Search

Abstract Background Regular review and support for asthma self-management is promoted in guidelines. A randomised controlled trial suggested that unscheduled health care usage was similar when patients were offered self management support by a lay-trainer or practice nurses. Methods Following the RCT, a costing study was undertaken using the trial data to account for the cost of delivery of the service under both strategies and the resulting impact on unscheduled healthcare (measure of effectiveness) in this trial. Results One year data (n = 418) showed that 29% (61/205) of the nurse group required unscheduled healthcare (177 events) compared with 30.5% (65/213) for lay-trainers (178 events). The training costs for the lay-trainers were greater than nurses (£36 versus £18 respectively per patient, p Conclusions There were no significant differences in the cost of training and healthcare delivery between nurse and lay trainers, and no significant difference in the cost of unscheduled health care use.

Abstract Background Seventy percent of women in Scotland have at least one baby, making pregnancy an opportunity to help most young women quit smoking before their own health is irreparably compromised. By quitting during pregnancy their infants will be protected from miscarriage and still birth as well as low birth weight, asthma, attention deficit disorder and adult cardiovascular disease. In the UK, the NICE guidelines: ‘How to stop smoking in pregnancy and following childbirth’ (June 2010) highlighted that little evidence exists in the literature to confirm the efficacy of financial incentives to help pregnant smokers to quit. Its first research recommendation was to determine: Within a UK context, are incentives an acceptable, effective and cost-effective way to help pregnant women who smoke to quit? Design and methods This study is a phase II exploratory individually randomized controlled trial comparing standard care for pregnant smokers with standard care plus the additional offer of financial voucher incentives to engage with specialist cessation services and/or to quit smoking during pregnancy. Participants (n = 600) will be pregnant smokers identified at maternity booking who, when contacted by specialist cessation services, agree to having their details passed to the NHS Smokefree Pregnancy Study Helpline to discuss the trial. The NHS Smokefree Pregnancy Study Helpline will be responsible for telephone consent and follow-up in late pregnancy. The primary outcome will be self reported smoking in late pregnancy verified by cotinine measurement. An economic evaluation will refine cost data collection and assess potential cost-effectiveness while qualitative research interviews with clients and health professionals will assess the level of acceptance of this form of incentive payment. The research questions are: What is the likely therapeutic efficacy? Are incentives potentially cost-effective? Is individual randomization an efficient trial design without introducing outcome bias? Can incentives be introduced in a way that is feasible and acceptable? Discussion This phase II trial will establish a workable design to reduce the risks associated with a future definitive phase III multicenter randomized controlled trial and establish a framework to assess the costs and benefits of financial incentives to help pregnant smokers to quit. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN87508788

Objective: To undertake a review of systematic reviews on the clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery across a mix of intracavity procedures, using evidence mapping to inform the decision makers on the best utilisation of robotic-assisted surgery., Eligibility Criteria: We included systematic reviews with randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials describing any clinical outcomes., Data Sources: Ovid Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library from 2017 to 2023., Data Extraction and Synthesis: We first presented the number of systematic reviews distributed in different specialties. We then mapped the body of evidence across selected procedures and synthesised major findings of clinical outcomes. We used a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews. The overlap of primary studies was managed by the corrected covered area method., Results: Our search identified 165 systematic reviews published addressing clinical evidence of robotic-assisted surgery. We found that for all outcomes except operative time, the evidence was largely positive or neutral for robotic-assisted surgery versus both open and laparoscopic alternatives. Evidence was more positive versus open. The evidence for the operative time was mostly negative. We found that most systematic reviews were of low quality due to a failure to deal with the inherent bias in observational evidence., Conclusion: Robotic surgery has a strong clinical effectiveness evidence base to support the expanded use of robotic-assisted surgery in six common intracavity procedures, which may provide an opportunity to increase the proportion of minimally invasive surgeries. Given the high incremental cost of robotic-assisted surgery and longer operative time, future economic studies are required to determine the optimal use of robotic-assisted surgery capacity., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: The timing of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for colorectal cancer and its association with long-term outcomes have been investigated in national cohort studies, with no consensus on the optimal time from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy., Objective: To analyze the association between the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery for colorectal cancer and disease-free survival., Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a post hoc analysis of the phase 3 SCOT randomized clinical trial, from 244 centers in 6 countries, investigating the noninferiority of 3 vs 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with high-risk stage II or stage III nonmetastatic colorectal cancer who underwent curative-intended surgery were randomized to either 3 or 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy consisting of fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin regimens. Those with complete information on the date of surgery, treatment type, and long-term follow-up were investigated for the primary and secondary end points. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to February 2024., Intervention: In the post hoc analysis, patients were grouped according to the start of adjuvant chemotherapy being less than 6 weeks vs greater than 6 weeks after surgery., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease-free survival. The secondary end points were adverse events in the total treatment period or the first cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy., Results: A total of 5719 patients (2251 [39.4%] female; mean [SD] age, 63.4 [9.3] years) were included in the primary analysis after data curation; among them, 914 were in the early-start group and 4805 were in the late-start group. Median (IQR) follow-up was 72.0 (47.3-88.1) months, with a median (IQR) of 56 (41-66) days from surgery to chemotherapy. Five-year disease-free survival was 78.0% (95% CI, 75.3%-80.8%) in the early-start group and 73.2% (95% CI, 72.0%-74.5%) in the late-start group. In an adjusted Cox regression analysis, the start of adjuvant chemotherapy greater than 6 weeks after surgery was associated with worse disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.46; P = .01). In adjusted logistic regression models, there was no association with adverse events in the total treatment period (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.04; P = .09) or adverse events in the first cycle of treatment (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.56-1.09; P = .13)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this international population of patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer, starting adjuvant chemotherapy more than 6 weeks after surgery was associated with worse disease-free survival, with no difference in adverse events between the groups., Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN59757862.

Introduction: The aim of the STOPPIT-3 study is to determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of antenatal corticosteroids (ACS) prior to planned birth of twins in a multicentre placebo-controlled trial with internal pilot., Methods and Analysis: This study will comprise a multicentre, double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in at least 50 UK obstetric units. The target population is 1552 women with a twin pregnancy and a planned birth between 35 and 38+6 weeks' gestation recruited from antenatal clinics. Women will be randomised to Dexamethasone Phosphate (24 mg) or saline administered via two intramuscular injections 24 hours apart, 24-120 hours prior to scheduled birth., Outcomes: The primary outcome is need for respiratory support within 72 hours of birth. Secondary and safety outcomes will be included. Cognitive and language development at age 2 years will be assessed in a subset of participants using the Parent report of Children's Abilities-Revised questionnaire. We will also determine the cost effectiveness of the treatment with ACS compared with placebo., Ethics and Dissemination: STOPPIT-3 has been funded and approved by the National Institute of Healthcare Research. It has been approved by the West Midlands Research Ethics Committee (22/WM/0018). The results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentation and will also be communicated to the public via links with charity partners and social media., Trial Sponsor: The University of Edinburgh and Lothian Health Board ACCORD, The Queen's Medical Research Institute, 47 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4TJ., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN59959611., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SJS has provided consultancy on preterm birth treatments for Natera and Hologic and is a trustee of SANDS charity., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of a smoke-free prison policy in Scotland, through assessments of the trade-offs between costs (healthcare and non-healthcare-related expenditure) and outcomes (health and non-health-related non-monetary consequences) of implementing the policy., Design: A health economic evaluation consisting of three analyses (cost-consequence, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility), from the perspectives of the healthcare payer, prison service, people in custody and operational staff, assessed the trade-offs between costs and outcomes. Costs associated with the implementation of the policy, healthcare resource use and personal spend on nicotine products were considered, alongside health and non-health outcomes. The cost-effectiveness of the policy was evaluated over 12-month and lifetime horizons (short term and long term)., Setting: Scotland's national prison estate., Participants: People in custody and operational prison staff., Intervention: Implementation of a comprehensive (indoor and outdoor) smoke-free policy., Main Outcome Measures: Concentration of secondhand smoke, health-related quality of life (health utilities and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY)) and various non-health outcomes (eg, incidents of assaults and fires)., Results: The short-term analyses suggest cost savings for people in custody and staff, improvements in concentration of secondhand smoke, with no consistent direction of change across other outcomes. The long-term analysis demonstrated that implementing smoke-free policy was cost-effective over a lifetime for people in custody and staff, with approximate cost savings of £28 000 and £450, respectively, and improvement in health-related quality of life of 0.971 QALYs and 0.262, respectively., Conclusion: Implementing a smoke-free prison policy is cost-effective over the short term and long term for people in custody and staff., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: To evaluate whether adding financial incentives to usual care is cost-effective in encouraging pregnant women to quit tobacco smoking, compared with usual care alone., Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-utility analysis (CUA) from a health-care provider's perspective, embedded in the Smoking Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial (CPIT III). Long-term analyses were conducted from the same perspective, using an existing Markov model over a life-time horizon., Setting: Seven maternity smoking cessation sites in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom., Participants: In the short-term analysis, CPIT III participants were assessed: women 16 years or older, self-reporting as smokers, fewer than 24 weeks pregnant and English-speaking (n = 944). The same population was used for the life-time analysis, plus their infants., Measurements: Costs included financial incentive vouchers and postage, cessation support and nicotine replacement therapy and neonatal stays. The outcome measure was a biochemically verified quit rate for the CEA and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for CUA. Costs are presented in 2020 GBP sterling (£). Data for the life-time analysis came from the trial and were combined with data from published literature embedded in the model, reporting incremental cost per quitter and QALY. A 3.5% discount rate was applied., Findings: The short-term incremental cost per quitter was £4400 and cost per QALY was £150 000. Results of sensitivity analyses confirmed these results. The long-term analysis combined costs and outcomes for mother and infants; results showed a cost saving of £37 [95% confidence interval (CI]) = £35-106] and increase in QALYs of 0.171 (95% CI = 0.124-0.229). These findings indicate that, over a life-time, financial incentives are cost-saving and improve health outcomes., Conclusions: In the United Kingdom, offering up to £400 financial incentives, in addition to usual care, to support pregnant women to stop smoking appears to be highly cost-effective over a life-time for mother and infants., (© 2023 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

