean benzodiazepine daily dosage at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included pattern of benzodiazepine dosage over time, benzodiazepine cessation proportion, and benzodiazepine withdrawal symptoms.In total, 86 patients (21-74 years) were enrolled: 42 were randomised to melatonin versus 44 to placebo. We found no significant effect of melatonin on mean benzodiazepine dosage at 24 weeks (melatonin group 8.01 mg versus placebo group 5.72 mg diazepam equivalents; difference between means -2.29; 95% CI -5.78 to 1.21; P = 0.20). Benzodiazepine cessation proportion was 38.1% (16/42) in the melatonin group versus 47.7% (21/44) in the placebo group (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.56; P = 0.32). Prolonged-release melatonin had no effect on benzodiazepine withdrawal symptoms.Benzodiazepine dosage was comparably low between the groups after 24 weeks of guided gradual dose reduction. In this context, prolonged-release melatonin did not seem to further facilitate benzodiazepine discontinuation.

Background Laparoscopic simulation has become a standard component of surgical training, but there is limited knowledge regarding skills transfer between procedural tasks. The objective was to investigate the specificity of procedural simulator training. Methods This was randomized single-centre educational superiority trial. Surgical novices practised basic skills on a laparoscopic virtual reality simulator. On reaching proficiency, participants were randomized to proficiency-based training. The intervention group practised two procedures on the simulator (appendicectomy followed by salpingectomy), whereas the control group trained on only one procedure (salpingectomy). The main outcomes were number of repetitions and time to proficiency for the second procedure. Results Ninety-six participants were randomized, of whom 74 per cent were women, with a median age of 26 years. The intervention group needed significantly fewer attempts than the control group to reach proficiency in the second procedure: median (i.q.r.) 22 (17–34) versus 32 (26–41) attempts, which corresponded to 24·1 per cent fewer attempts as assessed by multivariable analysis (P = 0·004). The intervention group required significantly less time than the control group to reach proficiency: median (i.q.r.) 88 (63–127) versus 131 (101–153) min respectively, corresponding to a difference of 31·1 min as assessed by multivariable analysis (P = 0·001). Conclusion Practising two procedures, compared with only one, reduced the number of attempts and time to reach proficiency in the second procedure. Skills transfer is seen between two tasks in laparoscopic simulator training; however, task specificity is still present when practising procedures. Registration number: NCT02069951 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Contains fulltext : 152730.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of in situ simulation (ISS) versus off-site simulation (OSS) on knowledge, patient safety attitude, stress, motivation, perceptions of simulation, team performance and organisational impact. DESIGN: Investigator-initiated single-centre randomised superiority educational trial. SETTING: Obstetrics and anaesthesiology departments, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: 100 participants in teams of 10, comprising midwives, specialised midwives, auxiliary nurses, nurse anaesthetists, operating theatre nurses, and consultant doctors and trainees in obstetrics and anaesthesiology. INTERVENTIONS: Two multiprofessional simulations (clinical management of an emergency caesarean section and a postpartum haemorrhage scenario) were conducted in teams of 10 in the ISS versus the OSS setting. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Knowledge assessed by a multiple choice question test. EXPLORATORY OUTCOMES: Individual outcomes: scores on the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire, stress measurements (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, cognitive appraisal and salivary cortisol), Intrinsic Motivation Inventory and perceptions of simulations. Team outcome: video assessment of team performance. Organisational impact: suggestions for organisational changes. RESULTS: The trial was conducted from April to June 2013. No differences between the two groups were found for the multiple choice question test, patient safety attitude, stress measurements, motivation or the evaluation of the simulations. The participants in the ISS group scored the authenticity of the simulation significantly higher than did the participants in the OSS group. Expert video assessment of team performance showed no differences between the ISS versus the OSS group. The ISS group provided more ideas and suggestions for changes at the organisational level. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomised trial, no significant differences were found regarding knowledge, patient safety attitude, motivation or stress measurements when comparing ISS versus OSS. Although participant perception of the authenticity of ISS versus OSS differed significantly, there were no differences in other outcomes between the groups except that the ISS group generated more suggestions for organisational changes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01792674.

