Search

IntroductionCOVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) is a new viral-induced pneumonia caused by infection with a novel coronavirus, SARS CoV2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2). At present there are few proven effective treatments. This early phase experimental medicine protocol describes an overarching and adaptive trial designed to provide safety, pharmacokinetic (PK)/ pharmacodynamic (PD) information and exploratory biological surrogates of efficacy, which may support further development and deployment of candidate therapies in larger scale trials of COVID-19 positive patients.Methods and analysisDEFINE is an ongoing exploratory multicentre platform, open label, randomised study. COVID-19 positive patients will be recruited from the following cohorts; a) community cases b) hospitalised patients with new changes on a chest x-ray (CXR) or a computed tomography (CT) scan or requiring supplemental oxygen and c) hospitalised patients requiring assisted ventilation. Participants may be recruited from all three of these cohorts, depending on the experimental therapy, its route of administration and mechanism of action.The primary statistical analyses are concerned with the safety of candidate agents as add-on therapy to standard of care in patients with COVID-19.Safety will be assessed usingHaematological and biochemical safety laboratory investigations.Physical examinationVital signs (blood pressure/heart rate/temperature and respiratory rate)Daily electrocardiogram (ECG) readingsAdverse eventsThe analysis population will consist of (i) all patients randomised to a treatment arm who receive any dose of the study drug and (ii) all patients randomised to the control arm who would also have been eligible to receive a study drug.Secondary analysis will assess the following variables during treatment period 1) the response of key exploratory biomarkers 2) change in WHO ordinal scale and NEWS2 score 3) oxygen requirements 4) viral load 5) duration of hospital stay 6) PK/PD and 7) changes in key coagulation pathways.Ethics and disseminationThe DEFINE trial platform and its initial two treatment and standard of care arms have received full ethical approval from Scotland A REC (20/SS/0066), the MHRA (EudraCT 2020-002230-32) and NHS Lothian and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.The results of each study arm will be published as soon as the treatment arm has finished recruitment, data input is complete and any outstanding patient safety follow-ups have been completed. Depending on the results of these or future arms, data will be shared with larger clinical trial networks, including RECOVERY, and to other partners for rapid roll out in larger patient cohorts.Registration detailsThe DEFINE protocol has been registered on ISRCTN (https://www.isrctn.com/) and Clinicaltrials.gov(https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/).ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04473053ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN14212905Strengths and limitations of this studyThe trial is as flexible as possible to ensure a broad range of patients can be recruited and candidate therapies can be added or removed as evidence emerges.The team are collecting real world data of medications at an early stage of their use in COVID-19 across the full spectrum of disease; allowing the administration of different treatment formulations (inhaled vs oral vs intravenous).The simultaneous collection of clinical outcomes as well as exploratory endpoints including clinical biomarkers, flow cytometry, PK/PD and thromboelastography allows further characterisation and elucidation of the temporal immuno-inflammatory cascade in COVID-19 to inform on future therapy selection.This is a Phase 1b/IIa platform study and thus the primary end point is clinical safety therefore our anticipated numbers will be too small to allow for definitive data on efficacy.DEFINE is an experimental medicine platform, currently restricted to three clinical sites and so the generation of data will be slower than that of larger platforms with access to a greater number of patients.

This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Health Technology Assessment Programme, project number 17/147/47. The HTA Programme is funded by the NIHR, with contributions from the Chief Scientist Office in Scotland and National Institute for Social Care and Health Research in Wales and the Health and Social Care R&D Division, Public Health Agency in Northern Ireland. Sponsor: Imperial College London., Introduction Up to 50% of patients develop post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) after an above knee deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The aim of the study was to determine the effect of graduated compression stockings in preventing PTS after DVT. Methods and analysis Pragmatic, UK multicentre randomised trial in adults with first above knee DVT. The standard of care arm is anticoagulation. The intervention arm will receive anticoagulation plus stockings (European class II, 23-32 mm Hg compression) worn for a median of 18 months. The primary endpoint is PTS using the Villalta score. Analysis of this will be through a time to event approach and cumulative incidence at median 6, 12 and 18 months. An ongoing process evaluation will examine factors contributing to adherence to stockings to understand if and how the behavioural interventions were effective. Ethics and dissemination UK research ethics committee approval (reference 19/LO/1585). Dissemination though the charity Thrombosis UK, the Imperial College London website, peer-reviewed publications and international conferences., National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) 17/147/47, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Chief Scientist Office in Scotland, National Institute for Social Care and Health Research in Wales, Health and Social Care R&D Division, Public Health Agency in Northern Ireland, Imperial College London

This study is supported by the J P Moulton Charitable Foundation (grant number: N/A). The DCD allograft is provided free of charge by NHSBT., The authors wish to thank the principal investigators, research nurses and their teams at the recruiting sites. The authors also wish to thank the NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) for providing the DCD allograft free of charge and for their support in training clinical staff, and the NIHR Clinical Research Networks (CRNs) for their support in identifying sites. Finally, the authors wish to thank all individuals who participated in the PPI focus groups and extend a special thank you to PPI representative Emanuel Ezeife, whose useful feedback helped to inform the design of the study., Introduction Venous leg ulceration (VLU), the most common type of chronic ulcer, can be difficult to heal and is a major cause of morbidity and reduced quality of life. Although compression bandaging is the principal treatment, it is time-consuming and bandage application requires specific training. There is evidence that intervention on superficial venous incompetence can help ulcer healing and recurrence, but this is not accessible to all patients. Hence, new treatments are required to address these chronic wounds. One possible adjuvant treatment for VLU is human decellularised dermis (DCD), a type of skin graft derived from skin from deceased tissue donors. Although DCD has the potential to promote ulcer healing, there is a paucity of data for its use in patients with VLU. Methods and analysis This is a multicentre, parallel group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial. One hundred and ninety-six patients with VLU will be randomly assigned to receive either the DCD allograft in addition to standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants with a healed index ulcer at 12 weeks post-randomisation in each treatment arm. Secondary outcomes include the time to index ulcer healing and the proportion of participants with a healed index ulcer at 12 months. Changes in quality of life scores and cost-effectiveness will also be assessed. All analyses will be carried out on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. A mixed-effects, logistic regression on the outcome of the proportion of those with the index ulcer healed at 12 weeks will be performed. Secondary outcomes will be assessed using various statistical models appropriate to the distribution and nature of these outcomes. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was granted by the Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1271). Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences., J P Moulton Charitable Foundation

Early diagnosis of brain tumours is challenging and a major unmet need. Patients with brain tumours most often present with non-specific symptoms more commonly associated with less serious diagnoses, making it difficult to determine which patients to prioritize for brain imaging. Delays in diagnosis affect timely access to treatment, with potential impacts on quality of life and survival. A test to help identify which patients with non-specific symptoms are most likely to have a brain tumour at an earlier stage would dramatically impact on patients by prioritizing demand on diagnostic imaging facilities. This clinical feasibility study of brain tumour early diagnosis was aimed at determining the accuracy of our novel spectroscopic liquid biopsy test for the triage of patients with non-specific symptoms that might be indicative of a brain tumour, for brain imaging. Patients with a suspected brain tumour based on assessment of their symptoms in primary care can be referred for open access CT scanning. Blood samples were prospectively obtained from 385 of such patients, or patients with a new brain tumour diagnosis. Samples were analysed using our spectroscopic liquid biopsy test to predict presence of disease, blinded to the brain imaging findings. The results were compared to the patient’s index brain imaging delivered as per standard care. Our test predicted the presence of glioblastoma, the most common and aggressive brain tumour, with 91% sensitivity, and all brain tumours with 81% sensitivity, and 80% specificity. Negative predictive value was 95% and positive predictive value 45%. The reported levels of diagnostic accuracy presented here have the potential to improve current symptom-based referral guidelines, and streamline assessment and diagnosis of symptomatic patients with a suspected brain tumour., Brennan et al. show a rapid, low-cost blood test can identify which patients with suspected brain tumour to prioritize for diagnostic imaging, reducing time to diagnosis. The test is more than 90% sensitive for the most aggressive tumours. Earlier diagnosis can provide health and economic benefits., Graphical Abstract Graphical Abstract

Background Timely interventions in women presenting with preterm labour can substantially improve health outcomes for preterm babies. However, establishing such a diagnosis is very challenging, as signs and symptoms of preterm labour are common and can be nonspecific. We aimed to develop and externally validate a risk prediction model using concentration of vaginal fluid fetal fibronectin (quantitative fFN), in combination with clinical risk factors, for the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth and assessed its cost-effectiveness. Methods and findings Pregnant women included in the analyses were 22+0 to 34+6 weeks gestation with signs and symptoms of preterm labour. The primary outcome was spontaneous preterm birth within 7 days of quantitative fFN test. The risk prediction model was developed and internally validated in an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of 5 European prospective cohort studies (2009 to 2016; 1,783 women; mean age 29.7 years; median BMI 24.8 kg/m2; 67.6% White; 11.7% smokers; 51.8% nulliparous; 10.4% with multiple pregnancy; 139 [7.8%] with spontaneous preterm birth within 7 days). The model was then externally validated in a prospective cohort study in 26 United Kingdom centres (2016 to 2018; 2,924 women; mean age 28.2 years; median BMI 25.4 kg/m2; 88.2% White; 21% smokers; 35.2% nulliparous; 3.5% with multiple pregnancy; 85 [2.9%] with spontaneous preterm birth within 7 days). The developed risk prediction model for spontaneous preterm birth within 7 days included quantitative fFN, current smoking, not White ethnicity, nulliparity, and multiple pregnancy. After internal validation, the optimism adjusted area under the curve was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.92), and the optimism adjusted Nagelkerke R2 was 35% (95% CI 33% to 37%). On external validation in the prospective UK cohort population, the area under the curve was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.94), and Nagelkerke R2 of 36% (95% CI: 34% to 38%). Recalibration of the model’s intercept was required to ensure overall calibration-in-the-large. A calibration curve suggested close agreement between predicted and observed risks in the range of predictions 0% to 10%, but some miscalibration (underprediction) at higher risks (slope 1.24 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.26)). Despite any miscalibration, the net benefit of the model was higher than “treat all” or “treat none” strategies for thresholds up to about 15% risk. The economic analysis found the prognostic model was cost effective, compared to using qualitative fFN, at a threshold for hospital admission and treatment of ≥2% risk of preterm birth within 7 days. Study limitations include the limited number of participants who are not White and levels of missing data for certain variables in the development dataset. Conclusions In this study, we found that a risk prediction model including vaginal fFN concentration and clinical risk factors showed promising performance in the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth within 7 days of test and has potential to inform management decisions for women with threatened preterm labour. Further evaluation of the risk prediction model in clinical practice is required to determine whether the risk prediction model improves clinical outcomes if used in practice. Trial registration The study was approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (16/WS/0068). The study was registered with ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN 41598423) and NIHR Portfolio (CPMS: 31277)., Sarah J Stock and colleagues develop and validate a risk prediction model of spontaneous preterm birth for women with preterm labour symptoms, based on vaginal fluid fetal fibronectin and clinical risk factors., Author summary Why was this study done? Preterm labour is notoriously challenging for clinicians to diagnose due to the nonspecific nature of presenting signs and symptoms. The outcomes and health of preterm babies can be significantly improved by well-timed and appropriate interventions, but unnecessary overtreatment of women is common and costly. Qualitative fetal fibronectin (fFN) is one test used to aid the diagnosis of preterm labour. What did the researchers do and find? We developed and validated a risk prediction model to improve the prediction of impending preterm birth using a combination of qualitative fFN results and additional clinical risk factors. The primary outcome was spontaneous preterm birth within 7 days of fFN testing. We developed and internally validated the model using data from 1783 European women and externally validated the model in a prospective cohort study of 2,924 UK women. Women with signs and symptoms of preterm labour were included in the analysis between 22+0 to 34+6 weeks gestation. At a threshold of ≥2% risk of birth within 7 days of testing, we found the prognostic model to be cost effective in comparison to fFN alone. What do these findings mean? Our findings indicate that the prognostic model has promising potential to improve prediction of spontaneous preterm birth. The model is well placed to aid management decisions and discussions with women presenting with signs and symptoms of preterm labour. Limitations were that there were low numbers of participants in the studies who were not White, and there were some missing data in the risk predictor development cohort.