In-vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intra-cytoplasmatic sperm injection (ICSI) are available in Scotland through the National Health Service (NHS) according to specific criteria. There is no standardised NHS tariff for these treatments in Scotland, and variation exists amongst different centres providing NHS services. The aim of this study was to calculate the mean cost of IVF and ICSI cycles for NHS-funded treatment in Scotland. A detailed cost analysis of fresh and frozen cycles was performed, and a breakdown of the various cost components was presented. A deterministic approach was applied using NHS-funded individual cycle data from 2015-2018 and aggregate data. All costs were calculated in UK pounds sterling (£- using 2018 prices). Resource use was assigned to individual cycles based on cycle-level data or expert-informed assumptions; whenever needed, average aggregate costs were assigned to cycles. A total of 9442 NHS-funded cycles were included in the analysis. The average cost of fresh IVF and ICSI cycles was £3247 [£1526-£4215] and £3473 [£1526-£4416], respectively. Frozen cycles averaged £938 [£272-£1085]. This data can be useful to decision-makers, especially where IVF/ICSI is publicly funded, as it delivers a detailed IVF/ICSI cost breakdown. It is an opportunity for other authorities to estimate IVF/ICSI costs, as the methods applied are clear and reproducible.

Objective: To examine effectiveness, cost effectiveness, generalisability, and acceptability of financial incentives for smoking cessation during pregnancy in addition to variously organised UK stop smoking services., Design: Pragmatic, multicentre, single blinded, phase 3, randomised controlled trial (Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial phase 3 (CPIT III))., Setting: Seven UK stop smoking services provided in primary and secondary care facilities in Scotland, Northern Ireland, and England., Participants: 944 pregnant women (age ≥16 years) who self-reported as being smokers (at least one cigarette in the past week) when asked at first maternity visit, less than 24 weeks' gestation, and notified to the trial team by routine stop smoking services., Interventions: Participants in the control group were offered the standard stop smoking services, which includes the offer of counselling by specially trained workers using withdrawal orientated therapy and the offer of free nicotine replacement therapy. The intervention was the offer of usual support from the stop smoking services and the addition of up to £400 ($440; €455) of LoveToShop financial voucher incentives for engaging with current stop smoking services or to stop smoking, or both, during pregnancy., Main Outcome Measures: Self-reported smoking cessation in late pregnancy (between 34 and 38 weeks' gestation) corroborated by saliva cotinine (and anabasine if using nicotine replacement products). Results were adjusted for age, smoking years, index of multiple deprivation, Fagerström score, before or after covid, and recruitment site. Secondary outcomes included point and continuous abstinence six months after expected date of delivery, engagement with stop smoking services, biochemically validated abstinence from smoking at four weeks after stop smoking date, birth weight of baby, cost effectiveness, generalisability documenting formats of stop smoking services, and acceptability to pregnant women and their carers., Results: From 9 January 2018 to 4 April 2020, of 4032 women screened by stop smoking services, 944 people were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=471) or the control group (n=470). Three people asked for their data to be removed. 126 (27%) of 471 participants stopped smoking from the intervention group and 58 (12%) of 470 from the control group (adjusted odds ratio 2.78 (1.94 to 3.97) P<0.001). Serious adverse events were miscarriages and other expected pregnancy events requiring hospital admission; all serious adverse events were unrelated to the intervention. Most people who stopped smoking from both groups relapsed after their baby was born., Conclusions: The offer of up to £400 of financial voucher incentives to stop smoking during pregnancy as an addition to current UK stop smoking services is highly effective. This bolt-on intervention supports new guidance from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which includes the addition of financial incentives to support pregnant women to stop smoking. Continuing incentives to 12 months after birth is being examined to prevent relapse., Trial Registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN15236311., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from Cancer Research UK; Chief Scientist Office; Scottish Government; HSC Public Health Agency Northern Ireland (NI); HSC R&D Division NI; Chest Heart and Stroke Northern Ireland; The Scottish Cot Death Trust; The Lullaby Trust for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: The Short Course Oncology Treatment (SCOT) trial indicated that 3 months of adjuvant doublet chemotherapy was non-inferior to 6 months of treatment for patients with colorectal cancer, with considerably less toxicity. The SCOT trial results were disseminated in June 2017. The aim of this study was to understand if SCOT trial findings were implemented in Scotland., Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out on a dataset derived from a source population of 5.4 million people. Eligible patients were those with stage II or III colorectal cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy. Logistic regression was applied to understand the extent of practice change to a 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy duration after the SCOT trial results were disseminated. Interrupted time series analysis was used to visualise differences in prescribing trends before and after June 2017 for the overall cohort, and by SCOT trial eligibility., Results: In total, 2310 patients were included in the study; 1957 and 353 treated pre- and post-June 2017, respectively. The median treatment duration decreased from 21 weeks (interquartile range 14-24) prior to June 2017 to 12 weeks (interquartile range 12-21 weeks) after June 2017 (P < 0.001). The proportion of patients receiving over 3 months of adjuvant treatment decreased from 75% to 42% (P < 0.001). This change was most noticeable for patients who met the SCOT trial eligibility criteria, and specifically for those with low-risk stage III disease and those treated with capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX). Although practice change occurred in all locations, there were differences between regions that could be explained by pre-SCOT trial prescribing trends., Discussion: A significant change in chemotherapy prescribing occurred after dissemination of the SCOT trial results. National, real-world data can be used to capture the extent of implementation of clinical trial results. In this case, implementation was aligned with clinical trial subgroup findings. This type of analysis could be conducted to evaluate the impact of other clinical trials., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Internationally, smoking prevalence among people in prison custody (ie, people on remand awaiting trial, awaiting sentencing, or serving a custodial sentence) is high. In Scotland, all prisons implemented a comprehensive smoke-free policy in 2018 after a 16-month anticipatory period. In this study, we aimed to use data on medication dispensing to assess the impact of this policy on cessation support, health outcomes, and potential unintended consequences among people in prison custody., Methods: We did an interrupted time-series analysis using dispensing data for 44 660 individuals incarcerated in 14 closed prisons in Scotland between March 30, 2014, and Nov 30, 2019. We estimated changes in dispensing rates associated with the policy announcement (July 17, 2017) and full implementation (Nov 30, 2018) using seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average models. Medication categories of primary interest were treatments for nicotine dependence (as an indicator of smoking cessation or abstinence attempts), acute smoking-associated illnesses, and mental health (antidepressants). We included antiepileptic medications as a negative control., Findings: A 44% step increase in dispensing of treatments for nicotine dependence was observed at implementation (2250 items per 1000 people in custody per fortnight, 95% CI 1875 to 2624) due primarily to a 42% increase in dispensing of nicotine replacement therapy (2109 items per 1000 people in custody per fortnight, 1701 to 2516). A 9% step decrease in dispensing for smoking-related illnesses was observed at implementation, largely accounted for by respiratory medications (-646 items per 1000 people in custody per fortnight, -1111 to -181). No changes associated with announcement or implementation were observed for mental health dispensing or antiepileptic medications (control)., Interpretation: Smoke-free prison policies might improve respiratory health among people in custody and encourage smoking abstinence or cessation without apparent short-term adverse effects on mental health dispensing., Funding: National Institute of Health Research Public Health Research programme, Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office, and UK Medical Research Council., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HS was a member of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) Scotland's Board (2017–20) and the Policy and Development Committee (2013–20), chair of the Scottish Tobacco-free Alliance Research Group (2012–20), and a council member for the Tobacco-free Alliance (2015–20). KH was previously a member of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research funding board., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Short Course Oncology Treatment (SCOT) trial demonstrated non-inferiority, less toxicity, and cost-effectiveness from a UK perspective of 3 versus 6 months of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy for patients with colorectal cancer. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of shorter treatment and the budget impact of implementing trial findings from the perspectives of all countries recruited to SCOT: Australia, Denmark, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom., Patients and Methods: Individual cost-utility analyses were performed from the perspective of each country. Resource, quality of life, and survival estimates from the SCOT trial (N = 6065) were used. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and subgroup analyses were undertaken. Using undiscounted costs from these cost-utility analyses, the impact on country-specific healthcare budgets of implementing the SCOT trial findings was calculated over a 5-year period. The currency used was US dollars (US$), and 2019 was the base year. One-way and scenario sensitivity analysis addressed uncertainty within the budget impact analysis., Results: Three months of treatment were cost saving and cost-effective compared to 6 months from the perspective of all countries. The incremental net monetary benefit per patient ranged from US$8972 (Spain) to US$13,884 (Denmark). The healthcare budget impact over 5 years for the base-case scenario ranged from US$3.6 million (New Zealand) to US$61.4 million (UK) and totaled over US$150 million across all countries., Conclusion: This study has widened the transferability of results from the SCOT trial, showing that shorter treatment is cost-effective from a multi-country perspective. The vast savings from implementation could fully justify the investment in conducting the SCOT trial., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The Medical Research Council published the second edition of its framework in 2006 on developing and evaluating complex interventions. Since then, there have been considerable developments in the field of complex intervention research. The objective of this project was to update the framework in the light of these developments. The framework aims to help research teams prioritise research questions and design, and conduct research with an appropriate choice of methods, rather than to provide detailed guidance on the use of specific methods., Methods: There were four stages to the update: (1) gap analysis to identify developments in the methods and practice since the previous framework was published; (2) an expert workshop of 36 participants to discuss the topics identified in the gap analysis; (3) an open consultation process to seek comments on a first draft of the new framework; and (4) findings from the previous stages were used to redraft the framework, and final expert review was obtained. The process was overseen by a Scientific Advisory Group representing the range of relevant National Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council research investments., Results: Key changes to the previous framework include (1) an updated definition of complex interventions, highlighting the dynamic relationship between the intervention and its context; (2) an emphasis on the use of diverse research perspectives: efficacy, effectiveness, theory-based and systems perspectives; (3) a focus on the usefulness of evidence as the basis for determining research perspective and questions; (4) an increased focus on interventions developed outside research teams, for example changes in policy or health services delivery; and (5) the identification of six 'core elements' that should guide all phases of complex intervention research: consider context; develop, refine and test programme theory; engage stakeholders; identify key uncertainties; refine the intervention; and economic considerations. We divide the research process into four phases: development, feasibility, evaluation and implementation. For each phase we provide a concise summary of recent developments, key points to address and signposts to further reading. We also present case studies to illustrate the points being made throughout., Limitations: The framework aims to help research teams prioritise research questions and design and conduct research with an appropriate choice of methods, rather than to provide detailed guidance on the use of specific methods. In many of the areas of innovation that we highlight, such as the use of systems approaches, there are still only a few practical examples. We refer to more specific and detailed guidance where available and note where promising approaches require further development., Conclusions: This new framework incorporates developments in complex intervention research published since the previous edition was written in 2006. As well as taking account of established practice and recent refinements, we draw attention to new approaches and place greater emphasis on economic considerations in complex intervention research. We have introduced a new emphasis on the importance of context and the value of understanding interventions as 'events in systems' that produce effects through interactions with features of the contexts in which they are implemented. The framework adopts a pluralist approach, encouraging researchers and research funders to adopt diverse research perspectives and to select research questions and methods pragmatically, with the aim of providing evidence that is useful to decision-makers., Future Work: We call for further work to develop relevant methods and provide examples in practice. The use of this framework should be monitored and the move should be made to a more fluid resource in the future, for example a web-based format that can be frequently updated to incorporate new material and links to emerging resources., Funding: This project was jointly funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the National Institute for Health Research (Department of Health and Social Care 73514).