BACKGROUND: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by symptoms of inattention and impulsivity and/or hyperactivity and a range of cognitive dysfunctions. Pharmacological treatment may be beneficial; however, many affected individuals continue to have difficulties with cognitive functions despite medical treatment, and up to 30 % do not respond to pharmacological treatment. Inadequate medical compliance and the long-term effects of treatment make it necessary to explore nonpharmacological and supplementary treatments for ADHD. Treatment of cognitive dysfunctions may prove particularly important because of the impact of these dysfunctions on the ability to cope with everyday life. Lately, several trials have shown promising results for cognitive computer training, often referred to as cognitive training, which focuses on particular parts of cognition, mostly on the working memory or attention but with poor generalization of training on other cognitive functions and functional outcome. Children with ADHD have a variety of cognitive dysfunctions, and it is important that cognitive training target multiple cognitive functions.METHODS/DESIGN: This multicenter randomized clinical superiority trial aims to investigate the effect of "ACTIVATE™," a computer program designed to improve a range of cognitive skills and ADHD symptoms. A total of 122 children with ADHD, aged 6 to 13 years, will be randomized to an intervention or a control group. The intervention group will be asked to use ACTIVATE™ at home 40 minutes per day, 6 days per week for 8 weeks. Both intervention and control group will receive treatment as usual. Outcome measures will assess cognitive functions, symptoms, and behavioral and functional measures before and after the 8 weeks of training and in a 12- and 24-week follow-up.DISCUSSION: Results of this trial will provide useful information on the effectiveness of computer training focusing on several cognitive functions. Cognitive training has the potential to reduce cognitive dysfunctions and to become a new treatment option, which can promote a more normal neural development in young children with ADHD and thus reduce cognitive dysfunctions and symptoms. This could help children with ADHD to perform better in everyday life and school.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01752530 , date of registration: 10 December 2012.

Systematic errors in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) overestimate treatment effects. We systematically assessed the risks of bias in RCTs assessing the effects of drug and non-drug interventions for patients with unipolar depression.We searched bibliographic databases for drug and non-drug RCTs including patients with depression. We assessed the following risk of bias domains: sequence generation, allocation concealment, baseline imbalance, blinding, intention-to-treat analysis, selective outcome reporting, and funding. Risks of bias were compared for drug and non-drug trials and according to year of publication (before 1990; from 1990 to 1999; and 2000 to 2010).Comparing drug trials (N=775) to non-drug trials (N=73), the proportion of drug trials with low risk of bias seemed superior regarding blinding of participants (p0.001), blinding of health-care providers (p0.001), and blinded outcome assessment (p0.001). Non-drug trials were superior regarding sequence generation (p0.001), allocation concealment (p=0.002), intention-to-treat analysis (p0.001), and baseline imbalance (p=0.006). Adequate blinding of data managers (p=0.45), blinding of statisticians (p=0.69), and selective outcome reporting (p=0.55) did not differ. 41.5% of drug trials were funded by for-profit organizations compared to 12.3% of non-drug trials (p0.001). In drug trials, the risk of bias decreased significantly over time. This did not reach statistical significance in non-drug trials.This study only included trials published before 2010.Included trials were associated with high risks of bias which may distort effect estimates. The risks of bias decreased with time for drug trials.

Background: The use of structured curricula for minimally invasive surgery training is becoming increasingly popular. However, many laparoscopic training programs still use basic skills and isolated task training, despite increasing evidence to support the use of training models with higher functional resemblance, such as whole procedural modules. In contrast to basic skills training, procedural training involves several cognitive skills such as elements of planning, movement integration, and how to avoid adverse events. The objective of this trial is to investigate the specificity of procedural practice in laparoscopic simulator training. Methods/Design: A randomised single-centre educational superiority trial. Participants are 96 surgical novices (medical students) without prior laparoscopic experience. Participants start by practicing a series of basic skills tasks to a predefined proficiency level on a virtual reality laparoscopy simulator. Upon reaching proficiency, the participants are randomised to either the intervention group, which practices two procedures (an appendectomy followed by a salpingectomy) or to the control group, practicing only one procedure (a salpingectomy) on the simulator. 1:1 central randomisation is used and participants are stratified by sex and time to complete the basic skills. Data collection is done at a surgical skills centre. The primary outcome is the number of repetitions required to reach a predefined proficiency level on the salpingectomy module. The secondary outcome is the total training time to proficiency. The improvement in motor skills and effect on cognitive load are also explored. Discussion: The results of this trial might provide new knowledge on how the technical part of surgical training curricula should be comprised in the future. To examine the specificity of practice in procedural simulator training is of great importance in order to develop more comprehensive surgical curricula. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02069951