BackgroundStress urinary incontinence (SUI) is common after radical prostatectomy and likely to persist despite conservative treatment. The sling is an emerging operation for persistent SUI, but randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparison with the established artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) is lacking.ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of surgery in men with bothersome urodynamic SUI after prostate surgery.Design, setting, and participantsA noninferiority RCT was conducted among men with bothersome urodynamic SUI from 27 UK centres. Blinding was not possible due the surgeries.InterventionParticipants were randomly assigned (1:1) to the male transobturator sling (n = 190) or the AUS (n = 190) group.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisThe primary outcome was patient-reported SUI 12 mo after randomisation, collected from postal questionnaire using a composite outcome from two items in validated International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form questionnaire (ICIQ-UI SF). Noninferiority margin was 15%, thought to be of acceptable lower effectiveness, in return for reduced adverse events (AEs) and easier operation, for the sling. Secondary outcomes were operative and postoperative details, patient-reported measures, and AEs, up to 12 mo after surgery.Results and limitationsA total of 380 participants were included. At 12 mo after randomisation, incontinence rates were 134/154 (87.0%) for male sling versus 133/158 (84.2%) for AUS (difference 3.6% [95% confidence interval {CI} –11.6 to 4.6], pNI = 0.003), showing noninferiority. Incontinence symptoms (ICIQ-UI SF) reduced from scores of 16.1 and 16.4 at baseline to 8.7 and 7.5 for male sling and AUS, respectively (mean difference 1.4 [95% CI 0.2–2.6], p = 0.02). Serious AEs (SAEs) were few: n = 6 and n = 13 for male sling and AUS (one man had three SAEs), respectively. Quality of life scores improved, and satisfaction was high in both groups. All other secondary outcomes that show statistically significant differences favour the AUS.ConclusionsUsing a strict definition, urinary incontinence rates remained high, with no evidence of difference between male sling and AUS. Symptoms and quality of life improved significantly in both groups, and men were generally satisfied with both procedures. Overall, secondary and post hoc analyses were in favour of AUS.Patient summaryUrinary incontinence after prostatectomy has considerable effect on men’s quality of life. MASTER shows that if surgery is needed, both surgical options result in fewer symptoms and high satisfaction, despite most men not being completely dry. However, most other results indicate that men having an artificial urinary sphincter have better outcomes than those who have a sling.

Background Endometriosis (where endometrial-like tissue is found outside the uterus) affects ~ 176 million women worldwide and can lead to debilitating pelvic pain. Three subtypes of endometriosis exist, with ~ 80% of women having superficial peritoneal endometriosis (SPE). Endometriosis is diagnosed by laparoscopy and, if SPE is found, gynaecologists usually remove it surgically. However, many women get limited pain relief from surgical removal of SPE. We plan to undertake a future large trial where women who have only SPE found at initial laparoscopy are randomly allocated to have surgical removal (excision or ablation) of SPE, or not. Ultimately, we want to determine whether surgical removal improves overall symptoms and quality of life, or whether surgery is of no benefit, exacerbates symptoms, or even causes harm. The primary objective of this feasibility study is to determine what proportion of women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy will agree to randomisation. The secondary objectives are to determine if there are differences in key prognostic parameters between eligible women that agree to be randomised and those that decline; how many women having laparoscopy for investigation of chronic pelvic pain are eligible for the trial; the range of treatment effects and variability in outcomes and the most acceptable methods of recruitment, randomisation and assessment tools. Methods We will recruit up to 90 women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy over a 9-month recruitment period in four Scottish hospitals and randomise them 1:1 to either diagnostic laparoscopy alone (with a sham port to achieve blinding of the allocation) or surgical removal of endometriosis. Baseline characteristics, e.g. age, index of social deprivation, ethnicity, and intensity/duration of pain will be collected. Participants will be followed up by online questionnaires assessing pain, physical and emotional function at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. Discussion Recruitment to a randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of surgery for endometriosis may be challenging because of preconceived ideas about treatment success amongst patients and clinicians. We have designed this study to assess feasibility of recruitment and to inform the design of our future definitive trial. Trial registration ClincicalTrials.gov, NCT04081532 Status Recruiting

Background: The benefit of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) in guiding asthma treatment is uncertain. Our hypothesis was that FeNO plus symptom-guided treatment reduces exacerbations in children with asthma compared to symptom-guided treatment alone. Methods: A multicentre randomised controlled trial recruited 6-15 year olds with asthma treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with an exacerbation in the previous year. Randomisation was to asthma treatment guided by FeNO plus symptoms (intervention) or by symptoms only (standard care). A web-based algorithm using symptom control, ICS adherence, current treatment and (within the intervention group) FeNO gave treatment recommendations. Participants attended assessments 3, 6, 9 and 12-months post-randomisation. The primary outcome was exacerbation requiring oral corticosteroid over the 12 months post-randomisation. Findings: There were 509 children recruited. At randomisation, the mean (SD) age was 10∙1y (2.6), median (IQR) FeNO 21 ppb (10, 48), mean (SD) %FEV 1 90% (18), 56% received ≤400 microg budesonide equivalent ICS and 50% had controlled symptoms. The primary outcome occurred in 123/255 (48%) of the intervention group and 129/251 (51%) of the standard care group. The adjusted difference in percentage of participants who received the intervention where the primary outcome occurred exacerbation compared to those receiving standard care was -3∙13% (95% CI: -11∙9% to 5∙6%). In adjusted intention-to-treat analysis, the odds ratio (OR) for primary outcome was 0 ∙88 [95%CI 0∙61 to 1∙27]. In 377 of 1771 assessments, the algorithm recommendation was not followed. In complier average causal effect analysis, adjusting for algorithm adherence, the OR for those fully adherent was 0∙82 [95% CI 0∙48 to 1∙41]. There were no differences in secondary outcomes between groups. Interpretation: In this exacerbation-prone population, adding FeNO to symptom-guided treatment did not reduce exacerbations. Trial Registration: ISRCTN number #67875351. Funding: This study was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanisms Evaluation programme of the National Institute for Health Research (reference 15-18-14). Declaration of Interest: David Price has board membership with AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Mylan, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi Genzyme, Thermofisher; consultancy agreements with Airway Vista Secretariat, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, EPG Communication Holdings Ltd, FIECON Ltd, Fieldwork International, GlaxoSmithKline, Mylan, Mundipharma, Novartis, OM Pharma SA, PeerVoice, Phadia AB, Spirosure Inc, Strategic North Limited, Synapse Research Management Partners S.L., Talos Health Solutions, Theravance and WebMD Global LLC; grants and unrestricted funding for investigator-initiated studies (conducted through Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute Pte Ltd) from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Mylan, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Respiratory Effectiveness Group, Sanofi Genzyme, Theravance and UK National Health Service; payment for lectures/speaking engagements from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, GlaxoSmithKline, Kyorin, Mylan, Mundipharma, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi Genzyme; payment for travel/accommodation/meeting expenses from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mundipharma, Mylan, Novartis, Thermofisher; stock/stock options from AKL Research and Development Ltd which produces phytopharmaceuticals; owns 74% of the social enterprise Optimum Patient Care Ltd (Australia and UK) and 92.61% of Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute Pte Ltd (Singapore); 5% shareholding in Timestamp which develops adherence monitoring technology; is peer reviewer for grant committees of the UK Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, and Health Technology Assessment; and was an expert witness for GlaxoSmithKline. Ethical Approval: The study was approved by the North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (16/NS/0106).

Background When psychosis emerges in young people there is a risk of poorer outcomes, and access to evidence-based treatments is paramount. The current evidence base is limited. Antipsychotic medications show only a small benefit over placebo, but young people experience more side effects than adults. There is sparse evidence for psychological intervention. Research is needed to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of psychological intervention versus antipsychotic medication versus a combined treatment for adolescents with psychosis. Objectives The objective of Managing Adolescent first-episode Psychosis: a feasibility Study (MAPS) was to determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial to answer the question of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these three treatment options. Design This was a prospective, randomised, open-blinded, evaluation feasibility trial with a single blind. Participants were allocated 1 : 1 : 1 to receive antipsychotic medication, psychological intervention or a combination of both. A thematic qualitative study explored the acceptability and feasibility of the trial. Setting Early intervention in psychosis services and child and adolescent mental health services in Manchester, Oxford, Lancashire, Sussex, Birmingham, Norfolk and Suffolk, and Northumberland, Tyne and Wear. Participants People aged 14–18 years experiencing a first episode of psychosis either with an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, schizophrenia spectrum diagnosis or meeting the entry criteria for early intervention in psychosis who had not received antipsychotic medication or psychological intervention within the last 3 months. Interventions Psychological intervention involved up to 26 hours of cognitive–behavioural therapy and six family intervention sessions over 6 months, with up to four booster sessions. Antipsychotic medication was prescribed by the participant’s psychiatrist in line with usual practice. Combined treatment was a combination of psychological intervention and antipsychotic medication. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was feasibility (recruitment, treatment adherence and retention). We used a three-stage progression criterion to determine feasibility. Secondary outcomes were psychosis symptoms, recovery, anxiety and depression, social and educational/occupational functioning, drug and alcohol use, health economics, adverse/metabolic side effects and adverse/serious adverse events. Results We recruited 61 out of 90 (67.8%; amber zone) potential participants (psychological intervention, n = 18; antipsychotic medication, n = 22; combined treatment, n = 21). Retention to follow-up was 51 out of 61 participants (83.6%; green zone). In the psychological intervention arm and the combined treatment arm, 32 out of 39 (82.1%) participants received six or more sessions of cognitive–behavioural therapy (green zone). In the combined treatment arm and the antipsychotic medication arm, 28 out of 43 (65.1%) participants received antipsychotic medication for 6 consecutive weeks (amber zone). There were no serious adverse events related to the trial and one related adverse event. Overall, the number of completed secondary outcome measures, including health economics, was small. Limitations Medication adherence was determined by clinician report, which can be biased. The response to secondary outcomes was low, including health economics. The small sample size obtained means that the study lacked statistical power and there will be considerable uncertainty regarding estimates of treatment effects. Conclusions It is feasible to conduct a trial comparing psychological intervention with antipsychotic medication and a combination treatment in young people with psychosis with some adaptations to the design, including adaptations to collection of health economic data to determine cost-effectiveness. Future work An adequately powered definitive trial is required to provide robust evidence. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN80567433. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Despite the success of vaccines and selected repurposed treatments, COVID-19 is likely to remain a global health problem and further chemotherapeutics are required. Many repurposed drugs have progressed rapidly to Phase 2 and 3 trials without characterisation of Pharmacokinetics (PK)/Pharmacodynamics (PD) including safety in COVID-19. One such drug is Nafamostat Mesylate (Nafamostat), a synthetic serine protease inhibitor with anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory properties. Preclinical data has demonstrated that it is has potent antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 by directly inhibiting the transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) dependent stage of host cell entry.MethodsWe present the findings of a phase Ib/II open label, platform randomised controlled trial (RCT), exploring the safety of intravenous Nafamostat in hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonitis. Patients were assigned randomly to standard of care (SoC), Nafamostat or an alternative therapy. Secondary endpoints included clinical endpoints such as number of oxygen free days and clinical improvement/ deterioration, PK/PD, thromboelastometry, D Dimers, cytokines, immune cell flow cytometry and viral load.ResultsData is reported from 42 patients, 21 of which were randomly assigned to receive intravenous Nafamostat. The Nafamostat group developed significantly higher plasma creatinine levels, more adverse events and a lower number of oxygen free days. There were no other statistically significant differences in the primary or secondary endpoints between Nafamostat and SoC. PK data demonstrated that intravenous Nafamostat was rapidly broken down to inactive metabolites. We observed an antifibrinolytic profile, and no significant anticoagulant effects in thromboelastometry. Participants in the Nafamostat group had higher D Dimers compared to SoC. There were no differences in cytokine profile and immune cell phenotype and viral loads between the groups.ConclusionIn hospitalised patients with COVID-19, we did not observe evidence of anti-inflammatory, anticoagulant or antiviral activity with intravenous Nafamostat. Given the number of negative trials with repurposed drugs, our experimental medicine trial highlights the value of PK/PD studies prior to selecting drugs for efficacy trials. Given the mechanism of action, further evaluation of Nafamostat delivered via a different route may be warranted. This trial demonstrates the importance of experimental trials in new disease entities such as COVID-19 prior to selecting drugs for larger trials.