Introduction: The aim of the cervical ripening at home or in-hospital-prospective cohort study and process evaluation (CHOICE) study is to compare home versus in-hospital cervical ripening to determine whether home cervical ripening is safe (for the primary outcome of neonatal unit (NNU) admission), acceptable to women and cost-effective from the perspective of both women and the National Health Service (NHS)., Methods and Analysis: We will perform a prospective multicentre observational cohort study with an internal pilot phase. We will obtain data from electronic health records from at least 14 maternity units offering only in-hospital cervical ripening and 12 offering dinoprostone home cervical ripening. We will also conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis and a mixed methods study to evaluate processes and women/partner experiences. Our primary sample size is 8533 women with singleton pregnancies undergoing induction of labour (IOL) at 39+0 weeks' gestation or more. To achieve this and contextualise our findings, we will collect data relating to a cohort of approximately 41 000 women undergoing IOL after 37 weeks. We will use mixed effects logistic regression for the non-inferiority comparison of NNU admission and propensity score matched adjustment to control for treatment indication bias. The economic analysis will be undertaken from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services (PSS) and the pregnant woman. It will include a within-study cost-effectiveness analysis and a lifetime cost-utility analysis to account for any long-term impacts of the cervical ripening strategies. Outcomes will be reported as incremental cost per NNU admission avoided and incremental cost per quality adjusted life year gained., Research Ethics Approval and Dissemination: CHOICE has been funded and approved by the National Institute of Healthcare Research Health Technology and Assessment, and the results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN32652461., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SJS reports grants from National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), Wellcome Trust, Tommy’s Charity and MRC, during the conduct of the study. AB reports a grant from UK NIHR, Research for patient benefit programme (NIHR RfPB) for trans-cervical balloon catheter and its comparison to sustained release prostaglandin use for outpatient induction of labour in low-risk women: a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial (PB-PG-0815–20022), outside the submitted work. MR is an employee of Clevermed. KAB reports a grant from the NIHR during conduct of the study. JS reports grants from NIHR during conduct of the study. NM leads and directs National Neonatal Research Database. GS reports grants from NIHR Health Technology and Assessment (HTA), during the conduct of the study; personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development, grants from Sera Prognostics, non-financial support from Illumina, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche Diagnostics, grants from Medical Research Council, grants from NIHR HTA, grants from Well-being of Women, grants from Wellcome Trust and grants from NIHR, outside the submitted work; n addition, Dr Smith has a patent named inventor on patent application for a novel predictive test for fetal growth restriction pending. JN reports grants from University of Edinburgh, during the conduct of the study; and declares membership of the following NIHR boards: CPR Decision Making Committee, HTA Commissioning Board, HTA Commissioning Sub-Board (EOI), HTA Funding Boards Policy Group, HTA General Board, HTA Post-Board funding teleconference, NIHR CTU Standing Advisory Committee, NIHR HTA and EME Editorial Board and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Impact Review Panel; and the MRC/NIHR EME Funding Board., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Performing cancer research relies on substantial financial investment, and contributions in time and effort from patients. It is therefore important that this research has real life impacts which are properly evaluated. The optimal approach to cancer research impact evaluation is not clear. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review of review articles that describe approaches to impact assessment, and to identify examples of cancer research impact evaluation within these reviews., Methods: In total, 11 publication databases and the grey literature were searched to identify review articles addressing the topic of approaches to research impact assessment. Information was extracted on methods for data collection and analysis, impact categories and frameworks used for the purposes of evaluation. Empirical examples of impact assessments of cancer research were identified from these literature reviews. Approaches used in these examples were appraised, with a reflection on which methods would be suited to cancer research  impact evaluation going forward., Results: In total, 40 literature reviews were identified. Important methods to collect and analyse data for impact assessments were surveys, interviews and documentary analysis. Key categories of impact spanning the reviews were summarised, and a list of frameworks commonly used for impact assessment was generated. The Payback Framework was most often described. Fourteen examples of impact evaluation for cancer research were identified. They ranged from those assessing the impact of a national, charity-funded portfolio of cancer research to the clinical practice impact of a single trial. A set of recommendations for approaching cancer research impact assessment was generated., Conclusions: Impact evaluation can demonstrate if and why conducting cancer research  is worthwhile. Using a mixed methods, multi-category assessment organised within a framework, will provide a robust evaluation, but the ability to perform this type of assessment may be constrained by time and resources. Whichever approach is used, easily measured, but inappropriate metrics should be avoided. Going forward, dissemination of the results of cancer research impact assessments will allow the cancer research community to learn how to conduct these evaluations.