Introduction: Sexuality is an important part of people's physical and mental health. Patients with heart disease often suffer from sexual dysfunction. Sexual dysfunction has a negative impact on quality of life and well-being in persons with heart disease, and sexual dysfunction is associated with anxiety and depression. Treatment and care possibilities seem to be lacking. Studies indicate that non-pharmacological interventions such as exercise training and psychoeducation possess the potential of reducing sexual dysfunction in patients with heart disease. The CopenHeartSF trial will investigate the effect of a comprehensive sexual rehabilitation programme versus usual care. Methods and analysis: CopenHeartSF is an investigator-initiated randomised clinical superiority trial with blinded outcome assessment, with 1:1 central randomisation to sexual rehabilitation plus usual care versus usual care alone. Based on sample size calculations, 154 male patients with impaired sexual function due to implantable cardioverter defibrillator or ischaemic heart disease will be included from two university hospitals in Denmark. All patients receive usual care and patients allocated to the experimental intervention group follow a 12-week sexual rehabilitation programme consisting of an individualised exercise programme and psychoeducative consultation with a specially trained nurse. The primary outcome is sexual function measured by the International Index of Erectile Function. The secondary outcome measure is psychosocial adjustment to illness by the Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale, sexual domain. A number of explorative analyses will also be conducted. Ethics and dissemination: CopenHeartSF is approved by the regional ethics committee (no H-4-2012-168) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (no 2007-58-0015) and is performed in accordance with good clinical practice and the Declaration of Helsinki in its latest form. Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01796353.

Heart valve diseases are common with an estimated prevalence of 2.5% in the Western world. The number is rising due to an ageing population. Once symptomatic, heart valve diseases are potentially lethal, and heavily influence daily living and quality of life. Surgical treatment, either valve replacement or repair, remains the treatment of choice. However, post surgery, the transition to daily living may become a physical, mental and social challenge. We hypothesise that a comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation programme can improve physical capacity and self-assessed mental health and reduce hospitalisation and healthcare costs after heart valve surgery. A randomised clinical trial, CopenHeartVR, aims to investigate whether cardiac rehabilitation in addition to usual care is superior to treatment as usual after heart valve surgery. The trial will randomly allocate 210 patients, 1:1 intervention to control group, using central randomisation, and blinded outcome assessment and statistical analyses. The intervention consists of 12 weeks of physical exercise, and a psycho-educational intervention comprising five consultations. Primary outcome is peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak) measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing with ventilatory gas analysis. Secondary outcome is self-assessed mental health measured by the standardised questionnaire Short Form 36. Also, long-term healthcare utilisation and mortality as well as biochemistry, echocardiography and cost-benefit will be assessed. A mixed-method design is used to evaluate qualitative and quantitative findings encompassing a survey-based study before the trial and a qualitative pre- and post-intervention study. The study is approved by the local regional Research Ethics Committee (H-1-2011-157), and the Danish Data Protection Agency (j.nr. 2007-58-0015). ClinicalTrials.gov ( http://NCT01558765 ).

Objective To evaluate the effect of a secondary prevention programme with education on skin care and individual counselling versus treatment as usual in healthcare workers with hand eczema. Design Randomised, observer blinded parallel group superiority clinical trial. Setting Three hospitals in Denmark. Participants 255 healthcare workers with self reported hand eczema within the past year randomised centrally and stratified by profession, severity of eczema, and hospital. 123 were allocated to the intervention group and 132 to the control group. Interventions Education in skin care and individual counselling based on patch and prick testing and assessment of work and domestic related exposures. The control was treatment as usual. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was clinical severity of disease at five month follow-up measured by scores on the hand eczema severity index. The secondary outcomes were scores on the dermatology life quality index, self evaluated severity of hand eczema, skin protective behaviours, and knowledge of hand eczema from onset to follow-up. Results Follow-up data were available for 247 of 255 participants (97%). At follow-up, the mean score on the hand eczema severity index was significantly lower (improved) in the intervention group than control group: difference of means, unadjusted −3.56 (95% confidence interval −4.92 to −2.14); adjusted −3.47 (−4.80 to −2.14), both P