BackgroundEmergency contraception (EC) was approved in the UK as a pharmacy medicine for purchase without prescription in 2001. Twenty years later we conducted a study to characterise routine practice pharmacy provision of EC.Study designMystery shopper study of 30 pharmacies in Edinburgh, Dundee and London participating in a clinical trial of contraception after EC.MethodsMystery shoppers, aged ≥16 years, followed a standard scenario requesting EC. After the pharmacy visit, they completed a proforma recording the duration of the consultation, where it took place, and whether advice was given to them about the importance of ongoing contraception after EC.ResultsFifty-five mystery shopper visits were conducted. The median reported duration of the consultation with the pharmacist was 6 (range 1–18) min. Consultations took place in a private room in 34 cases (62%) and at the shop counter in the remainder. In 27 cases (49%) women received advice about ongoing contraception. Eleven women (20%) left the pharmacy without EC due to lack of supplies or of a trained pharmacist. Most women were generally positive about the consultation.ConclusionsWhile availability of EC from UK pharmacies has undoubtedly improved access, the necessity to have a consultation, however helpful, with a pharmacist introduces delays and around one in five of our mystery shoppers left without getting EC. Consultations in private are not always possible and little advice is given about ongoing contraception. It is time to make EC available without a pharmacy consultation.

BackgroundChronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) are major causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide with a substantial burden of the disease being borne by the low and middle income countries (LMICs). Interventions to change health behaviour which aim to improve the quality of life and reduce disease burden due to CRD require knowledge of the problem and factors influencing such behaviour. Our study sought to appreciate the lived experiences of people with CRD, their understanding of the disease and its risk factors, and usual practice of health behaviour in a rural low-literate community in southern India.MethodsQualitative data were collected between September and December 2018 through eight focus group discussions (FGDs), five in-depth interviews and four key-informant interviews from patients and community members. Community engagement was undertaken prior to the study and all interviews and discussions were recorded with permission. Inductive coding was used to thematically analyse the results.ResultsMajor themes included understanding of chronic lung disease, health behaviours, lived experiences with the disease and social norms, attitudes and other factors influencing health behaviour.DiscussionPoor understanding of CRDs and their risk factors affect health seeking behaviour and/or health practices. Stigma associated with the disease and related health behaviours (e.g. inhaler use) creates emotional challenges and mental health problems, besides influencing health behaviour. However barriers can be circumvented by increasing community awareness; communication and connection with the community through community based health care providers can turn challenges into opportunities for better health care.

Background Patients admitted to hospital for surgery are at an increased risk of venous thromboembolism. Pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis and mechanical prophylaxis (usually graduated compression stockings or intermittent pneumatic compression) have been shown to reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism. The evidence base supporting the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s recommendation for the use of graduated compression stockings for venous thromboembolism prevention in the UK has recently been challenged. It is unclear if the risks and costs associated with graduated compression stockings are justified for deep-vein thrombosis prevention in moderate- and high-risk elective surgical inpatients receiving low-dose low-molecular-weight heparin pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis. Objectives The primary objective was to compare the venous thromboembolism rate in elective surgical inpatients at moderate or high risk of venous thromboembolism who were receiving either graduated compression stockings and low-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (standard care) or low-dose low-molecular-weight heparin alone (intervention). Design This was a pragmatic, multicentre, prospective, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Setting This took place in secondary care NHS hospitals in the UK. Participants Patients aged ≥ 18 years who were assessed to be at moderate or high risk of venous thromboembolism according to the NHS England venous thromboembolism risk assessment tool (or the trust equivalent based on this form) and who were not contraindicated to low-molecular-weight heparin or graduated compression stockings were deemed eligible to take part. Interventions Participants were randomised 1 : 1 to either low-molecular-weight heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin and graduated compression stockings. Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism up to 90 days after surgery. A combined end point of duplex ultrasound-proven new lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (symptomatic or asymptomatic) plus imaging-confirmed symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, compliance with graduated compression stockings and low-molecular-weight heparin during admission, and all-cause mortality. Results A total of 1905 participants were randomised and 1858 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. A primary outcome event occurred in 16 out of 937 (1.7%) patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin-alone arm compared with 13 out of 921 (1.4%) patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin plus graduated compression stockings arm. The risk difference between low-molecular-weight heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin plus graduated compression stockings was 0.30% (95% confidence interval –0.65% to 1.26%). As the 95% confidence interval did not cross the non-inferiority margin of 3.5% (p Limitations In total, 13% of patients did not receive a duplex ultrasound scan that could have detected further asymptomatic deep-vein thrombosis. However, missing scans were balanced between both trial arms. The subpopulation of those aged ≥ 65 years assessed as being at a moderate risk of venous thromboembolism was under-represented in the study; however, this reflects that this group is under-represented in the general population. Conclusions For elective surgical patients at moderate or high risk of venous thromboembolism, administration of pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis alone is non-inferior to a combination of pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis and graduated compression stockings. These findings indicate that graduated compression stockings may be unnecessary for most elective surgical patients. Future work Further studies are required to evaluate whether or not adjuvant graduated compression stockings have a role in patients receiving extended thromboprophylaxis, beyond the period of hospital admission, following elective surgery or in patients undergoing emergency surgical procedures. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13911492. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 69. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BACKGROUND: Unless women start effective contraception after oral emergency contraception, they remain at risk of unintended pregnancy. Most women in the UK obtain emergency contraception from community pharmacies. We hypothesised that pharmacist provision of the progestogen-only pill as a bridging interim method of contraception with emergency contraception plus an invitation to a sexual and reproductive health clinic, in which all methods of contraception are available, would result in increased subsequent use of effective contraception.METHODS: We did a pragmatic cluster-randomised crossover trial in 29 UK pharmacies among women receiving levonorgestrel emergency contraception. Women aged 16 years or older, not already using hormonal contraception, not on medication that could interfere with the progestogen-only pill, and willing to give contact details for follow-up were invited to participate. In the intervention group, women received a 3-month supply of the progestogen-only pill (75 μg desogestrel) plus a rapid access card to a participating sexual and reproductive health clinic. In the control group, pharmacists advised women to attend their usual contraceptive provider. The order in which each pharmacy provided the intervention or control was randomly assigned using a computer software algorithm. The primary outcome was the use of effective contraception (hormonal or intrauterine) at 4 months. This study is registered, ISRCTN70616901 (complete).FINDINGS: Between Dec 19, 2017, and June 26, 2019, 636 women were recruited to the intervention group (316 [49·6%], mean age 22·7 years [SD 5·7]) or the control group (320 [50·3%], 22·6 years [5·1]). Three women (one in the intervention group and two in the control group) were excluded after randomisation. 4-month follow-up data were available for 406 (64%) participants, 25 were lost to follow-up, and two participants no longer wanted to participate in the study. The proportion of women using effective contraception was 20·1% greater (95% CI 5·2-35·0) in the intervention group (mean 58·4%, 48·6-68·2), than in the control group (mean 40·5%, 29·7-51·3 [adjusted for recruitment period, treatment group, and centre]; p=0·011).The difference remained significant after adjusting for age, current sexual relationship, and history of effective contraception use, and was robust to the effect of missing data (assuming missingness at random). No serious adverse events occurred.INTERPRETATION: Provision of a supply of the progestogen-only pill with emergency contraception from a community pharmacist, along with an invitation to a sexual and reproductive health clinic, results in a clinically meaningful increase in subsequent use of effective contraception. Widely implemented, this practice could prevent unintended pregnancies after use of emergency contraception.FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (Health Technology Assessment Programme project 15/113/01).

Background Process evaluations have become a valued component, alongside clinical trials, of the wider evaluation of complex health interventions. They support understanding of implementation, and fidelity, related to the intervention and provide valuable insights into what is effective in a practical setting by examining the context in which interventions are implemented. The TOPSY study consists of a large multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of pessary self-management with clinic-based care in improving women’s condition-specific quality of life, and a nested process evaluation. The process evaluation aims to examine and maximise recruitment to the trial, describe intervention fidelity and explore participants’ and healthcare professionals’ experiences. Methods The trial will recruit 330 women from approximately 17 UK centres. The process evaluation uses a mixed-methods approach. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with randomised women (18 per randomised group/n = 36), women who declined trial participation but agreed to interview (non-randomised women) (n = 20) and healthcare professionals recruiting to the trial (n ~ 17) and delivering self-management and clinic-based care (n ~ 17). The six internal pilot centres will be asked to record two to three recruitment discussions each (total n = 12–18). All participating centres will be asked to record one or two self-management teaching appointments (n = 30) and self-management 2-week follow-up telephone calls (n = 30). Process data (quantitative and qualitative) will be gathered in participant completed trial questionnaires. Interviews will be analysed thematically and recordings using an analytic grid to identify fidelity to the intervention. Quantitative analysis will be predefined within the process evaluation analysis plan. Discussion The wide variety of pessary care delivered across the UK for women with pelvic organ prolapse presents specific localised contexts in which the TOPSY interventions will be implemented. Understanding this contextual variance is central to understanding how and in what circumstances pessary self-management can be implemented (should it be effective). The inclusion of non-randomised women provides an innovative way of collecting indispensable information about eligible women who decline trial participation, allowing broader contextualisation and considerations of generalisability of trial findings. Methodological insights from examination of recruitment processes and mechanisms have the potential to inform recruitment mechanisms and future recruitment strategies and study designs. Trial registration ISRCTN62510577. Registered on 6 October 2017.

Background: The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) contribute 14% to global maternal mortality. HDP encompasses several subcategories, including gestational hypertension (GH) and pre-eclampsia. These two conditions are both characterised by a rise in blood pressure, with an onset from 20 weeks of gestation. They also share some common risk factors. The current definition of pre-eclampsia includes raised blood pressure in the absence of proteinuria, thus presenting the two conditions as a spectrum. In this article, we refer to both conditions as gestational hypertension, which is our outcome of interest. The aetiology of GH is not yet clearly understood. Observational studies have suggested that malaria may be associated with GH. However, the evidence from these small studies has been inconclusive. Having a better understanding of the association between malaria and GH may help inform prevention strategies to reduce maternal and infant mortality and morbidity.Methods: In assessing the association between malaria infection and GH we explored open access articles published in the English language on Medline, Embase, WHO GIM and Google scholar. The subject related articles were retrieved and processed according to preferred reporting items in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Search date was 9th week of 2018. Inverse variance weighting method in Revman 5 software (Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom) was used to aggregate evidence by computing the pooled odds ratio to show the nature and strength of the relationship between malaria and GH.Results: Using critical appraisal skills program (CASP) checklist tool we identified four good quality case-control studies. The total sample size was 1281 women out of which 518 were cases. These studies together show malaria is associated with GH with an overall odds ratio of 2.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.58-4.53. Heterogeneity of the individual studies supported fixed effect modelling assumptions (I2 = 0%). Malaria infection may have a constant effect on GH across different African populations. The funnel plot did not suggest publication bias however, the four studies involved in the meta-analysis were insufficient to rule it out.Conclusions: Our findings provide evidence of an association between malaria infection and gestational hypertension; this underscores the need to control malaria especially during pregnancy.