Introduction: Over half of the 1.5 million individuals globally who are diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with stage II-III disease. Understanding clinician attitudes towards treatment for this group is paramount to contextualise real-world outcomes and plan future trials. The aim of this study was to assess clinician awareness of trials assessing the optimal duration of CRC adjuvant therapy, their attitudes towards shorter treatment and their self-reported practice., Methods: A survey was developed using OnlineSurveys® and distributed to clinicians in April 2019, with a follow-up survey disseminated to a subset of respondents in August 2020. Microsoft Excel® and Stata® were used for analysis., Results: 265 clinicians replied to the first survey, with the majority aware of findings from the International Duration Evaluation of Adjuvant Therapy collaboration and contributory trials. Practice change was greatest for patients under 70 with low-risk stage III CRC, with most uncertainty around using 3-months of doublet chemotherapy for high-risk stage II disease. In August 2020, clinicians (n = 106) were more likely to use 3-months of FOLFOX for low-risk stage III disease and 3-months of CAPOX for stage II disease compared to April 2019. There was no indication that the COVID-19 pandemic had enduring changes on treatment decisions beyond those made in response to trial evidence., Discussion: Clinicians use a risk-stratified approach to treat CRC the adjuvant setting. Lower utilisation of doublet chemotherapy for older and stage II patients has affected the extent of trial implementation. Active dialogue regarding how trial results apply to these groups may improve consensus., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: Smoking results in an average 10-year loss of life, but smokers who permanently quit before age 40 can expect a near normal lifespan. Pregnancy poses a good opportunity to help women to stop; around 80% of women in the UK have a baby, most of whom are less than 40 years of age. Smoking prevalence during pregnancy is high: 17%-23% in the UK. Smoking during pregnancy causes low birth weight and increases the risk of premature birth. After birth, passive smoking is linked to sudden infant death syndrome, respiratory diseases and increased likelihood of taking up smoking. These risks impact the long-term health of the child with associated increase in health costs. Emerging evidence suggests that offering financial incentives to pregnant women to quit is highly cost effective.This protocol describes the economic evaluation of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial (Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial III, CPIT III) designed to establish whether offering financial incentives, in addition to usual care, is effective and cost effective in helping pregnant women to quit., Methods and Analysis: The economic evaluation will identify, measure and value resource use and outcomes from CPIT III, comparing participants randomised to either usual care or usual care plus up to £400 financial incentives. Within-trial and long-term analyses will be conducted from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective; the outcome for both analyses will be quality adjusted life-years measured using EQ-5D-5L. Patient level data collected during the trial will be used for the within-trial analysis, with an additional outcome of cotinine validated quit rates at 34-38 weeks gestation and 6 months postpartum. The long-term model will be informed by data from the trial and published literature., Ethics and Dissemination: TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15236311; Pre-results (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN15236311)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared, (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: In developed countries, people who inject drugs (PWID) have a high prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV), yet they are often under-diagnosed. The World Health Organization has set 2030 as a target year for HCV elimination. To meet this target, improving screening in convenient community settings in order to reach infected undiagnosed individuals is a priority. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of alternative novel strategies for diagnosing HCV infection in PWID., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken to compare HCV screening at needle exchange centres, substance misuse services and at community pharmacies, with the standard practice of detection during general practitioners' consultations. A decision tree model was developed to assess the incremental cost per positive diagnosis, and a Markov model explored the net monetary benefit (NMB) and the cost per Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) gained over a lifetime horizon., Results: Needle exchange services provided a 7.45-fold increase in detecting positive individuals and an incremental cost of £12,336 per QALY gained against current practice (NMB £163,827), making this the most cost-effective strategy over a lifetime horizon. Screening at substance misuse services and pharmacies was cost-effective only at a £30,000/QALY threshold. With a 24% discount to HCV treatment list prices, all three screening strategies become cost-effective at £20,000/QALY., Conclusions: Targeting PWID populations with screening at needle exchange services is a highly cost-effective strategy for reaching undiagnosed HCV patients. When applying realistic discounts to list prices of drug treatments, all three strategies were highly cost-effective from a UK NHS perspective. All of these strategies have the potential to make a cost-effective contribution to the eradication of HCV by 2030., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: An impactful clinical trial will have real-life benefits for patients and society beyond the academic environment. This study analyses case studies of cancer trials to understand how impact is evidenced for cancer trials and how impact evaluation can be more routinely adopted and improved., Methods: The United Kingdom (UK) Government allocates research funding to higher-education institutions based on an assessment of the institutions' previous research efforts, in an exercise known as the Research Excellence Framework (REF). In addition to each institution's journal publications and research environment, for the first time in 2014, allocation of funding was also dependent on an evaluation of the wider, societal impact of research conducted. In the REF2014, impact assessment was performed by evaluation of impact case studies. In this study, case studies (n = 6637) submitted by institutions for the REF2014 were accessed and those focussing on cancer trials were identified. Manual content analysis was then used to assess the characteristics of the cancer trials discussed in the case studies, the impact described and the methods used by institutions to demonstrate impact., Results: Forty-six case studies describing 106 individual cancer trials were identified. The majority were phase III randomised controlled trials and those recruiting patients with breast cancer. A list of indicators of cancer trial impact was generated using the previous literature and developed inductively using these case studies. The most common impact from a cancer trial identified in the case studies was on policy, in particular citation of trial findings in clinical guidelines. Impact on health outcomes and the economy were less frequent and health outcomes were often predicted rather than evidenced. There were few descriptions identified of trialists making efforts to maximise trial impact., Discussion: Cancer trial impact narratives for the next REF assessment exercise in 2021 can be improved by evidencing actual rather than predicted Impact, with a clearer identification of the beneficiaries of cancer trials and the processes through which trial results are used. Clarification of the individuals responsible for performing impact evaluations of cancer trials and the provision of resources to do so needs to be addressed if impact evaluation is to be sustainable.

Background: The Zanmi Lasante Depression Symptom Inventory (ZLDSI) is a screening tool for major depression used in 12 primary care clinics in Haiti's Central Plateau. Although previously validated in a clinic-based sample, the present study is the first to evaluate the validity and clinical utility of the ZLDSI for depression screening in a school-based population in central Haiti., Methods: We assessed depressive symptoms in a school-based sample of transitional age youth (18-22 years; n  = 120) with the ZLDSI. Other mental health-related assessments included a modified Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders (SCID) for current Major Depressive Episode, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, and selected items adapted from the Global School-Based Health Survey mental health module. Diagnostic assignments of major depressive episode (MDE) were based on modified SCID interviews., Results: The ZLDSI demonstrated good overall accuracy in identifying current MDE (Area under the Curve = .92, 95% CI = .86, .98, p  < .001). We ascertained ≥12 as the optimal cut-off point to screen for depression with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 73.9%. In addition, the ZLDSI was associated with other measures of depressive symptoms, suggesting that it demonstrates construct validity., Conclusions: Study findings support that the ZLDSI has clinical utility for screening for depression among school-going transitional age youth., Competing Interests: Competing interestsMEG is currently employed by Sage Therapeutics, Inc. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© The Author(s). 2020.)