INTRODUCTION: Infective endocarditis (IE) is among the most serious infectious diseases in the western world. Treatment requires lengthy hospitalisation, high-dosage antibiotic therapy and possible valve replacement surgery. Despite advances in treatment, the 1-year mortality remains at 20-40%. Studies indicate that patients experience persisting physical symptoms, diminished quality of life and difficulties returning to work up to a year postdischarge. No studies investigating the effects of rehabilitation have been published. We present the rationale and design of the CopenHeart(IE) trial, which investigates the effect of comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation versus usual care for patients treated for IE. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a randomised clinical trial to investigate the effects of comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation versus usual care on the physical and psychosocial functioning of patients treated for IE. The trial is a multicentre, parallel design trial with 1 : 1 individual randomisation to either the intervention or control group. The intervention consists of five psychoeducational consultations provided by specialised nurses and a 12-week exercise training programme. The primary outcome is mental health (MH) measured by the standardised Short Form 36 (SF-36). The secondary outcome is peak oxygen uptake measured by the bicycle ergospirometry test. Furthermore, a number of exploratory analyses will be performed. Based on sample size calculation, 150 patients treated for left-sided (native or prosthetic valve) or cardiac device endocarditis will be included in the trial. A qualitative and a survey-based complementary study will be undertaken, to investigate postdischarge experiences of the patients. A qualitative postintervention study will explore rehabilitation participation experiences. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the regional research ethics committee (no H-1-2011-129) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (no 2007-58-0015). Study findings will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01512615. ispartof: BMJ Open vol:2 issue:6 ispartof: location:England status: published

BackgroundMajor depressive disorder afflicts an estimated 17% of individuals during their lifetime at tremendous suffering and cost. Cognitive therapy and interpersonal psychotherapy are treatment options, but their effects have only been limitedly compared in systematic reviews.MethodUsing Cochrane systematic review methodology we compared the benefits and harm of cognitive therapy versus interpersonal psychotherapy for major depressive disorder. Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, Medline via PubMed, EMBASE, Psychlit, PsycInfo, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2010. Continuous outcome measures were assessed by mean difference and dichotomous outcomes by odds ratio. We conducted trial sequential analysis to control for random errors.ResultsWe included seven trials randomizing 741 participants. All trials had high risk of bias. Meta-analysis of the four trials reporting data at cessation of treatment on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression showed no significant difference between the two interventions [mean difference −1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) −2.35 to 0.32]. Meta-analysis of the five trials reporting data at cessation of treatment on the Beck Depression Inventory showed comparable results (mean difference −1.29, 95% CI −2.73 to 0.14). Trial sequential analysis indicated that more data are needed to definitively settle the question of a differential effect. None of the included trial reported on adverse events.ConclusionsRandomized trials with low risk of bias and low risk of random errors are needed, although the effects of cognitive therapy and interpersonal psychotherapy do not seem to differ significantly regarding depressive symptoms. Future trials should report on adverse events.

Background Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are severe mental illnesses that can have a significant disabling impact on the lives of people. Psychosocial interventions that stress hope and recovery as a part of a multi-dimensional approach are possibly indicated to support people with severe mental illness in facilitating recovery. Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) is a curriculum-based psychosocial intervention designed as structured program with a recovery-oriented approach. The aim of IMR is to rehabilitate people with severe mental illnesses by helping them acquire knowledge and skills in managing their illness and achieve personal recovery goals. Previous randomised clinical trials indicate that IMR can be implemented with a good effect and a high fidelity though further trials are crucial to demonstrate the potential effectiveness of IMR. Methods/Design The trial design is a randomised, assessor-blinded, multi-centre, clinical trial of the IMR program compared with treatment as usual for 200 participants diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder under the care of two community mental health centres in the Capital Region of Denmark. The primary outcome is level of functioning at the end of treatment. The secondary outcomes are disease symptoms; use of alcohol/drugs; individual meaning of recovery; hope; hospital admissions and out-patient psychiatric treatment at the end of treatment and the abovementioned and level of functioning at follow-up 21 months after baseline. Discussion If the results of this trial show IMR to be effective these positive results will strengthen the evidence of IMR as an effective comprehensive psychosocial intervention with a recovery-oriented approach for people with severe mental illness. This will have significant implications for the treatment and recovery of people with severe mental illness. Trial registration Registration number NCT01361698.