Background Evidence for the effectiveness of treatments in early-onset psychosis is sparse. Current guidance for the treatment of early-onset psychosis is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs versus psychological intervention (cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT] and family intervention) versus the combination of these treatments for early-onset psychosis. The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of antipsychotic monotherapy, psychological intervention monotherapy, and antipsychotics plus psychological intervention in adolescents with first-episode psychosis. Methods We did a multicentre pilot and feasibility trial according to a randomised, single-blind, three-arm, controlled design. We recruited participants from seven UK National Health Service Trust sites. Participants were aged 14–18 years; help-seeking; had presented with first-episode psychosis in the past year; were under the care of a psychiatrist; were showing current psychotic symptoms; and met ICD-10 criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or delusional disorder, or met the entry criteria for an early intervention for psychosis service. Participants were assigned (1:1:1) to antipsychotics, psychological intervention (CBT with optional family intervention), or antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. Randomisation was via a web-based randomisation system, with permuted blocks of random size, stratified by centre and family contact. CBT incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions, and family intervention incorporated up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. Participants were followed up for a maximum of 12 months. The primary outcome was feasibility (ie, data on trial referral and recruitment, session attendance or medication adherence, retention, and treatment acceptability) and the proposed primary efficacy outcome was total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at 6 months. Primary outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. Safety outcomes were reported according to as-treated status, for all patients who had received at least one session of CBT or family intervention, or at least one dose of antipsychotics. The study was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN80567433. Findings Of 101 patients referred to the study, 61 patients (mean age 16·3 years [SD 1·3]) were recruited from April 10, 2017, to Oct 31, 2018, 18 of whom were randomly assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics, and 21 to antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. The trial recruitment rate was 68% of our target sample size of 90 participants. The study had a low referral to recruitment ratio (around 2:1), a high rate of retention (51 [84%] participants retained at the 6-month primary endpoint), a high rate of adherence to psychological intervention (defined as six or more sessions of CBT; in 32 [82%] of 39 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups), and a moderate rate of adherence to antipsychotic medication (defined as at least 6 consecutive weeks of exposure to antipsychotics; in 28 [65%] of 43 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups). Mean scores for PANSS total at the 6-month primary endpoint were 68·6 (SD 17·3) for antipsychotic monotherapy (6·2 points lower than at randomisation), 59·8 (13·7) for psychological intervention (13·1 points lower than at randomisation), and 62·0 (15·9) for antipsychotics plus psychological intervention (13·9 points lower than at randomisation). A good clinical response at 6 months (defined as ≥50% improvement in PANSS total score) was achieved in four (22%) of 18 patients receiving antipsychotic monotherapy, five (31%) of 16 receiving psychological intervention, and five (29%) of 17 receiving antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. In as-treated groups, serious adverse events occurred in eight [35%] of 23 patients in the combined group, two [13%] of 15 in the antipsychotics group, four [24%] of 17 in the psychological intervention group, and four [80%] of five who did not receive any treatment. No serious adverse events were considered to be related to participation in the trial. Interpretation This trial is the first to show that a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention, antipsychotics, and their combination is safe in young people with first-episode psychosis. However, the feasibility of a larger trial is unclear because of site-specific recruitment challenges, and amendments to trial design would be needed for an adequately powered clinical and cost-effectiveness trial that provides robust evidence. Funding National Institute for Health Research.

Post-hoc secondary analysis of data from our recent Edinburgh and Lothians Viral Intervention Study (ELVIS) pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) indicates that hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and gargling (HSNIG) reduced the duration of coronavirus upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) by an average of two-and-a-half days. As such, it may offer a potentially safe, effective and scalable intervention in those with Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) following infection with the betacoronavirus Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). ELVIS was undertaken in 66 adults with an URTI. Results have been reported in detail elsewhere. Briefly, volunteers with URTI were, within 48 hours of symptom onset, randomised to intervention (n=32) or control (n=34) groups. The intervention group made hypertonic saline at home and performed HSNIG as many times as needed (maximum of 12 times/day). Control group participants dealt with their URTI as they normally did. Nose swabs collected at recruitment and first thing in the morning on four consecutive days were sent to the laboratory for testing. Both groups kept a diary (which included the Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey-21 questionnaire) for a maximum of 14 days or until they were well for two consecutive days. Follow-up data were available for 92% of individuals (intervention group: n=30; control group: n=31). HSNIG reduced the duration of URTI by 1.9 days (95% CI = 0.4 to 3.3) (p=0.01), over-the-counter medication use by 36% (p=0.004), transmission within household contacts by 35% (p=0.006) and viral shedding by ≥0.5 log10/day (p=0.04) in the intervention group when compared to controls. We also recently reported that epithelial cells mount an antiviral effect by producing hypochlorous acid (HOCl) from chloride ions. HOCl is the active ingredient in bleach. Epithelial cells have this innate antiviral immune mechanism to clear viral infections. Since bleach is effective against all virus types, we tested to see if a range of DNA, RNA, enveloped and non-enveloped viruses were inhibited in the presence of chloride ions supplied via salt (NaCl). All the viruses we tested were inhibited in the presence of NaCl. The human viruses we tested were: DNA/enveloped: herpes simplex virus; RNA/enveloped: human coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E), respiratory syncytial virus, influenza A virus; and RNA/non-enveloped: coxsackievirus B3. In COVID-19, high titres of SARS-CoV-2 are detectable in the upper respiratory tract of asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals. The titres are higher in the nose than the throat suggesting measures that control the infection and viral shedding will help reduce transmission. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have undertaken a post-hoc re-analysis of the ELVIS data with a focus on those infected with coronaviruses. Coronaviruses were the second most common cause of URTI (after rhinoviruses). Fifteen individuals were infected by a coronavirus (intervention group (n=7), control group (n=8)). In the intervention group, four participants were infected by an alphacoronavirus (HCoV 229E=3, HCoV NL63=1) and three by a betacoronavirus (HCoV HKU1=3). In the control group, two were infected by an alphacoronavirus (HCoV NL63=2) and six by a betacoronavirus (HCoV OC43=1, HCoV HKU1=5). An individual in the control group with HCoV HKU1 had dual infection with rhinovirus. The duration of illness was lower in the intervention group compared to the control group in the subset of patients infected with coronavirus (mean days (SD): 5.6 (1.4) vs 8.1 (2.9)). Using a two-sample t-test, this was difference of -2.6 days (95%CI -5.2, 0.05; p=0.054). The difference in the duration of blocked nose was -3.1 days (95%CI -6.0, -0.2; p=0.04), cough -3.3 days (95%CI -5.9, -0.7; p=0.02) and hoarseness of voice -2.9 days (95%CI -5.6, -0.3; p=0.03) in favour of HSNIG. In the absence of a suitable antiviral agent or a vaccine, we need a safe and effective intervention that can be globally implemented. Our in-vitro data gives the evidence that NaCl has an antiviral effect that works across viral types. The findings from this post-hoc analysis of ELVIS need to be interpreted with caution. These data do however suggest that HSNIG may have a role to play in reducing symptoms and duration of illness in COVID-19. Primary research objective To investigate whether the use of Hypertonic Saline Nasal Irrigation and Gargling (HSNIG) performed by adults with symptoms consistent with COVID-19 reduces the duration of symptoms when compared to participants managed using standard care. Secondary research objective To determine the effect of HSNIG on: 1. Severity of all symptoms 2. Duration and severity of individual symptoms 3. Over-the-counter medication use 4. Contact with primary care, NHS 24/111 and out-of-hours (OOH) primary care, COVID-19 hubs 5. Hospital attendance (i.e. A&E attendance and/or hospital admission) and diagnosis 6. Number of household contacts infected 7. Side-effect of HSNIG. Trial design ELVIS COVID-19 is a pragmatic web-based Bayesian adaptive randomised controlled, parallel group trial of hypertonic saline nasal irrigation and gargling compared to standard care in participants with clinically suspected or confirmed COVID-19 being managed at home. Participants from Scotland will be self-recruiting via web based system which will randomise in a 1:1 ratio to perform HSNIG or not. Eligibility criteria Inclusion: ·Adults (≥18 years) ·Those living within Scotland ·Those self-isolating at home within 48 hours of the start of the illness with: (a)Clinical symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 (i.e. those who have at least one of the following symptoms: recent onset of (i) new continuous cough and/or (ii) high temperature) and/or (iii) loss of, or change in, sense of smell or taste (anosmia) OR (b)Those with virologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and clinical symptoms indicative of COVID-19 (as detailed in (a) above). ·Provision of informed consent Exclusion: ·Onset of illness >48hours ·People ≤17 years ·Inability to consent ·Pregnancy ·Immunosuppression ·Inability to perform HSNIG ·Those taking part in another interventional medical trial ·Those without access to a supply of salt ·Those who have had a negative COVID-19 swab result for the present symptoms ·Those with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 in whom hospital admission is recommended ·Those who do not have access to email/internet ·Those living in a household with another person currently participating in this study Setting This study will look for participants across Scotland, who are 18 years old or older and who are self-isolating with confirmed or suspected COVID-19, with symptoms that have developed no more than 48 hours before consent to the study. The study is conducted online and everything we ask participants to do will be done at home with items they will already have. Randomisation Participants will be allocated in 1:1 ratio to either HSNIG or standard care.The randomisation will be performed using a web-based system utilising a block randomisation with varying block sizes and will be stratified on the variables: age (

Background Preterm-labour-associated preterm birth is a common cause of perinatal mortality and morbidity in twin pregnancy. We aimed to test the hypothesis that the Arabin pessary would reduce preterm-labour-associated preterm birth by 40% or greater in women with a twin pregnancy and a short cervix. Methods and findings We conducted an open-label randomised controlled trial in 57 hospital antenatal clinics in the UK and Europe. From 1 April 2015 to 14 February 2019, 2,228 women with a twin pregnancy underwent cervical length screening between 18 weeks 0 days and 20 weeks 6 days of gestation. In total, 503 women with cervical length ≤ 35 mm were randomly assigned to pessary in addition to standard care (n = 250, mean age 32.4 years, mean cervical length 29 mm, with pessary inserted in 230 women [92.0%]) or standard care alone (n = 253, mean age 32.7 years, mean cervical length 30 mm). The pessary was inserted before 21 completed weeks of gestation and removed at between 35 and 36 weeks or before birth if earlier. The primary obstetric outcome, spontaneous onset of labour and birth before 34 weeks 0 days of gestation, was present in 46/250 (18.4%) in the pessary group compared to 52/253 (20.6%) following standard care alone (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.87 [95% CI 0.55–1.38], p = 0.54). The primary neonatal outcome—a composite of any of stillbirth, neonatal death, periventricular leukomalacia, early respiratory morbidity, intraventricular haemorrhage, necrotising enterocolitis, or proven sepsis, from birth to 28 days after the expected date of delivery—was present in 67/500 infants (13.4%) in the pessary group compared to 76/506 (15.0%) following standard care alone (aOR 0.86 [95% CI 0.54–1.36], p = 0.50). The positive and negative likelihood ratios of a short cervix (≤35 mm) to predict preterm birth before 34 weeks were 2.14 and 0.83, respectively. A meta-analysis of data from existing publications (4 studies, 313 women) and from STOPPIT-2 indicated that a cervical pessary does not reduce preterm birth before 34 weeks in women with a short cervix (risk ratio 0.74 [95% CI 0.50–1.11], p = 0.15). No women died in either arm of the study; 4.4% of babies in the Arabin pessary group and 5.5% of babies in the standard treatment group died in utero or in the neonatal period (p = 0.53). Study limitations include lack of power to exclude a smaller than 40% reduction in preterm labour associated preterm birth, and to be conclusive about subgroup analyses. Conclusions These results led us to reject our hypothesis that the Arabin pessary would reduce the risk of the primary outcome by 40%. Smaller treatment effects cannot be ruled out. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN 02235181. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02235181., Jane Norman and co-workers report an evaluation of a cervical pessary for prevention of preterm birth in women with a short cervix bearing twins., Author summary Why was this study done? Preterm-labour-associated preterm birth is common in twin pregnancy, and is an important cause of perinatal mortality and morbidity. There is controversy on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Arabin pessary for the prevention of preterm birth in women with a twin pregnancy and a short cervix. What did the researchers do and find? We randomised 503 women with a cervical length of 35 mm or less to either standard care (according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] guidelines) or standard care and an Arabin pessary, inserted before 21 weeks gestation. The primary obstetric outcome was spontaneous onset of labour and birth before 34 weeks 0 days of gestation; the primary neonatal outcome was a composite adverse outcome. We found no differences in rates of the primary obstetric and neonatal outcomes between the 2 groups. What do these findings mean? Our findings indicate that any reduction in preterm-labour-associated preterm birth conferred by the Arabin pessary is less than 40%. Our findings indicate that a cervical length scan between 18 weeks 0 days and 20 weeks 6 days in women with a twin pregnancy and using a threshold length of 35 mm was ineffective at ruling in or ruling out preterm-labour-associated preterm birth.

ObjectivesTo investigate whether the use of graduated compression stockings (GCS) offers any adjuvant benefit when pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis is used for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing elective surgery.DesignOpen, multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.SettingSeven National Health Service tertiary hospitals in the United Kingdom.Participants1905 elective surgical inpatients (≥18 years) assessed as being at moderate or high risk of venous thromboembolism were eligible and consented to participate.InterventionParticipants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis alone or LMWH pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis and GCS.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was imaging confirmed lower limb deep vein thrombosis with or without symptoms, or pulmonary embolism with symptoms within 90 days of surgery. Secondary outcome measures were quality of life, compliance with stockings and LMWH, lower limb complications related to GCS, bleeding complications, adverse reactions to LMWH, and all cause mortality.ResultsBetween May 2016 and January 2019, 1905 participants were randomised. 1858 were included in the intention to treat analysis (17 were identified as ineligible after randomisation and 30 did not undergo surgery). A primary outcome event occurred in 16 of 937 (1.7%) patients in the LMWH alone group compared with 13 of 921 (1.4%) in the LMWH and GCS group. The risk difference between the two groups was 0.30% (95% confidence interval −0.65% to 1.26%). Because the 95% confidence interval did not cross the non-inferiority margin of 3.5% (PConclusionsFor patients who have elective surgery and are at moderate or high risk of venous thromboembolism, administration of pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis alone is non-inferior to a combination of pharmaco-thromboprophylaxis and GCS. These findings indicate that GCS might be unnecessary in most patients undergoing elective surgery.Trial registrationISRCTN13911492.