Background: Oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy administered over 6 months is the standard adjuvant regimen for patients with high-risk stage II or III colorectal cancer. However, the regimen is associated with cumulative toxicity, characterised by chronic and often irreversible neuropathy., Objectives: To assess the efficacy of 3-month versus 6-month adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer and to compare the toxicity, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the durations., Design: An international, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, Phase III, parallel-group trial., Setting: A total of 244 oncology clinics from six countries: UK (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland), Denmark, Spain, Sweden, Australia and New Zealand., Participants: Adults aged ≥ 18 years who had undergone curative resection for high-risk stage II or III adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum., Interventions: The adjuvant treatment regimen was either oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil or oxaliplatin and capecitabine, randomised to be administered over 3 or 6 months., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Overall survival, adverse events, neuropathy and health-related quality of life were also assessed. The main cost categories were chemotherapy treatment and hospitalisation. Cost-effectiveness was assessed through incremental cost comparisons and quality-adjusted life-year gains between the options and was reported as net monetary benefit using a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year per patient., Results: Recruitment is closed. In total, 6088 patients were randomised (3044 per group) between 27 March 2008 and 29 November 2013, with 6065 included in the intention-to-treat analyses (3-month analysis, n  = 3035; 6-month analysis, n  = 3030). Follow-up for the primary analysis is complete. The 3-year disease-free survival rate in the 3-month treatment group was 76.7% (standard error 0.8%) and in the 6-month treatment group was 77.1% (standard error 0.8%), equating to a hazard ratio of 1.006 (95% confidence interval 0.909 to 1.114; p -value for non-inferiority = 0.012), confirming non-inferiority for 3-month adjuvant chemotherapy. Frequent adverse events (alopecia, anaemia, anorexia, diarrhoea, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis, sensory neuropathy, neutropenia, pain, rash, altered taste, thrombocytopenia and watery eye) showed a significant increase in grade with 6-month duration; the greatest difference was for sensory neuropathy (grade ≥ 3 was 4% for 3-month vs.16% for 6-month duration), for which a higher rate of neuropathy was seen for the 6-month treatment group from month 4 to ≥ 5 years ( p  < 0.001). Quality-of-life scores were better in the 3-month treatment group over months 4-6. A cost-effectiveness analysis showed 3-month treatment to cost £4881 less over the 8-year analysis period, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £7246 per patient., Conclusions: The study achieved its primary end point, showing that 3-month oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy is non-inferior to 6 months of the same regimen; 3-month treatment showed a better safety profile and cost less. For future work, further follow-up will refine long-term estimates of the duration effect on disease-free survival and overall survival. The health economic analysis will be updated to include long-term extrapolation for subgroups. We expect these analyses to be available in 2019-20. The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study translational samples may allow the identification of patients who would benefit from longer treatment based on the molecular characteristics of their disease., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN59757862 and EudraCT 2007-003957-10., 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. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This research was supported by the Medical Research Council (transferred to NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre - Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; grant reference G0601705), the Swedish Cancer Society and Cancer Research UK Core Clinical Trials Unit Funding (funding reference C6716/A9894)., Competing Interests: Timothy Iveson reports honoraria from Amgen Inc. (Thousand Oaks, CA, USA), Bayer AG (Leverkusen, Germany), Bristol-Myers Squibb (New York, NY, USA), Celgene Corporation (Summit, NJ, USA), Pierre-Fabre (Paris, France), Roche (Roche Holding AG, Basel, Switzerland) and Servier (Laboratories Servier, Suresnes, France). Kathleen A Boyd reports grants from the Medical Research Council during the conduct of the study. Mark P Saunders reports personal fees from Servier, Amgen, Merck (Merck and Co., Kenilworth, New Jersey, USA), Eisai (Eisai Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) and Roche outside the submitted work. Jim Cassidy reports grants from the Medical Research Council during the conduct of the study and is currently an employee of Celgene Corporation. Josep Tabernero reports personal fees from Array Biopharma (Boulder, CO, USA), AstraZeneca (Cambridge, UK), Bayer AG (Leverkusen, Germany), BeiGene (Beijing, China), Boehringer Ingelheim (Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany), Chugai (Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Tokyo, Japan), Genentech, Inc. (South San Francisco, CA, USA), Genmab A/S (Copenhagen, Denmark), Halozyme (Halozyme Therapeutics, San Diego, CA, USA), Imugene Limited (Sydney, NSW, Australia), Inflection Biosciences Limited (Blackrock, Dublin), Ipsen (Paris, France), Kura Oncology (San Diego, CA, USA), Eli Lilly and Company (Indianapolis, IN, USA), Merck, Menarini (The Menarini Group, Florence, Italy), Merck Serono (Rockland, MA, USA), Merrimack Pharmaceuticals (MA, USA), Merus (Utrecht, the Netherlands), Molecular Partners (Molecular Partners AG, Zurich, Switzerland), Novartis (Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland), Peptomyc, Pfizer Inc. (New York, NY, USA), Pharmacyclics (Pharmacyclics LLC, Sunnyvale, CA, USA), ProteoDesign SL (Barcelona, Spain), Rafael Pharmaceuticals (Stony Brook, NY, USA), F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Sanofi (Sanofi S. A., Paris, France), Seattle Genetics (Bothwell, WA, USA), Servier, Symphogen (Symphogen A/S, Ballerup, Denmark), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Tokyo, Japan), VCN Biosciences (Barcelona, Spain), Biocartis (Biocartis Group, Mechelen, Belgium), Foundation Medicine (Cambridge, MA, USA), HalioDX (Marseille, France), SAS Pharmaceuticals (Delhi, India) and Roche Diagnostics outside the submitted work. Bengt Glimelius reports support from PledPharma AB for being on advisory boards. Sherif Raouf reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, grants and personal fees from Amgen, and grants and personal fees from Merck outside the submitted work. David Farrugia reports that he received honoraria for speaking in educational events and support for meeting attendance from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Ipsen, Amgen, AstraZeneca and Merck. David Cunningham reports grants from 4SC (4SC AG, Planegg, Germany), AstraZeneca, Bayer, Amgen, Celgene, Clovis Oncology (Boulder, CO, USA), Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals (Beerse, Belgium), MedImmune (Gaithersburg, MD, USA), Merck, Merrimack and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Tamish Hickish reports grants from Pfizer, Roche, Pierre Fabre (Paris, France) and personal fees from Eli Lilly and Company during the conduct of the study. John Bridgewater reports funding from the University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust/University College London Biomedical Research Centre. David Cunningham reports funding from the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres at the Royal Marsden.

Background & Aims: Liver function tests (LFTs) are frequently requested blood tests which may indicate liver disease. LFTs are commonly abnormal, the causes of which can be complex and are frequently under investigated. This can lead to missed opportunities to diagnose and treat liver disease at an early stage. We developed an automated investigation algorithm, intelligent liver function testing (iLFT), with the aim of increasing the early diagnosis of liver disease in a cost-effective manner., Methods: We developed an automated system that further investigated abnormal LFTs on initial testing samples to generate a probable diagnosis and management plan. We integrated this automated investigation algorithm into the laboratory management system, based on minimal diagnostic criteria, liver fibrosis estimation, and reflex testing for causes of liver disease. This algorithm then generated a diagnosis and/or management plan. A stepped-wedged trial design was utilised to compare LFT outcomes in general practices in the 6 months before and after introduction of the iLFT system. Diagnostic outcomes were collated and compared., Results: Of eligible patients with abnormal LFTs, 490 were recruited to the control group and 64 were recruited to the intervention group. The primary diagnostic outcome was based on the general practitioner diagnosis, which agreed with the iLFT diagnosis in 67% of cases. In the iLFT group, the diagnosis of liver disease was increased by 43%. Additionally, there were significant increases in the rates of GP visits after diagnosis and the number of referrals to secondary care in the iLFT group. iLFT was cost-effective with a low initial incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £284 per correct diagnosis, and a saving to the NHS of £3,216 per patient lifetime., Conclusions: iLFT increases liver disease diagnoses, improves quality of care, and is highly cost-effective. This can be achieved with minor changes to working practices and exploitation of functionality existing within modern laboratory diagnostics systems., Lay Summary: There is a growing epidemic of advanced liver disease, this could be offset by early detection and management. Checking liver blood tests (LFTs) should be an opportunity to diagnose liver problems, but abnormal results are often incompletely investigated. In this study we were able to substantially increase the diagnostic yield of the abnormal LFTs using the automated intelligent LFT system. With the addition of referral recommendations and management plans, this strategy provides optimum investigation and management of LFTs and is cost saving to the NHS., (Copyright © 2019 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Phenotype-based screening of a fungal extract library yielded an active sample from a Penicillium sp. isolate that impaired zebrafish motility. Bioassay-guided purification led to the identification of 14 meroterpenoids including six new metabolites, arisugacins L-Q ( 4 , 5 , 8 , and 12 - 14 ), seven known arisugacins ( 1 - 3 , 6 , 7 , 9 , and 10 ), and one known terreulactone ( 11 ). Their structures were determined using a combination of NMR and HRESIMS data, evidence secured from theoretical and experimental ECD spectra, and the modified Mosher's method. The purified compounds were tested in zebrafish embryos, as well as in vitro for cholinesterase inhibition activities. Compound 12 produced defects in myotome structure (metameric muscle, which is critical for locomotion) in vivo and showed the most potent and selective acetylcholinesterase inhibitory activity with an IC 50 of 191 nM in vitro. The phenotype assay was also used to reveal bioactivities for several previously reported arisugacins, which had failed to show activity in prior cell-based and in vitro testing. This study demonstrates that utilization of the zebrafish phenotype assay is an effective approach for the identification of bioactive extracts, is compatible with the bioassay-guided compound purification strategies, and offers a valuable tool for probing complex natural product sources to detect bioactive small molecules with potential therapeutic or other commercial applications.