Background: Major depressive disorder afflicts an estimated 17% of individuals during their lifetimes at tremendous suffering and costs. Interpersonal psychotherapy and other psychodynamic therapies may be effective interventions for major depressive disorder, but the effects have only had limited assessment in systematic reviews. Methods/Principal Findings: Cochrane systematic review methodology with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized trials comparing the effect of psychodynamic therapies versus ‘treatment as usual’ for major depressive disorder. To be included the participants had to be older than 17 years with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Altogether, we included six trials randomizing a total of 648 participants. Five trials assessed ‘interpersonal psychotherapy’ and only one trial assessed ‘psychodynamic psychotherapy’. All six trials had high risk of bias. Meta-analysis on all six trials showed that the psychodynamic interventions significantly reduced depressive symptoms on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (mean difference 23.12 (95% confidence interval 24.39 to 21.86;P,0.00001), no heterogeneity) compared with ‘treatment as usual’. Trial sequential analysis confirmed this result. Discussion: We did not find convincing evidence supporting or refuting the effect of interpersonal psychotherapy or psychodynamic therapy compared with ‘treatment as usual’ for patients with major depressive disorder. The potential beneficial effect seems small and effects on major outcomes are unknown. Randomized trials with low risk of systematic errors and low risk of random errors are needed.

Major depressive disorder afflicts an estimated 17% of individuals during their lifetimes at tremendous suffering and costs. Psychodynamic therapy may be a treatment option for depression, but the effects have only been limitedly assessed in systematic reviews.Using Cochrane systematic review methodology, we compared the benefits and harms of psychodynamic therapy versus 'no intervention' or sham for major depressive disorder. We accepted any co-intervention, including antidepressants, as long as it was delivered similarly in both intervention groups. Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Psychlit, Psyc Info, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2010. Two authors independently extracted data. We evaluated risk of bias to control for systematic errors. We conducted trial sequential analysis to control for random errors.We included five trials randomizing a total of 365 participants who all received antidepressants as co-intervention. All trials had high risk of bias. Four trials assessed 'interpersonal psychotherapy' and one trial 'short psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy'. Meta-analysis showed that psychodynamic therapy significantly reduced depressive symptoms on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (mean difference -3.01 (95% confidence interval -3.98 to -2.03; P0.00001), no significant heterogeneity between trials) compared with 'no intervention'. Trial sequential analysis confirmed this result.Our results are based on few trials with high risk of bias and a limited number of participants so our results may be questionable.Adding psychodynamic therapy to antidepressants might benefit depressed patients, but the possible treatment effect measured on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression is small.

Although a light to moderate alcohol intake is associated with a lower risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), alcohol is also associated with risk of hypertension, which in turn is a strong risk factor of ACS. We examined whether middle-aged men and women with hypertension also benefit from a light to moderate alcohol intake in relation to risk of ACS and overall mortality. We used data from 57,053 men and women, aged 50-64, who participated in the Danish Diet, Cancer and Health study. Information on alcohol intake (amount and frequency) was reported by the participants. Hypertension status was assessed at baseline by combining blood pressure measurements and self-reports. During follow-up, 860 and 271 ACS events occurred among men and women. Irrespective of alcohol intake, participants with hypertension had a higher risk than participants with normal blood pressure. Alcohol intake was associated with a lower risk of ACS among participants both with and without hypertension and there was no evidence of interaction between alcohol intake and hypertension. Those who drank moderately had a lower mortality than abstainers and those who drank heavily; and for all levels of alcohol intake, participants with hypertension had a higher risk than participants with normal blood pressure. Results were similar for men and women. These findings indicate that a light to moderate alcohol intake has similar effects on the risk of ACS in men and women with and without hypertension.

Background Hand eczema is the most frequently recognized occupational disease in Denmark with an incidence of approximately 0.32 per 1000 person-years. Consequences of hand eczema include chronic severe eczema, prolonged sick leave, unemployment, and impaired quality of life. New preventive strategies are needed to reduce occupational hand eczema. Methods/Design We describe the design of a randomised clinical trial to investigate the effects of classification of hand eczema plus individual counselling versus no intervention. The trial includes health-care workers with hand eczema identified from a self-administered questionnaire delivered to 3181 health-care workers in three Danish hospitals. The questionnaire identifies the prevalence of hand eczema, knowledge of skin-protection, and exposures that can lead to hand eczema. At entry, all participants are assessed regarding: disease severity (Hand Eczema Severity Index); self-evaluated disease severity; number of eruptions; quality of life; skin protective behaviour, and knowledge of skin protection. The patients are centrally randomised to intervention versus no intervention 1:1 stratified for hospital, profession, and severity score. The experimental group undergoes patch and prick testing; classification of the hand eczema; demonstration of hand washing and appliance of emollients; individual counselling, and a skin-care programme. The control group receives no intervention. All participants are reassessed after six months. The primary outcome is observer-blinded assessment of disease severity and the secondary outcomes are unblinded assessments of disease severity; number of eruptions; knowledge of skin protection; skin-protective behaviour, and quality of life. Trial registration The trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.Gov, NCT01012453.