Primary research question For adults surviving spontaneous (non-traumatic) symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage with persistent/paroxysmal atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF), does starting full treatment dose oral anticoagulation (OAC) result in a beneficial net reduction of all serious vascular events compared with not starting OAC? Trial design Investigator-led, multicentre, randomised, open, assessor-masked, parallel group, clinical trial of investigational medicinal product (CTIMP) prescribing strategies. We plan for a pilot phase, followed by a safety phase. Objectives Pilot phase: ~30 hospital sites keep screening logs and recruit at least 60 participants >24 hours after spontaneous symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage with AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 to determine the acceptability and feasibility of recruiting the target sample size in a definitive trial in an acceptable timescale. Safety phase: ~60 hospital sites will recruit at least 190 participants to determine whether the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage is sufficiently low (non-inferior) to justify a definitive trial. Eligibility criteria Inclusion: Spontaneous symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. Exclusion: Patient age

Background Patients’ pre-operative health and physical function is known to influence their post-operative outcomes. In patients with knee osteoarthritis, pharmacological and non-pharmacological options are often not optimised prior to joint replacement. This results in some patients undergoing surgery when they are not as fit as they could be. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a pre-operative package of non-operative care versus standard care prior to joint replacement. Methods/design This is a multicentre, randomised controlled feasibility trial of patients undergoing primary total knee replacement for osteoarthritis. Sixty patients will be recruited and randomised (2:1) to intervention or standard care arms. Data will be collected at baseline (before the start of the intervention), around the end of the intervention period and a minimum of 90 days after the planned date of surgery. Adherence will be reviewed each week during the intervention period (by telephone or in person). Participants will be randomised to a pre-operative package of non-operative care or standard care. The non-operative care will consist of (1) a weight-loss programme, (2) a set of exercises, (3) provision of advice on analgesia use and (4) provision of insoles. The intervention will be started as soon as possible after patients have been added to the waiting list for joint replacement surgery to take advantage of the incentive for behavioural change that this will create. The primary outcomes of this study are feasibility outcomes which will indicate whether the intervention and study protocol is feasible and acceptable and whether a full-scale effectiveness trial is warranted. The following will be measured and used to inform study feasibility: rate of recruitment, rate of retention at 90-day follow-up review after planned surgery date, and adherence to the intervention estimated through review questionnaires and weight change (for those receiving the weight-loss aspect of intervention). In addition the following information will be assessed qualitatively: analysis of qualitative interviews exploring acceptability, feasibility, adherence and possible barriers to implementing the intervention, and acceptability of the different outcome measures. Discussion The aims of the study specifically relate to testing the feasibility and acceptability of the proposed effectiveness trial intervention and the feasibility of the trial methods. This study forms the important first step in developing and assessing whether the intervention has the potential to be assessed in a future fully powered effectiveness trial. The findings will also be used to refine the design of the effectiveness trial. Trial registration ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN96684272. Registered on 18 April 2018.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Background: The introduction of more sensitive cardiac troponin assays has led to increased recognition of myocardial injury in acute illnesses other than acute coronary syndrome. The Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction recommends high-sensitivity cardiac troponin testing and classification of patients with myocardial injury based on pathogenesis, but the clinical implications of implementing this guideline are not well understood. Methods: In a stepped-wedge cluster randomized, controlled trial, we implemented a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assay and the recommendations of the Universal Definition in 48 282 consecutive patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. In a prespecified secondary analysis, we compared the primary outcome of myocardial infarction or cardiovascular death and secondary outcome of noncardiovascular death at 1 year across diagnostic categories. Results: Implementation increased the diagnosis of type 1 myocardial infarction by 11% (510/4471), type 2 myocardial infarction by 22% (205/916), and acute and chronic myocardial injury by 36% (443/1233) and 43% (389/898), respectively. Compared with those without myocardial injury, the rate of the primary outcome was highest in those with type 1 myocardial infarction (cause-specific hazard ratio [HR] 5.64 [95% CI, 5.12–6.22]), but was similar across diagnostic categories, whereas noncardiovascular deaths were highest in those with acute myocardial injury (cause specific HR 2.65 [95% CI, 2.33–3.01]). Despite modest increases in antiplatelet therapy and coronary revascularization after implementation in patients with type 1 myocardial infarction, the primary outcome was unchanged (cause specific HR 1.00 [95% CI, 0.82–1.21]). Increased recognition of type 2 myocardial infarction and myocardial injury did not lead to changes in investigation, treatment or outcomes. Conclusions: Implementation of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin assays and the recommendations of the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction identified patients at high-risk of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular events but was not associated with consistent increases in treatment or improved outcomes. Trials of secondary prevention are urgently required to determine whether this risk is modifiable in patients without type 1 myocardial infarction. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01852123.

Blinding is intended to reduce bias but can make studies unnecessarily complex or lead to results that no longer address the clinical question, argue Rohan Anand and colleagues

BackgroundRelapse in schizophrenia is a major cause of distress and disability and is predicted by changes in symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and suspiciousness (early warning signs [EWSs]). These can be used as the basis for timely interventions to prevent relapse. However, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the implementation of EWS interventions.ObjectiveThis study was designed to establish the feasibility of conducting a definitive cluster randomized controlled trial comparing Early signs Monitoring to Prevent relapse in psychosis and prOmote Well-being, Engagement, and Recovery (EMPOWER) against treatment as usual (TAU). Our primary outcomes are establishing parameters of feasibility, acceptability, usability, safety, and outcome signals of a digital health intervention as an adjunct to usual care that is deliverable in the UK National Health Service and Australian community mental health service (CMHS) settings. We will assess the feasibility of candidate primary outcomes, candidate secondary outcomes, and candidate mechanisms for a definitive trial.MethodsWe will randomize CMHSs to EMPOWER or TAU. We aim to recruit up to 120 service user participants from 8 CMHSs and follow them for 12 months. Eligible service users will (1) be aged 16 years and above, (2) be in contact with local CMHSs, (3) have either been admitted to a psychiatric inpatient service or received crisis intervention at least once in the previous 2 years for a relapse, and (4) have an International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnosis of a schizophrenia-related disorder. Service users will also be invited to nominate a carer to participate. We will identify the feasibility of the main trial in terms of recruitment and retention to the study and the acceptability, usability, safety, and outcome signals of the EMPOWER intervention. EMPOWER is a mobile phone app that enables the monitoring of well-being and possible EWSs of relapse on a daily basis. An algorithm calculates changes in well-being based on participants’ own baseline to enable tailoring of well-being messaging and clinical triage of possible EWSs. Use of the app is blended with ongoing peer support.ResultsRecruitment to the trial began September 2018, and follow-up of participants was completed in July 2019. Data collection is continuing. The database was locked in July 2019, followed by analysis and disclosing of group allocation.ConclusionsThe knowledge gained from the study will inform the design of a definitive trial including finalizing the delivery of our digital health intervention, sample size estimation, methods to ensure successful identification, consent, randomization, and follow-up of participants, and the primary and secondary outcomes. The trial will also inform the final health economic model to be applied in the main trial.Trial RegistrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 99559262; http://isrctn.com/ISRCTN99559262International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/15058

IntroductionThe BREATHE Health Data Research Hub is a consortium of five academic institutions and several industry partners seeking to facilitate and accelerate respiratory science initiatives and outcomes. Unlocking organisational, jurisdictional, and scientific challenges, such as differing and inherent complexities with data standards, incongruous governance, and disparate data access mechanisms for over 100 diverse UK datasets are key aims. Objectives and ApproachCentral to the data effort is the UK Secure eResearch Platform (SeRP UK), and its flagship tenancy, the SAIL Databank. Onboarding datasets, making them remotely available to the respiratory research community, is a key approach. Datasets targeted range from population cohort studies, to respiratory trials data, routine healthcare datasets, and specialist ‘omics data. Partnerships with national safe havens and providers such as eDRIS and NHS Digital will enable BREATHE to expedite and improve wider sharing of datasets for the respiratory science. Data improvements focus on datasets from primary, secondary, and tertiary care from national healthcare systems, ‘respiratorising’ these datasets and increasing utility for academic and industry respiratory scientists. Incorporating dataset metadata and access permutations into national cataloguing systems at HDR UK, standardising metadata, and interoperability for in-scope datasets form a concerted data quality improvement effort. ResultsFacilitating data sharing through initiatives such as BREATHE will increase visibility and accessibility for datasets within respiratory science, whilst addressing national cultural and governance issues to data sharing. BREATHE data sharing processes will allow for team science to be undertaken in a highly collaborative manner and allow for best practise in data collection and sharing to flow to nationwide datasets in respiratory science. Conclusion / ImplicationsCollaborative hubs with scientific domain expertise can be created and leveraged to accelerate data sharing and data science within the scientific area. These collaborative efforts can however be translated to other disease-specific efforts, and indeed disease agnostic platform solutions.

ObjectivesRandomised controlled trials in healthcare increasingly include economic evaluations. Some show small differences which are not statistically significant. Yet these sometimes come to paradoxical conclusions such as: ‘the intervention is not clinically effective’ but ‘is probably cost-effective’. This study aims to quantify the extent of non-significant results and the types of conclusions drawn from them.DesignCross-sectional retrospective analysis of randomised trials published by the UK’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme. We defined as ‘doubly null’ those trials that found non-statistically significant differences in both primary outcome and cost per patient. Paradoxical was defined as concluding in favour of an intervention, usually compared with placebo or usual care. No human participants were involved. Our sample was 226 randomised trial projects published by the Health Technology Assessment programme 2004 to 2017. All are available free online.ResultsThe 226 projects contained 193 trials with a full economic evaluation. Of these 76 (39%) had at least one ‘doubly null’ comparison. These 76 trials contained 94 comparisons. In these 30 (32%) drew economic conclusions in favour of an intervention. Overall report conclusions split roughly equally between those favouring the intervention (14), and those favouring either the control (7) or uncertainty (9).DiscussionTrials with ‘doubly null’ results and paradoxical conclusions are not uncommon. The differences observed in cost and quality-adjustedlife year were small and non-statistically significant. Almost all these trials were also published in leading peer-reviewed journals. Although some guidelines for reporting economic results require cost-effectiveness estimates regardless of statistical significance, the interpretability of paradoxical results has nowhere been addressed.ConclusionsReconsideration is required of the interpretation of cost-effectiveness analyses in randomised controlled trials with ‘doubly null’ results, particularly when economics favours a novel intervention.

ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) plus electromyographic biofeedback or PFMT alone for stress or mixed urinary incontinence in women.DesignParallel group randomised controlled trial.Setting23 community and secondary care centres providing continence care in Scotland and England.Participants600 women aged 18 and older, newly presenting with stress or mixed urinary incontinence between February 2014 and July 2016: 300 were randomised to PFMT plus electromyographic biofeedback and 300 to PFMT alone.InterventionsParticipants in both groups were offered six appointments with a continence therapist over 16 weeks. Participants in the biofeedback PFMT group received supervised PFMT and a home PFMT programme, incorporating electromyographic biofeedback during clinic appointments and at home. The PFMT group received supervised PFMT and a home PFMT programme. PFMT programmes were progressed over the appointments.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was self-reported severity of urinary incontinence (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-urinary incontinence short form (ICIQ-UI SF), range 0 to 21, higher scores indicating greater severity) at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were cure or improvement, other pelvic floor symptoms, condition specific quality of life, women’s perception of improvement, pelvic floor muscle function, uptake of other urinary incontinence treatment, PFMT self-efficacy, adherence, intervention costs, and quality adjusted life years.ResultsMean ICIQ-UI SF scores at 24 months were 8.2 (SD 5.1, n=225) in the biofeedback PFMT group and 8.5 (SD 4.9, n=235) in the PFMT group (mean difference −0.09, 95% confidence interval −0.92 to 0.75, P=0.84). Biofeedback PFMT had similar costs (mean difference £121 ($154; €133), −£409 to £651, P=0.64) and quality adjusted life years (−0.04, −0.12 to 0.04, P=0.28) to PFMT. 48 participants reported an adverse event: for 23 this was related or possibly related to the interventions.ConclusionsAt 24 months no evidence was found of any important difference in severity of urinary incontinence between PFMT plus electromyographic biofeedback and PFMT alone groups. Routine use of electromyographic biofeedback with PFMT should not be recommended. Other ways of maximising the effects of PFMT should be investigated.Trial registrationISRCTN57756448.