The indignities imposed by the words and actions of strangers in public recreation facilities can deter families with children experiencing disability from using these spaces. An interpretative phenomenological analysis case study was conducted to gain an understanding of how a young family with a child with autism experiences dignity during family leisure. Three generations (parents, grandmother, and great grandmother) participated in audio-recorded semistructured and conversational interviews. The interviews, thematically analyzed and interpreted using the conceptual framework of relational ethics, depicted the family's experiences of dignity: (a) living under a microscope; (b) "screw your microscope, we're going anyway"; (c) emerging stories of belonging; and (d) retreating, feeling overlooked, and lamenting the future. The family members experienced both dignity-affirming and dignity-removing interactions during community family leisure. Dignity was cyclically maintained, temporarily lost, and regained again as family members (re)formulated perceptions of self-respect, rejected stereotypes, and built relationships.

Introduction: Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer mortality in the UK, and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately 85% of all lung cancers. Most patients present with inoperable disease; therefore, radiotherapy plays a major role in treatment. However, the majority of patients are not suitable for the gold standard treatment (concurrent chemoradiotherapy) due to performance status and comorbidities. Novel strategies integrating radiotherapy advances and radiobiological knowledge need to be evaluated in patients treated with sequential chemoradiotherapy. Four separate dose escalation accelerated radiotherapy schedules have been completed in UK (CHART-ED, IDEAL-CRT, I-START and Isotoxic IMRT). This study will compare these schedules with a UK standard sequential chemoradiotherapy schedule of 55 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks. As it would be impossible to test all schedules in a phase III study, the aim is to use a combined randomised phase II screening/'pick the winner' approach to identify the best schedule to take into a randomised phase III study against conventionally fractionated radiotherapy., Methods and Analysis: Suitable patients will have histologically/cytologically confirmed, stage III NSCLC and are able to undergo chemoradiotherapy treatment. The study will recruit 360 patients; 120 on the standard arm and 60 on each experimental arm. Patients will complete 2-4 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy before being randomised to one of the radiotherapy schedules. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival, with overall survival, time to local-regional failure, toxicity and cost-effectiveness as secondary objectives., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has received ethical approval (research ethics committee (REC) reference: 16/WS/0165) from the West of Scotland REC 1. The trial is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. Trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented internationally., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN47674500., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The Short Course Oncology Therapy (SCOT) study is an international, multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial assessing the efficacy, toxicity, and cost-effectiveness of 3 months (3 M) versus the usually given 6 months (6 M) of adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer., Methods: In total, 6088 patients with fully resected high-risk stage II or stage III colorectal cancer were randomised and followed up for 3-8 years. The within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis from a UK health-care perspective is presented using the resource use data, quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), time on treatment (ToT), disease-free survival after treatment (DFS) and overall survival (OS) data. Quality-adjusted partitioned survival analysis and Kaplan-Meier Sample Average Estimator estimated QALYs and costs. Probabilistic sensitivity and subgroup analysis was undertaken., Results: The 3 M arm is less costly (-£4881; 95% CI: -£6269; -£3492) and entails (non-significant) QALY gains (0.08; 95% CI: -0.086; 0.230) due to a better significant quality of life. The net monetary benefit was significantly higher in 3 M under a wide range of monetary values of a QALY. The subgroup analysis found similar results for patients in the CAPOX regimen. However, for the FOLFOX regimen, 3 M had lower QALYs than 6 M (not statistically significant)., Conclusions: Overall, 3 M dominates 6 M with no significant detrimental impact on QALYs. The results provide the economic case that a 3 M treatment strategy should be considered a new standard of care.