Udgivelsesdato: 2010-May-21 Aims: The risk of myocardial infarction is lower among light-to-moderate drinkers compared with abstainers. Results from some previous studies, but not all, suggest that this association is modified by variations in genes coding for alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH). We aimed to test this hypothesis, including alcohol as both the amount of alcohol and the frequency of drinking. Methods: we conducted a nested case-cohort study within the Danish Diet, Cancer and Health study, including 1,645 men (770 incident cases of acute coronary syndrome from 1993-1997 through 2004 and 875 randomly selected controls). Results: Higher alcohol intake (measured as amount or drinking frequency) was associated with lower risk of acute coronary syndrome; however, there was no evidence that these finding were modified by ADH1B or ADH1C genotypes. Conclusions: The importance of functional variation in alcohol dehydrogenase for the association between alcohol drinking habits and the risk of developing acute coronary syndrome, if any, is very limited.

METHODS: First and second-year medical students were enrolled in a course comprised of basic suturing, intubation, and central venous catheterization. Before participation, students completed surveys pertaining to demographic data, specialty interest area (ie, surgical vs non-procedural), experience with common technical skills, and confidence in acquiring new skills. Using data from the surveys and univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis with Stata, variables predictive of success in the simulation tasks were identified.

Only a few studies on the health status of ethnic minorities in Denmark have been carried out. These studies have shown a higher mental and physical morbidity rate and an increased prevalence of social problems among adults. The purpose of this study was to compare the self-reported health status of ethnic Danish youths and young first- and second-generation immigrants from non-Western countries to establish whether there is an association between ethnicity and "belief in the ability to affect one's own health".We surveyed a cohort of 6,203 ninth-grade students (aged 15 to 16 years), including 264 first-generation and 391 second-generation immigrants from non-Western countries. Self-reported health and self-efficacy, defined as the belief in the ability to affect one's own health, were included in the analyses, using SPSS cross-tabulations and logistical regression analysis.A direct association between ethnicity and self-reported health status was found. Both first- and second-generation immigrants rated their health worse than did ethnic Danish youths. The association was statistically significant for first-generation immigrant girls when controlling for relevant risk factors for ill health. Significant associations between self-reported health status and belief in the ability to affect one's own health were found for both first- and second-generation immigrants of both sexes, compared to ethnic Danish youths.Factors related to immigration and immigrants' social conditions may partially explain the ethnic differences in self-reported health status. However, cultural differences may influence the ethnic and gender differences in health status and self-efficacy, as ethnic minorities are less likely to believe in their ability to affect their own health. It is recommended that this knowledge be implemented when developing health promotion programs in the public schools.

INTRODUCTION: Only a few studies on the health status of ethnic minorities in Denmark have been carried out. These studies have shown a higher mental and physical morbidity rate and an increased prevalence of social problems among adults. The purpose of this study was to compare the self-reported health status of ethnic Danish youths and young first- and second-generation immigrants from non-Western countries to establish whether there is an association between ethnicity and "belief in the ability to affect one's own health". MATERIALS AND METHODS: We surveyed a cohort of 6,203 ninth-grade students (aged 15 to 16 years), including 264 first-generation and 391 second-generation immigrants from non-Western countries. Self-reported health and self-efficacy, defined as the belief in the ability to affect one's own health, were included in the analyses, using SPSS cross-tabulations and logistical regression analysis. RESULTS: A direct association between ethnicity and self-reported health status was found. Both first- and second-generation immigrants rated their health worse than did ethnic Danish youths. The association was statistically significant for first-generation immigrant girls when controlling for relevant risk factors for ill health. Significant associations between self-reported health status and belief in the ability to affect one's own health were found for both first- and second-generation immigrants of both sexes, compared to ethnic Danish youths. CONCLUSION: Factors related to immigration and immigrants' social conditions may partially explain the ethnic differences in self-reported health status. However, cultural differences may influence the ethnic and gender differences in health status and self-efficacy, as ethnic minorities are less likely to believe in their ability to affect their own health. It is recommended that this knowledge be implemented when developing health promotion programs in the public schools. Udgivelsesdato: 2006-Apr-24