Background Periodontal disease is preventable but remains the most common oral disease worldwide, with major health and economic implications. Stakeholders lack reliable evidence of the relative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different types of oral hygiene advice (OHA) and the optimal frequency of periodontal instrumentation (PI). Objectives To test clinical effectiveness and assess the economic value of the following strategies: personalised OHA versus routine OHA, 12-monthly PI (scale and polish) compared with 6-monthly PI, and no PI compared with 6-monthly PI. Design Multicentre, pragmatic split-plot, randomised open trial with a cluster factorial design and blinded outcome evaluation with 3 years’ follow-up and a within-trial cost–benefit analysis. NHS and participant costs were combined with benefits [willingness to pay (WTP)] estimated from a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Setting UK dental practices. Participants Adult dentate NHS patients, regular attenders, with Basic Periodontal Examination (BPE) scores of 0, 1, 2 or 3. Intervention Practices were randomised to provide routine or personalised OHA. Within each practice, participants were randomised to the following groups: no PI, 12-monthly PI or 6-monthly PI (current practice). Main outcome measures Clinical – gingival inflammation/bleeding on probing at the gingival margin (3 years). Patient – oral hygiene self-efficacy (3 years). Economic – net benefits (mean WTP minus mean costs). Results A total of 63 dental practices and 1877 participants were recruited. The mean number of teeth and percentage of bleeding sites was 24 and 33%, respectively. Two-thirds of participants had BPE scores of ≤ 2. Under intention-to-treat analysis, there was no evidence of a difference in gingival inflammation/bleeding between the 6-monthly PI group and the no-PI group [difference 0.87%, 95% confidence interval (CI) –1.6% to 3.3%; p = 0.481] or between the 6-monthly PI group and the 12-monthly PI group (difference 0.11%, 95% CI –2.3% to 2.5%; p = 0.929). There was also no evidence of a difference between personalised and routine OHA (difference –2.5%, 95% CI –8.3% to 3.3%; p = 0.393). There was no evidence of a difference in self-efficacy between the 6-monthly PI group and the no-PI group (difference –0.028, 95% CI –0.119 to 0.063; p = 0.543) and no evidence of a clinically important difference between the 6-monthly PI group and the 12-monthly PI group (difference –0.097, 95% CI –0.188 to –0.006; p = 0.037). Compared with standard care, no PI with personalised OHA had the greatest cost savings: NHS perspective –£15 (95% CI –£34 to £4) and participant perspective –£64 (95% CI –£112 to –£16). The DCE shows that the general population value these services greatly. Personalised OHA with 6-monthly PI had the greatest incremental net benefit [£48 (95% CI £22 to £74)]. Sensitivity analyses did not change conclusions. Limitations Being a pragmatic trial, we did not deny PIs to the no-PI group; there was clear separation in the mean number of PIs between groups. Conclusions There was no additional benefit from scheduling 6-monthly or 12-monthly PIs over not providing this treatment unless desired or recommended, and no difference between OHA delivery for gingival inflammation/bleeding and patient-centred outcomes. However, participants valued, and were willing to pay for, both interventions, with greater financial value placed on PI than on OHA. Future work Assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of providing multifaceted periodontal care packages in primary dental care for those with periodontitis. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56465715. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Aims: To test the effectiveness of a theoretically based text‐message intervention to reduce binge drinking among socially disadvantaged men. Design: A multi‐centre parallel group, pragmatic, individually randomized controlled trial. Setting: Community‐based study conducted in four regions of Scotland. Participants: A total of 825 men aged 25–44 years recruited from socially disadvantaged areas who had two or more episodes of binge drinking (> 8 UK units on a single occasion) in the preceding 28 days: 411 men were randomized to the intervention and 414 to the control. Intervention and comparator: A series of 112 interactive text messages was delivered by mobile phone during a 12‐week period. The intervention was structured around the Health Action Process Approach, a comprehensive model which allows integration of a range of evidence‐based behaviour change techniques. The control group received 89 texts on general health, with no mention of alcohol or use of behaviour change techniques. Measurements: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of men consuming > 8 units on three or more occasions (in the previous 28 days) at 12 months post‐intervention. Findings: The proportion of men consuming > 8 units on three or more occasions (in the previous 28 days) was 41.5% in the intervention group and 47.8% in the control group. Formal analysis showed that there was no evidence that the intervention was effective [odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.57–1.08; absolute reduction 5.7%, 95% CI = −13.3 to 1.9]. The Bayes factor for this outcome was 1.3, confirming that the results were inconclusive. The retention was high and similar in intervention (84.9%) and control (86.5%) groups. Most men in the intervention group engaged with the text messages: almost all (92%) replied to text messages and 67% replied more than 10 times. Conclusions: A theoretically based text‐messaging intervention aimed at reducing binge drinking in disadvantaged men was not found to reduce prevalence of binge drinking at 12‐month follow‐up.

BackgroundHaemorrhoids are a benign anorectal condition and are highly prevalent in the UK population. Treatments involve clinic-based procedures and surgery. The surgical procedures available include stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) and traditional haemorrhoidectomy (TH), and over 25,000 operations are performed for haemorrhoids annually in the UK. The disease is therefore important both to patients and to health service commissioners. Debate remains as to which of these surgical procedures is the most clinically effective and cost-effective.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SH with that of TH.DesignA large, open two-arm parallel-group pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial involving 32 UK hospitals and a within-trial cost–benefit analysis. A discrete choice experiment was conducted to estimate benefits (willingness to pay).ParticipantsPatients with grades II–IV haemorrhoids who had not previously undergone SH or TH were included in the study.InterventionsParticipants were randomised to receive either SH or TH. Randomisation was minimised at 1 : 1, in accordance with baseline EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version (EQ-5D-3L) score, haemorrhoid grade, sex and centre, via an automated system.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was area under the quality-of-life curve measured using the EQ-5D-3L descriptive system over 24 months, and the primary economic outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Secondary outcomes included disease-specific quality of life, recurrence, complications, further interventions and costs.ResultsBetween January 2011 and August 2014, 777 patients were randomised (389 to receive SH and 388 to receive TH). There were 774 participants included in the analysis as a result of one post-randomisation exclusion in the SH arm and two in the TH arm. SH was less painful than TH in the short term. Surgical complications were similar in both arms. EQ-5D-3L score was higher for the SH arm in the first 6 weeks after surgery, but over 24 months the TH group had significantly better EQ-5D-3L scores (–0.073, 95% confidence interval –0.140 to –0.006;p = 0.0342). Symptoms and further interventions were significantly fewer in the TH arm at 24 months. Continence was better in the TH arm and tenesmus occurred less frequently. The number of serious adverse events reported was 24 out of 337 (7.1%) for participants who received SH and 33 out of 352 (9.4%) for those who received TH. There were two deaths in the SH arm, both unrelated to the eTHoS (either Traditional Haemorrhoidectomy or Stapled haemorrhoidopexy for haemorrhoidal disease) study. Patient preference did not seem to influence the treatment difference. SH was dominated by TH as it cost more and was less effective. The net benefit for the TH arm was higher than that for the SH arm.LimitationsNeither the participants nor the assessors were masked to treatment assignment and final recruitment was slightly short of the total target of 800. There were also substantial missing follow-up data.ConclusionsWhile patients who received SH had less short-term pain, after 6 weeks, recurrence rates, symptoms, re-interventions and quality-of-life measures all favoured TH. In addition, TH is cheaper. As part of a tailored management plan for haemorrhoids, TH should be considered over SH as the surgical treatment of choice for haemorrhoids refractory to clinic-based interventions.Future workPerform an updated meta-analysis incorporating recently conducted European trials [eTHoS, HubBLe (haemorrhoidal artery ligation versus rubber band ligation for the management of symptomatic second-degree and third-degree haemorrhoids) and LingaLongo (Cost-effectiveness of New Surgical Treatments for Haemorrhoidal Disease)].Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN80061723.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 70. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BackgroundPresentation with advanced glaucoma is the major risk factor for lifetime blindness. Effective intervention at diagnosis is expected to minimise risk of further visual loss in this group of patients.AimTo compare clinical and cost-effectiveness of primary medical management compared with primary surgery for people presenting with advanced open-angle glaucoma (OAG).MethodsDesign: A prospective, pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT).SettingTwenty-seven UK hospital eye services.ParticipantsFour hundred and forty patients presenting with advanced OAG, according to the Hodapp-Parish-Anderson classification of visual field loss.InterventionParticipants will be randomised to medical treatment or augmented trabeculectomy (1:1 allocation minimised by centre and presence of advanced disease in both eyes).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome is vision-related quality of life measured by the National Eye Institute—Visual Function Questionnaire-25 at 24 months. Secondary outcomes include generic EQ-5D-5L, Health Utility Index-3 and glaucoma-related health status (Glaucoma Utility Index), patient experience, visual field measured by mean deviation value, logarithm of the mean angle of resolution visual acuity, intraocular pressure, adverse events, standards for driving and eligibility for blind certification. Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) based on EQ-5D-5L and glaucoma profile instrument will be estimated.ResultsThe study will report the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medical treatment against augmented trabeculectomy in patients presenting with advanced glaucoma in terms of patient-reported health and visual function, clinical outcomes and incremental cost per QALY at 2 years.ConclusionsTreatment of Advanced Glaucoma Study will be the first RCT reporting outcomes from the perspective of those with advanced glaucoma.Trial registration numberISRCTN56878850, Pre-results.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base upon which current global venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention recommendations have been made is not optimal. The cost of purchasing and applying graduated compression stockings (GCS) in surgical patients is considerable and has been estimated at £63.1 million per year in England alone.OBJECTIVE: The aim was to determine whether low dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) alone is non-inferior to a combination of GCS and low dose LMWH for the prevention of VTE.METHODS: The randomised controlled Graduated compression as an Adjunct to Pharmacoprophylaxis in Surgery (GAPS) Trial (ISRCTN 13911492) will randomise adult elective surgical patients identified as being at moderate and high risk of VTE to receive either the current "standard" combined thromboprophylactic LMWH with GCS mechanical thromboprophylaxis, or thromboprophylactic LMWH pharmacoprophylaxis alone. To show non-inferiority (3.5% non-inferiority margin) for the primary endpoint of all VTE within 90 days, 2236 patients are required. Recruitment will be from seven UK centres. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, compliance with stockings and LMWH, overall mortality, and GCS or LMWH related complications (including bleeding). Recruitment commenced in April 2016 with the seven UK centres coming "on-line" in a staggered fashion. Recruitment will be over a total of 18 months. The GAPS trial is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment in the UK (14/140/61).

Context: Clinicians and treatment guideline developers are faced with a dilemma when the results of a new, large, well-conducted randomized controlled trial (RCT) are in direct conflict with the results of a previous systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA). Objective: To explore and discuss possible reasons for disagreement in results from SRs/MAs and RCTs and to provide guidance to clinicians and guideline developers for making well-informed treatment decisions and recommendations in the face of conflicting data. Evidence acquisition: The advantages and limitations of RCTs and SRs/MAs are reviewed. Two practical examples that have a direct bearing on European Association of Urology guidelines on treatment recommendations are discussed in detail to illustrate the points to be considered when conflicts exist between the results of large RCTs and SRs/MAs. Evidence synthesis: RCTs are the gold standard for providing evidence of the effectiveness of interventions. However, concerns regarding the internal and external validity of an RCT may limit its applicability to clinical practice. SRs/MAs synthesize all evidence related to a given research question, but two urologic examples show that the validity of the results depends on the quality of the individual studies, the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the studies, and publication bias. Conclusions: Although SRs/MAs can provide a higher level of evidence than RCTs, the quality of the evidence from both RCTs and SRs/MAs should be investigated when their results conflict to determine which source provides the better evidence. Guideline developers should have a well-defined and robust process to assess the evidence from MAs and RCTs when such conflicts exist. Patient summary: We discuss the advantages and limitations of using data from randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews/meta-analyses in informing clinical practice when there are conflicting results. We provide guidance on how such conflicts should be dealt with by guideline organizations. New or existing data from randomized controlled trials can lead to conflicts with meta-analysis data. In this paper, we present examples of and explore reasons for such conflicts. Guidance is provided to guideline developers on how to assess conflicting data in such circumstances to help determine which source is more reliable. For guideline organizations, both within and outside of urology, having a well-defined and robust process to deal with such conflicts is essential to improve the quality of their guidelines.