Introduction: The aim of the QUIDS study is to develop a decision support tool for the management of women with symptoms and signs of preterm labour, based on a validated prognostic model using quantitative fetal fibronectin (fFN) concentration, in combination with clinical risk factors., Methods and Analysis: The study will evaluate the Rapid fFN 10Q System (Hologic, Marlborough, Massachusetts, USA) which quantifies fFN in a vaginal swab. In QUIDS part 2, we will perform a prospective cohort study in at least eight UK consultant-led maternity units, in women with symptoms of preterm labour at 22 +0  to 34 +6 weeks gestation to externally validate a prognostic model developed in QUIDS part 1. The effects of quantitative fFN on anxiety will be assessed, and acceptability of the test and prognostic model will be evaluated in a subgroup of women and clinicians (n=30). The sample size is 1600 women (with estimated 96-192 events of preterm delivery within 7 days of testing). Clinicians will be informed of the qualitative fFN result (positive/negative) but be blinded to quantitative fFN result. Research midwives will collect outcome data from the maternal and neonatal clinical records. The final validated prognostic model will be presented as a mobile or web-based application., Ethics and Dissemination: The study is funded by the National Institute of Healthcare Research Health Technology Assessment (HTA 14/32/01). It has been approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (16/WS/0068)., Version: Protocol V.2, Date 1 November 2016., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN 41598423andCPMS: 31277., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SJS and JEN work at the University of Edinburgh, who received £1000 sponsorship from Hologic to support a meeting (The Society of Reproductive Investigation and MRC Centre for Reproductive Health Scientific Symposium on Targeting Inflammation to Improve Reproductive Health across the Lifecourse – August 2017). AS has in the past (over last 5 years; not in the last 3 years) received funding for expenses related to advisory board and internal staff education from Hologic. MC received sponsorship from Hologic to organise an educational teaching focusing on prediction of Preterm Birth at the 2017 annual meeting of the British Maternal and Fetal Medicine Society. Hologic, the makers of fFN have provided analysers and technical support for their use to sites participating in the QUIDS prospective cohort study. They have no access to the data, or other involvement in the conduct, data analysis, interpretation of results or decision to publish the results of the study., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Introduction: The aim of the QUIDS study is to develop a decision support tool for the management of women with symptoms and signs of preterm labour, based on a validated prognostic model using quantitative fetal fibronectin (qfFN) concentration, in combination with clinical risk factors., Methods and Analysis: The study will evaluate the Rapid fFN 10Q System (Hologic, Marlborough, Massachusetts) which quantifies fFN in a vaginal swab. In part 1 of the study, we will develop and internally validate a prognostic model using an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of existing studies containing women with symptoms of preterm labour alongside fFN measurements and pregnancy outcome. An economic analysis will be undertaken to assess potential cost-effectiveness of the qfFN prognostic model. The primary endpoint will be the ability of the prognostic model to rule out spontaneous preterm birth within 7 days. Six eligible studies were identified by systematic review of the literature and five agreed to provide their IPD (n=5 studies, 1783 women and 139 events of preterm delivery within 7 days of testing)., Ethics and Dissemination: The study is funded by the National Institute of Healthcare Research Health Technology Assessment (HTA 14/32/01). It has been approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (16/WS/0068)., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42015027590., Version: Protocol version 2, date 1 November 2016., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SJS and JEN work at the University of Edinburgh, who received £1000 sponsorship from Hologic to support a meeting (Scientific Symposium Targeting Inflammation to Improve Reproductive Health across the Lifecourse (August 2017) in collaboration with The Society for Reproductive Investigation and MRC Centre for Reproductive Health). AS has in the past (over last 5 years; not in the last 3 years) received funding for expenses related to advisory board and internal staff education from Hologic. MC received sponsorship from Hologic to organise an educational teaching focusing on prediction of preterm birth at the 2017 annual meeting of the British Maternal and Fetal Medicine Society. Hologic, the makers of fFN, provided analysers and technical support for their use to sites participating in the QUIDS prospective cohort study. They have no access to the data, or other involvement in the conduct, analysis, interpretation or decision to publish the results of the study., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Background: 6 months of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy is usually given as adjuvant treatment for stage 3 colorectal cancer. We investigated whether 3 months of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy would be non-inferior to the usual 6 months of treatment., Methods: The SCOT study was an international, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 244 centres. Patients aged 18 years or older with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer underwent central randomisation with minimisation for centre, choice of regimen, sex, disease site, N stage, T stage, and the starting dose of capecitabine. Patients were assigned (1:1) to receive 3 months or 6 months of adjuvant oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy. The chemotherapy regimens could consist of CAPOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin) or FOLFOX (bolus and infused fluorouracil with oxaliplatin). The regimen was selected before randomisation in accordance with choices of the patient and treating physician. The primary study endpoint was disease-free survival and the non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio of 1·13. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in patients who started study treatment. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN59757862, and follow-up is continuing., Findings: 6088 patients underwent randomisation between March 27, 2008, and Nov 29, 2013. The intended treatment was FOLFOX in 1981 patients and CAPOX in 4107 patients. 3044 patients were assigned to 3 month group and 3044 were assigned to 6 month group. Nine patients in the 3 month group and 14 patients in the 6 month group did not consent for their data to be used, leaving 3035 patients in the 3 month group and 3030 patients in the 6 month group for the intention-to-treat analyses. At the cutoff date for analysis, there had been 1482 disease-free survival events, with 740 in the 3 month group and 742 in the 6 month group. 3 year disease-free survival was 76·7% (95% CI 75·1-78·2) for the 3 month group and 77·1% (75·6-78·6) for the 6 month group, giving a hazard ratio of 1·006 (0·909-1·114, test for non-inferiority p=0·012), significantly below the non-inferiority margin. Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or worse was more common in the 6 month group (237 [58%] of 409 patients for the subset with safety data) than in the 3 month group (103 [25%] of 420) and was long-lasting and associated with worse quality of life. 1098 serious adverse events were reported (492 reports in the 3 month group and 606 reports in the 6 month group) and 32 treatment-related deaths occurred (16 in each group)., Interpretation: In the whole study population, 3 months of oxaliplatin-containing adjuvant chemotherapy was non-inferior to 6 months of the same therapy for patients with high-risk stage II and stage III colorectal cancer and was associated with reduced toxicity and improved quality of life. Despite the fact the study was underpowered, these data suggest that a shorter duration leads to similar survival outcomes with better quality of life and thus might represent a new standard of care., Funding: Medical Research Council, Swedish Cancer Society, NETSCC, and Cancer Research UK., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Children who have experienced abuse and neglect are at increased risk of mental and physical health problems throughout life. This places an enormous burden on individuals, families and society in terms of health services, education, social care and judiciary sectors. Evidence suggests that early intervention can mitigate the negative consequences of child maltreatment, exerting long-term positive effects on the health of maltreated children entering foster care. However, evidence on cost-effectiveness of such complex interventions is limited. This protocol describes the first economic evaluation of its kind in the UK., Methods and Analysis: An economic evaluation alongside the Best Services Trial (BeST?) has been prospectively designed to identify, measure and value key resource and outcome impacts arising from the New Orleans intervention model (NIM) (an infant mental health service) compared with case management (CM) (enhanced social work services as usual). A within-trial economic evaluation and long-term model from a National Health Service/Personal Social Service and a broader societal perspective will be undertaken alongside the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)-Public Health Research Unit (PHRU)-funded randomised multicentre BeST?. BeST? aims to evaluate NIM compared with CM for maltreated children entering foster care in a UK context. Collection of Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) and the recent mapping of PedsQL to EuroQol-5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) will facilitate the estimation of quality-adjusted life years specific to the infant population for a cost-utility analysis. Other effectiveness outcomes will be incorporated into a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-consequences analysis (CCA). A long-term economic model and multiple economic evaluation frameworks will provide decision-makers with a comprehensive, multiperspective guide regarding cost-effectiveness of NIM. The long-term population health economic model will be developed to synthesise trial data with routine linked data and key government sector parameters informed by literature. Methods guidance for population health economic evaluation will be adopted (lifetime horizon, 1.5% discount rate for costs and benefits, CCA framework, multisector perspective)., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained by the West of Scotland Ethics Committee. Results of the main trial and economic evaluation will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal as well as published in the peer-reviewed NIHR journals library (Public Health Research Programme)., Trial Registration Number: NCT02653716; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Services for maltreated children are inadequate and lack infant mental health input in many parts of the world. A recent audit of Glasgow services revealed that children frequently 'revolve' between maltreating birth parents and various temporary foster placements for many years. Addressing infant mental health in this population will require radical change to current services. The New Orleans programme developed by the Tulane Infant Team in Louisiana is one such radical programme. Prior to the design of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test this programme in Glasgow, it was essential that policy-makers had some insight into the local model of service delivery and how a New Orleans model could impact. This article explores the structure and costs of the current Glasgow system and the potential costs and consequence impact of implementing a New Orleans model in Glasgow, using data obtained from the research literature, Glasgow City Council audit data and expert's opinion. A New Orleans-Glasgow model would likely shift resources from social services on to the NHS. The resource intensive nature of this model could increase the cost of an episode in care from £66 300 in the current system to £86 070; however, the probability of repeated episodes in care is likely to fall substantially, making the cost per child fall from £95 500 in the current system to £88 600. This study informed the design of a phase II explorative RCT, identified appropriate outcomes for measurement and areas of uncertainty for further research., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Children's engagement in active free play has declined across recent generations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine perceptions of intergenerational changes in active free play among families from rural areas. We addressed two research questions: (1) How has active free play changed across three generations? (2) What suggestions do participants have for reviving active free play?, Methods: Data were collected via 49 individual interviews with members of 16 families (15 grandparents, 16 parents, and 18 children) residing in rural areas/small towns in the Province of Alberta (Canada). Interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis guided by an ecological framework of active free play., Results: Factors that depicted the changing nature of active free play were coded in the themes of less imagination/more technology, safety concerns, surveillance, other children to play with, purposeful physical activity, play spaces/organized activities, and the good parenting ideal. Suggestions for reviving active free play were coded in the themes of enhance facilities to keep kids entertained, provide more opportunities for supervised play, create more community events, and decrease use of technology., Conclusions: These results reinforce the need to consider multiple levels of social ecology in the study of active free play, and highlight the importance of community-based initiatives to revive active free play in ways that are consistent with contemporary notions of good parenting.