Introduction and Aims Disadvantaged men suffer substantial harm from heavy drinking. This feasibility study developed and evaluated the methods for a trial of a brief intervention delivered by text messages to disadvantaged men. It aimed to test the methods for recruitment and retention, to monitor engagement with the intervention and assess the overall acceptability of study methods. Design and Methods Disadvantaged men aged 25–44 years who had ≥2 episodes of binge drinking (≥8 units in one session) in the preceding month were recruited. Two recruitment strategies were assessed: recruitment from general practice registers and by a community outreach strategy. Theoretically and empirically based text messages were tailored to the target group. Results The study recruited 67 disadvantaged men at high risk of alcohol-related harm, exceeding the target of 60. Evaluation showed that 95% of text messages were delivered, and the men engaged enthusiastically with the intervention. Retention at follow up was 96%. Outcomes were successfully measured on all men followed up. This provided data for the sample size calculation for the full trial. Post-study evaluation showed high levels of satisfaction with the study. Discussion and Conclusions This study has shown that disadvantaged men can be recruited and follow-up data obtained in an alcohol intervention study. The study methods were acceptable to the participants. The men recruited were at high risk of alcohol-related harms. It also clarified ways in which the recruitment strategy, the baseline questionnaire and the intervention could be improved. The full trial is currently underway. [Crombie IK, Irvine L, Falconer DW, Williams B, Ricketts IW, Jones C, Humphris G, Norrie J, Slane P, Rice P. Alcohol and disadvantaged men: A feasibility trial of an intervention delivered by mobile phone. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;36:468-476]

Background: The use of transvaginal mesh and biological graft material in prolapse surgery is controversial and has led to a number of enquiries into their safety and efficacy. Existing trials of these augmentations are individually too small to be conclusive. We aimed to compare the outcomes of prolapse repair involving either synthetic mesh inlays or biological grafts against standard repair in women.Methods: We did two pragmatic, parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trials for our study (PROSPECT [PROlapse Surgery: Pragmatic Evaluation and randomised Controlled Trials]) in 35 centres (a mix of secondary and tertiary referral hospitals) in the UK. We recruited women undergoing primary transvaginal anterior or posterior compartment prolapse surgery by 65 gynaecological surgeons in these centres. We randomly assigned participants by a remote web-based randomisation system to one of the two trials: comparing standard (native tissue) repair alone with standard repair augmented with either synthetic mesh (the mesh trial) or biological graft (the graft trial). We assigned women (1:1:1 or 1:1) within three strata: assigned to one of the three treatment options, comparison of standard repair with mesh, and comparison of standard repair with graft. Participants, ward staff, and outcome assessors were masked to randomisation where possible; masking was obviously not possible for the surgeon. Follow-up was for 2 years after the surgery; the primary outcomes, measured at 1 year and 2 years, were participant-reported prolapse symptoms (i.e. the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score [POP-SS]) and condition-specific (ie, prolapse-related) quality-of-life scores, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN60695184.Findings: Between Jan 8, 2010, and Aug 30, 2013, we randomly allocated 1352 women to treatment, of whom 1348 were included in the analysis. 865 women were included in the mesh trial (430 to standard repair alone, 435 to mesh augmentation) and 735 were included in the graft trial (367 to standard repair alone, 368 to graft augmentation). Because the analyses were carried out separately for each trial (mesh trial and graft trial) some women in the standard repair arm assigned to all treatment options were included in the standard repair group of both trials. 23 of these women did not receive any surgery (15 in the mesh trial, 13 in the graft trial; five were included in both trials) and were included in the baseline analyses only. Mean POP-SS at 1 year did not differ substantially between comparisons (standard 5·4 [SD 5·5] vs mesh 5·5 [5·1], mean difference 0·00, 95% CI −0·70 to 0·71; p=0·99; standard 5·5 [SD 5·6] vs graft 5·6 [5·6]; mean difference −0·15, −0·93 to 0·63; p=0·71). Mean prolapse-related quality-of-life scores also did not differ between groups at 1 year (standard 2·0 [SD 2·7] vs mesh 2·2 [2·7], mean difference 0·13, 95% CI −0·25 to 0·51; p=0·50; standard 2·2 [SD 2·8] vs graft 2·4 [2·9]; mean difference 0·13, −0·30 to 0·56; p=0·54). Mean POP-SS at 2 years were: standard 4·9 (SD 5·1) versus mesh 5·3 (5·1), mean difference 0·32, 95% CI −0·39 to 1·03; p=0·37; standard 4·9 (SD 5·1) versus graft 5·5 (5·7); mean difference 0·32, −0·48 to 1·12; p=0·43. Prolapse-related quality-of-life scores at 2 years were: standard 1·9 (SD 2·5) versus mesh 2·2 (2·6), mean difference 0·15, 95% CI −0·23 to 0·54; p=0·44; standard 2·0 (2·5) versus graft 2·2 (2·8); mean difference 0·10, −0·33 to 0·52; p=0·66. Serious adverse events such as infection, urinary retention, or dyspareunia or other pain, excluding mesh complications, occurred with similar frequency in the groups over 1 year (mesh trial: 31/430 [7%] with standard repair vs 34/435 [8%] with mesh, risk ratio [RR] 1·08, 95% CI 0·68 to 1·72; p=0·73; graft trial: 23/367 [6%] with standard repair vs 36/368 [10%] with graft, RR 1·57, 0·95 to 2·59; p=0·08). The cumulative number of women with a mesh complication over 2 years in women actually exposed to synthetic mesh was 51 (12%) of 434.Interpretation: Augmentation of a vaginal repair with mesh or graft material did not improve women's outcomes in terms of effectiveness, quality of life, adverse effects, or any other outcome in the short term, but more than one in ten women had a mesh complication. Therefore, follow-up is vital to identify any longer-term potential benefits and serious adverse effects of mesh or graft reinforcement in vaginal prolapse surgery.Funding: UK National Institute of Health Research.

IntroductionOral emergency contraception (EC) can prevent unintended pregnancy but it is important to start a regular method of contraception. Women in the UK usually access EC from a pharmacy but then need a subsequent appointment with a general practitioner or a sexual and reproductive health (SRH) service to access regular contraception. Unintended pregnancies can occur during this time.Methods and analysisBridge-It is a pragmatic cluster randomised cohort cross-over trial designed to determine whether pharmacist provision of a bridging supply of a progestogen-only pill (POP) plus rapid access to a local SRH clinic, results in increased uptake of effective contraception and prevents more unintended pregnancies than provision of EC alone. Bridge-It involves 31 pharmacies in three UK regions (London, Lothian and Tayside) aiming to recruit 626–737 women. Pharmacies will give EC (levonorgestrel) according to normal practice and recruit women to both intervention and the control phases of the study. In the intervention phase, pharmacists will provide the POP (desogestrel) and offer rapid access to an SRH clinic. In the control phase, pharmacists will advise women to attend a contraceptive provider for contraception (standard care).Women will be asked 4 months later about contraceptive use. Data linkage to abortion registries will provide abortion rates over 12 months. The sample size is calculated on the primary outcome of effective contraception use at 4 months (yes/no) with 90% power and a 5% level of significance. Abortion rates will be an exploratory secondary analysis. Process evaluation includes interviews with pharmacists, SRH clinicians and women. Cost-effectiveness analysis will use a healthcare system perspective and be expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was received from South East Scotland REC June 2017. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations.Trial registration numberISRCTN70616901.

Background Major disparities between women and men in the diagnosis, management, and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome are well recognized. Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of implementing a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay with sex-specific diagnostic thresholds for myocardial infarction in women and men with suspected acute coronary syndrome. Methods Consecutive patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome were enrolled in a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized controlled trial across 10 hospitals. Myocardial injury was defined as high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I concentration >99th centile of 16 ng/l in women and 34 ng/l in men. The primary outcome was recurrent myocardial infarction or cardiovascular death at 1 year. Results A total of 48,282 patients (47% women) were included. Use of the high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay with sex-specific thresholds increased myocardial injury in women by 42% and in men by 6%. Following implementation, women with myocardial injury remained less likely than men to undergo coronary revascularization (15% vs. 34%) and to receive dual antiplatelet (26% vs. 43%), statin (16% vs. 26%), or other preventive therapies (p, Central Illustration

IntroductionBladder cancer is the most frequently occurring tumour of the urinary system. Ta, T1 tumours and carcinoma in situ (CIS) are grouped as non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), which can be effectively treated by transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT). There are limitations to the visualisation of tumours with conventional TURBT using white light illumination within the bladder. Incomplete resections occur from the failure to identify satellite lesions or the full extent of the tumour leading to recurrence and potential risk of disease progression. To improve complete resection, photodynamic diagnosis (PDD) has been proposed as a method that can enhance tumour detection and guide resection. The objective of the current research is to determine whether PDD-guided TURBT is better than conventional white light surgery and whether it is cost-effective.Methods and analysisPHOTO is a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (open parallel group, non-masked and superiority trial) comparing the intervention of PDD-guided TURBT with standard white light resection in newly diagnosed intermediate and high risk NMIBC within the UK National Health Service setting. Clinical effectiveness is measured with time to recurrence. Cost-effectiveness is assessed within trial via the calculation of incremental cost per recurrence avoided and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life per year gained over 3 years and over long term through a modelling exercise over patients’ lifetime.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethics review was undertaken with a favourable opinion, in line with UK regulatory procedures (REC reference number: 14/NE/1062). If reductions in time to recurrence is associated with long-term patient benefits, the cost-effectiveness evaluation will provide further evidence to inform adoption of the technology. Findings will be shared in lay media such as patient and charity forums and will be presented at key meetings and published in academic literature.Trial registration numberISRCTN84013636.

Background Urinary incontinence (UI) is highly prevalent in nursing and residential care homes (CHs) and profoundly impacts on residents’ dignity and quality of life. CHs predominantly use absorbent pads to contain UI rather than actively treat the condition. Transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (TPTNS) is a non-invasive, safe and low-cost intervention with demonstrated effectiveness for reducing UI in adults. However, the effectiveness of TPTNS to treat UI in older adults living in CHs is not known. The ELECTRIC trial aims to establish if a programme of TPTNS is a clinically effective treatment for UI in CH residents and investigate the associated costs and consequences. Methods This is a pragmatic, multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised parallel-group trial comparing the effectiveness of TPTNS (target n = 250) with sham stimulation (target n = 250) in reducing volume of UI in CH residents. CH residents (men and women) with self- or staff-reported UI of more than once per week are eligible to take part, including those with cognitive impairment. Outcomes will be measured at 6, 12 and 18 weeks post randomisation using the following measures: 24-h Pad Weight Tests, post void residual urine (bladder scans), Patient Perception of Bladder Condition, Minnesota Toileting Skills Questionnaire and Dementia Quality of Life. Economic evaluation based on a bespoke Resource Use Questionnaire will assess the costs of providing a programme of TPTNS. A concurrent process evaluation will investigate fidelity to the intervention and influencing factors, and qualitative interviews will explore the experiences of TPTNS from the perspective of CH residents, family members, CH staff and managers. Discussion TPTNS is a non-invasive intervention that has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing UI in adults. The ELECTRIC trial will involve CH staff delivering TPTNS to residents and establish whether TPTNS is more effective than sham stimulation for reducing the volume of UI in CH residents. Should TPTNS be shown to be an effective and acceptable treatment for UI in older adults in CHs, it will provide a safe, low-cost and dignified alternative to the current standard approach of containment and medication. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248362. Registered on 14 August 2017. ISRCTN, ISRCTN98415244. Registered on 25 April 2018. https://www.isrctn.com/.

Background Despite widespread use of therapies such as inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) continue to suffer, have reduced life expectancy and utilise considerable NHS resources. Laboratory investigations have demonstrated that at low plasma concentrations (1–5 mg/l) theophylline markedly enhances the anti-inflammatory effects of corticosteroids in COPD. Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding low-dose theophylline to a drug regimen containing ICSs in people with COPD at high risk of exacerbation. Design A multicentre, pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Setting The trial was conducted in 121 UK primary and secondary care sites. Participants People with COPD [i.e. who have a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) of Interventions Participants were randomised (1 : 1) to receive either low-dose theophylline or placebo for 1 year. The dose of theophylline (200 mg once or twice a day) was determined by ideal body weight and smoking status. Primary outcome The number of participant-reported exacerbations in the 1-year treatment period that were treated with antibiotics and/or OCSs. Results A total of 1578 people were randomised (60% from primary care): 791 to theophylline and 787 to placebo. There were 11 post-randomisation exclusions. Trial medication was prescribed to 1567 participants: 788 in the theophylline arm and 779 in the placebo arm. Participants in the trial arms were well balanced in terms of characteristics. The mean age was 68.4 [standard deviation (SD) 8.4] years, 54% were male, 32% smoked and mean FEV1 was 51.7% (SD 20.0%) predicted. Primary outcome data were available for 98% of participants: 772 in the theophylline arm and 764 in the placebo arm. There were 1489 person-years of follow-up data. The mean number of exacerbations was 2.24 (SD 1.99) for participants allocated to theophylline and 2.23 (SD 1.97) for participants allocated to placebo [adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.08]. Low-dose theophylline had no significant effects on lung function (i.e. FEV1), incidence of pneumonia, mortality, breathlessness or measures of quality of life or disease impact. Hospital admissions due to COPD exacerbation were less frequent with low-dose theophylline (adjusted IRR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.94). However, 39 of the 51 excess hospital admissions in the placebo group were accounted for by 10 participants having three or more exacerbations. There were no differences in the reporting of theophylline side effects between the theophylline and placebo arms. Limitations A higher than expected percentage of participants (26%) ceased trial medication; this was balanced between the theophylline and placebo arms and mitigated by over-recruitment (n = 154 additional participants were recruited) and the high rate of follow-up. The limitation of not using documented exacerbations is addressed by evidence that patient recall is highly reliable and the results of a small within-trial validation study. Conclusion For people with COPD at high risk of exacerbation, the addition of low-dose oral theophylline to a drug regimen that includes ICSs confers no overall clinical or health economic benefit. This result was evident from the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. Future work To promote consideration of the findings of this trial in national and international COPD guidelines. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN27066620. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 37. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background Adolescent-onset psychosis is associated with more severe symptoms and poorer outcomes than adult-onset psychosis. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommend that adolescents with first episode psychosis (FEP) should be offered a combination of antipsychotic medication (APs), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and family intervention (FI). The evidence for APs in treating psychosis is limited in adolescents compared to adults. Nevertheless, it indicates that APs can reduce overall symptoms in adolescents but may cause more severe side effects, including cardiovascular and metabolic effects, than in adults. CBT and FI can improve outcomes in adults, but there are no studies of psychological interventions (PI) in patients under 18 years old. Given this limited evidence base, NICE made a specific research recommendation for determining the clinical and cost effectiveness of APs versus PI versus both treatments for adolescent FEP. Methods/design The current study aimed to establish the feasibility and acceptability of conducting such a trial by recruiting 14–18-year-olds with a first episode of psychosis into a feasibility prospective randomised open blinded evaluation (PROBE) design, three-arm, randomised controlled trial of APs alone versus PI alone versus a combination of both treatments. We aimed to recruit 90 participants from Early Intervention and Child and Adolescent Mental Health Teams in seven UK sites. APs were prescribed by participants’ usual psychiatrists. PI comprised standardised cognitive behavioural therapy and family intervention sessions. Discussion This is the first study to compare APs to PI in an adolescent population with FEP. Recruitment finished on 31 October 2018. The study faced difficulties with recruitment across most sites due to factors including clinician and service-user treatment preferences. Trial registration Current controlled trial with ISRCTN, ISRCTN80567433. Registered on 27 February 2017. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3506-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND Relapse in schizophrenia is a major cause of distress and disability and is predicted by changes in symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and suspiciousness (early warning signs [EWSs]). These can be used as the basis for timely interventions to prevent relapse. However, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the implementation of EWS interventions. OBJECTIVE This study was designed to establish the feasibility of conducting a definitive cluster randomized controlled trial comparing Early signs Monitoring to Prevent relapse in psychosis and prOmote Well-being, Engagement, and Recovery (EMPOWER) against treatment as usual (TAU). Our primary outcomes are establishing parameters of feasibility, acceptability, usability, safety, and outcome signals of a digital health intervention as an adjunct to usual care that is deliverable in the UK National Health Service and Australian community mental health service (CMHS) settings. We will assess the feasibility of candidate primary outcomes, candidate secondary outcomes, and candidate mechanisms for a definitive trial. METHODS We will randomize CMHSs to EMPOWER or TAU. We aim to recruit up to 120 service user participants from 8 CMHSs and follow them for 12 months. Eligible service users will (1) be aged 16 years and above, (2) be in contact with local CMHSs, (3) have either been admitted to a psychiatric inpatient service or received crisis intervention at least once in the previous 2 years for a relapse, and (4) have an International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnosis of a schizophrenia-related disorder. Service users will also be invited to nominate a carer to participate. We will identify the feasibility of the main trial in terms of recruitment and retention to the study and the acceptability, usability, safety, and outcome signals of the EMPOWER intervention. EMPOWER is a mobile phone app that enables the monitoring of well-being and possible EWSs of relapse on a daily basis. An algorithm calculates changes in well-being based on participants’ own baseline to enable tailoring of well-being messaging and clinical triage of possible EWSs. Use of the app is blended with ongoing peer support. RESULTS Recruitment to the trial began September 2018, and follow-up of participants was completed in July 2019. Data collection is continuing. The database was locked in July 2019, followed by analysis and disclosing of group allocation. CONCLUSIONS The knowledge gained from the study will inform the design of a definitive trial including finalizing the delivery of our digital health intervention, sample size estimation, methods to ensure successful identification, consent, randomization, and follow-up of participants, and the primary and secondary outcomes. The trial will also inform the final health economic model to be applied in the main trial. CLINICALTRIAL International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 99559262; http://isrctn.com/ISRCTN99559262

Background: Current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for psychosis and Schizophrenia recommend the offer of psychological therapy with or without family intervention for those considered to be individuals at at-risk of developing psychosis. NICE guidelines for psychosis and schizophrenia in children and young people also have a specific research recommendation to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of combined individual and family intervention. We report here on the rationale, design and baseline characteristics of a feasibility study to investigate combined Individual and Family Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (IFCBT). for people considered to be at risk of developing psychosis in comparison to treatment as usual. Methods: The IFCBT study was a single blind, pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare a combined individual and family Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) intervention to treatment as usual. Participants were assessed using the Comprehensive Assessment of the At-risk Mental State (CAARMS) and randomly allocated to either therapy or enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU). All participants were followed up at six and twelve months. Primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment and retention of participants. Secondary outcomes included transition to psychosis and assessment of mood, anxiety and the relationship of the individual and nominated family member. Results: We report data showing entry into the study from initial enquiry to randomisation. We report the characteristics of the recruited sample of individuals (n=70) and family members (n=70) at baseline. (n=70). Conclusions: The study recruited to 92% of target demonstrating it is feasible to identify and recruit participants. Our study aimed to add to the current evidence base regarding the utility of family interventions for people at-risk of psychosis.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding affects 25% of women in the UK, many of whom require surgery to treat it. Hysterectomy is effective but has more complications than endometrial ablation, which is less invasive but ultimately leads to hysterectomy in 20% of women. We compared laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy with endometrial ablation in women seeking surgical treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding.METHODS: In this parallel-group, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial in 31 hospitals in the UK, women younger than 50 years who were referred to a gynaecologist for surgical treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding and who were eligible for endometrial ablation were randomly allocated (1:1) to either laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy or second generation endometrial ablation. Women were randomly assigned by either an interactive voice response telephone system or an internet-based application with a minimisation algorithm based on centre and age group (FINDINGS: Between May 21, 2014, and March 28, 2017, we enrolled and randomly assigned 660 women (330 in each group). 616 (93%) of 660 women were operated on within the study period, 588 (95%) of whom received the allocated procedure and 28 (5%) of whom had an alternative surgery. At 15 months after randomisation, more women allocated to laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy were satisfied with their operation compared with those in the endometrial ablation group (270 [97%] of 278 women vs 244 [87%] of 280 women; adjusted percentage difference 9·8, 95% CI 5·1-14·5; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2·53, 95% CI 1·83-3·48; pINTERPRETATION: Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy is superior to endometrial ablation in terms of clinical effectiveness and has a similar proportion of complications, but takes longer to perform and is associated with a longer recovery.FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Introduction Fatigue remains pervasive, disabling and challenging to manage across all inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs). Non-pharmacological interventions, specifically cognitive-behavioural approaches (CBAs) and graded exercise programmes designed to support and increase exercise, are valuable treatments which help patients with IRD to manage their fatigue. Yet, healthcare systems have encountered substantial barriers to the implementation of these therapeutic options. Lessening the Impact of Fatigue in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases: a Randomised Trial (LIFT) is designed to give insights into the effectiveness of a remotely delivered standardised intervention for a range of patients with IRD. It will also enable the exploration of putative moderating factors which may allow for the future triage of patients and to investigate the precise mediators of treatment effect in IRD-related fatigue. Methods and analysis LIFT is a pragmatic, multicentre, three-arm randomised, controlled trial, which will test whether adapted CBA and personalised exercise programme interventions can individually reduce the impact and severity of fatigue. This will be conducted with up to 375 eligible patients diagnosed with IRD and interventions will be delivered by rheumatology healthcare professionals, using the telephone or internet-based audio/video calls. Ethics approval and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by Wales REC 7 (17/WA/0065). Results of this study will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and in scientific journal. A lay summary of the results will be sent to participants. Trial registration number NCT03248518; Pre-results.

BackgroundClozapine (clozaril, Mylan Products Ltd) is a first-choice treatment for people with schizophrenia who have a poor response to standard antipsychotic medication. However, a significant number of patients who trial clozapine have an inadequate response and experience persistent symptoms, called clozapine-resistant schizophrenia (CRS). There is little evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological or psychological interventions for this population.ObjectivesTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) for people with CRS and to identify factors predicting outcome.DesignThe Focusing on Clozapine Unresponsive Symptoms (FOCUS) trial was a parallel-group, randomised, outcome-blinded evaluation trial. Randomisation was undertaken using permuted blocks of random size via a web-based platform. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis, using random-effects regression adjusted for site, age, sex and baseline symptoms. Cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out to determine whether or not CBT was associated with a greater number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and higher costs than treatment as usual (TAU).SettingSecondary care mental health services in five cities in the UK.ParticipantsPeople with CRS aged ≥ 16 years, with anInternational Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) schizophrenia spectrum diagnoses and who are experiencing psychotic symptoms.InterventionsIndividual CBT included up to 30 hours of therapy delivered over 9 months. The comparator was TAU, which included care co-ordination from secondary care mental health services.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at 21 months and the primary secondary outcome was PANSS total score at the end of treatment (9 months post randomisation). The health benefit measure for the economic evaluation was the QALY, estimated from the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L), health status measure. Service use was measured to estimate costs.ResultsParticipants were allocated to CBT (n = 242) or TAU (n = 245). There was no significant difference between groups on the prespecified primary outcome [PANSS total score at 21 months was 0.89 points lower in the CBT arm than in the TAU arm, 95% confidence interval (CI) –3.32 to 1.55 points;p = 0.475], although PANSS total score at the end of treatment (9 months) was significantly lower in the CBT arm (–2.40 points, 95% CI –4.79 to –0.02 points;p = 0.049). CBT was associated with a net cost of £5378 (95% CI –£13,010 to £23,766) and a net QALY gain of 0.052 (95% CI 0.003 to 0.103 QALYs) compared with TAU. The cost-effectiveness acceptability analysis indicated a low likelihood that CBT was cost-effective, in the primary and sensitivity analyses (probability p = 0.58).ConclusionsCognitive–behavioural therapy for CRS was not superior to TAU on the primary outcome of total PANSS symptoms at 21 months, but was superior on total PANSS symptoms at 9 months (end of treatment). CBT was not found to be cost-effective in comparison with TAU. There was no suggestion that the addition of CBT to TAU caused adverse effects. Future work could investigate whether or not specific therapeutic techniques of CBT have value for some CRS individuals, how to identify those who may benefit and how to ensure that effects on symptoms can be sustained.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN99672552.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.