As laws and policies related to homosexuality have evolved, Americans' attitudes have also changed. Race and religion have been established as important indicators of feelings about homosexuality. However, researchers have given almost no attention to how county characteristics shape Americans' attitudes. Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling techniques, we examine how personal characteristics and the religious and racial context of a county shape feelings about homosexuality drawing on data from the American National Election Survey and information about where respondents reside. We find that African Americans initially appear less tolerant than other racial groups, until we account for the geographical distribution of attitudes across the nation. Additionally, once we consider religious involvement, strength of belief, and religious affiliation African Americans appear to have warmer feelings about homosexuality than whites. Drawing on the moral communities' hypothesis, we also find that the strength of religiosity amongst county residents heightens the influence of personal religious beliefs on disapproving attitudes. There is also a direct effect of the proportion conservative Protestant, whereby people of all faiths have cooler attitudes towards homosexual individuals when they reside in a county with a higher proportion of conservative Protestants. Finally, we do not find any evidence for an African American cultural influence on attitudes., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of up to £400 worth of financial incentives for smoking cessation in pregnancy as an adjunct to routine health care., Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a Phase II randomized controlled trial (RCT) and a cost-utility analysis using a life-time Markov model., Setting: The RCT was undertaken in Glasgow, Scotland. The economic analysis was undertaken from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective., Participants: A total of 612 pregnant women randomized to receive usual cessation support plus or minus financial incentives of up to £400 vouchers (US $609), contingent upon smoking cessation., Measurements: Comparison of usual support and incentive interventions in terms of cotinine-validated quitters, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and direct costs to the NHS., Findings: The incremental cost per quitter at 34-38 weeks pregnant was £1127 ($1716).This is similar to the standard look-up value derived from Stapleton & West's published ICER tables, £1390 per quitter, by looking up the Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial (CIPT) incremental cost (£157) and incremental 6-month quit outcome (0.14). The life-time model resulted in an incremental cost of £17 [95% confidence interval (CI) = -£93, £107] and a gain of 0.04 QALYs (95% CI = -0.058, 0.145), giving an ICER of £482/QALY ($734/QALY). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicates uncertainty in these results, particularly regarding relapse after birth. The expected value of perfect information was £30 million (at a willingness to pay of £30 000/QALY), so given current uncertainty, additional research is potentially worthwhile., Conclusion: Financial incentives for smoking cessation in pregnancy are highly cost-effective, with an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years of £482, which is well below recommended decision thresholds., (© 2015 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of salvage cryotherapy (SC) in men with radiation recurrent prostate cancer (RRPC)., Design: Cost-utility analysis using decision analytic modelling by a Markov model., Setting and Methods: Compared SC and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in a cohort of patients with RRPC (biopsy proven local recurrence, no evidence of metastatic disease). A literature review captured published data to inform the decision model, and resource use data were from the Scottish Prostate Cryotherapy Service. The model was run in monthly cycles for RRPC men, mean age of 70 years. The model was run over the patient lifetime, to assess changes in patient health states and the associated quality of life, survival and cost impacts. Results are reported in terms of the discounted incremental costs and discounted incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained between the 2 alternative interventions. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis used a 10,000 iteration Monte Carlo simulation., Results: SC has a high upfront treatment cost, but delays the ongoing monthly cost of ADT. SC is the dominant strategy over the patient lifetime; it is more effective with an incremental 0.56 QALY gain (95% CI 0.28 to 0.87), and less costly with a reduced lifetime cost of £29,719 (€37,619) (95% CI -51,985 to -9243). For a ceiling ratio of £30,000, SC has a 100% probability to be cost-effective. The cost neutral point was at 3.5 years, when the upfront cost of SC (plus any subsequent cumulative cost of side effects and ADT) equates the cumulative cost in the ADT arm. Limitations of our model may arise from its insensitivity to parameter or structural uncertainty., Conclusions: The platform for SC versus ADT cost-effective analysis can be employed to evaluate other treatment modalities or strategies in RRPC. SC is the dominant strategy, costing less over a patient's lifetime with improvements in QALYs., Trial Registration Number: This economic analysis was undertaken as part of the CROP RCT study, Isrctn: 72677390; it was a pre-trial economic model developed and analysed during the pre-results stage of the RCT., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends a permissive hypoxaemic target for an oxygen saturation of 90% for children with bronchiolitis, which is consistent with the WHO recommendations for targets in children with lower respiratory tract infections. No evidence exists to support this threshold. We aimed to assess whether the 90% or higher target for management of oxygen supplementation was equivalent to a normoxic 94% or higher target for infants admitted to hospital with viral bronchiolitis., Methods: We did a parallel-group, randomised, controlled, equivalence trial of infants aged 6 weeks to 12 months of age with physician-diagnosed bronchiolitis newly admitted into eight paediatric hospital units in the UK (the Bronchiolitis of Infancy Discharge Study [BIDS]). A central computer randomly allocated (1:1) infants, in varying length blocks of four and six and without stratification, to be clipped to standard oximeters (patients treated with oxygen if pulse oxygen saturation [SpO2] <94%) or modified oximeters (displayed a measured value of 90% as 94%, therefore oxygen not given until SpO2 <90%). All parents, clinical staff, and outcome assessors were masked to allocation. The primary outcome was time to resolution of cough (prespecified equivalence limits of plus or minus 2 days) in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN28405428., Findings: Between Oct 3, and March 30, 2012, and Oct 1, and March 29, 2013, we randomly assigned 308 infants to standard oximeters and 307 infants to modified oximeters. Cough resolved by 15·0 days (median) in both groups (95% CI for difference -1 to 2) and so oxygen thresholds were equivalent. We recorded 35 serious adverse events in 32 infants in the standard care group and 25 serious adverse events in 24 infants in the modified care group. In the standard care group, eight infants transferred to a high-dependency unit, 23 were readmitted, and one had a prolonged hospital stay. In the modified care group, 12 infants were transferred to a high-dependency unit and 12 were readmitted to hospital. Recorded adverse events did not differ significantly., Interpretation: Management of infants with bronchiolitis to an oxygen saturation target of 90% or higher is as safe and clinically effective as one of 94% or higher. Future research should assess the benefits and risks of different oxygen saturation targets in acute respiratory infection in older children, particularly in developing nations where resources are scarce., Funding: National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment programme., (Copyright © 2015 Cunningham et al. Open Access article distributed under the terms of CC BY-NC-ND. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are no randomised trials of peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) targets in acute respiratory infection. Two national guidelines recommended different targets for the management of acute viral bronchiolitis., Objectives: To compare the American Academy of Pediatrics guideline target of SpO2 ≥ 90% with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network target of SpO2 ≥ 94%., Design: A multicentre, parallel-group, double-blind, randomised controlled, equivalence trial with economic evaluation., Setting: Eight paediatric hospital departments in the UK., Participants: Infants > 6 weeks and ≤ 12 months of age (corrected for prematurity) with physician-diagnosed bronchiolitis admitted to hospital from a paediatric emergency assessment area. Follow-up for 6 months by standardised telephone contacts., Intervention: Infants were randomised to a target oxygen saturation of ≥ 94% (standard care) or ≥ 90% (modified care) displayed by a pulse saturation oximeter (Masimo Corporation Limited, CA, USA)., Routine Care: All infants received routine care in addition to the study intervention. Infants were eligible for discharge when they exhibited a SpO2 of ≥ 94% in room air for 4 hours including a period of sleep and were also feeding adequately (≥ 75% usual volume)., Primary Outcome: A total of 615 infants were recruited, of whom 308 were allocated to the standard care group and 307 to the modified care group. The primary outcome was time to cough resolution. There was equivalence at the prespecified variance of ± 2 days [time to cough resolution: standard care group, 15 days; modified care group, 15 days; median difference 1 day (benefit modified), 95% confidence interval (CI) -1 to 2 days]., Secondary Results: Return to adequate feeding occurred sooner in infants in the modified care group than in those in the standard care group (19.5 vs. 24.1 hours). This difference was non-equivalent [median difference 2.7 hours (95% CI -0.3 to 7.0 hours) versus prespecified ± 4 hours; post-hoc hazard ratio 1.22 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.44 (p-value = 0.015)]. Parent perspective of the time taken to return to normal was not equivalent, being 12 days in the standard care group compared with 11 days in the modified care group [median difference 1.0 day (95% CI 0.0 to 3.0 days) versus prespecified ± 2 days; post-hoc hazard ratio 1.19 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.41); p-value = 0.043]. At 28 days, SpO2 was equivalent [mean difference 0.11% (95% CI -0.35% to 0.57%), within the 1% prespecified]. The modified care group (55.6%) required oxygen less than the standard care group (73.1%), and for a shorter period (5.7 hours vs. 27.6 hours). Infants in the modified care group were fit for discharge (30.2 hours vs. 44.2 hours, hazard ratio 1.46, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.73; p-value < 0.001) and were discharged (40.9 hours vs. 50.9 hours; hazard ratio 1.28, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.50; p-value < 0.003) sooner than those in the standard care group. There were 35 serious adverse events in the standard care group, compared with 25 in the modified care group. Eight infants in the standard care group and 12 in the modified care group were admitted to a high-dependency unit. By 28 days, 23 infants had been readmitted to hospital in the standard care group and 12 infants in the modified care group. Parents of infants in the modified care group did not experience higher levels of anxiety and, by 14 days, had lost 28% fewer hours to usual activities. NHS costs were £290 lower in the modified care group than in the standard care group, with additional societal costs also being lower in the modified care group., Conclusions: Management of infants to a SpO2 target of ≥ 90% is as clinically effective as ≥ 94%, gives rise to no additional safety concerns, and appears to be cost-effective. Future work could focus on the safety and effectiveness of using intermittent oxygen saturation monitoring in secondary care, and to consider what are safe and effective oxygen saturation targets for children with bronchiolitis managed in primary care., Trial Registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN28405428., Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme. Masimo Corporation Limited, CA, USA, kindly provided oxygen saturation monitors with standard and altered algorithms.

Background: Maltreated children have significant and complex problems which clinicians find difficult to diagnose and treat. Previous US pilot work suggests that Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy (DDP) may be effective; however, rigorous evidence from a randomised controlled trial (RCT) is lacking. The purpose of this study is to establish the feasibility of an RCT of DDP by exploring the ways that DDP is operating across different UK sites and the impacts of current practice on the potential set-up of an RCT., Methods: Qualitative methods (interviews, focus groups and teleconferences) were used to explore trial feasibility with therapists and service managers from teams implementing both DDP and possible control interventions. Data were analysed thematically and related to various aspects of trial design., Results: DDP was commonly regarded as having a particular congruence with the complexity of maltreatment-associated problems and a common operating model of DDP was evident across sites. A single control therapy was harder to establish, however, and it is likely to be a non-specific and context-dependent intervention/s offered within mainstream Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Because a 'gold standard' Treatment as Usual (TAU) does not currently exist, randomisation between DDP and TAU (CAMHS) therefore looks feasible and ethical. The nature of family change during DDP was regarded as multi-faceted, non-linear and relationship-based. Assessment tools need to be carefully considered in terms of their ability to capture change that covers both individual child and family-based functioning., Conclusions: An RCT of DDP is feasible and timely. This study has demonstrated widespread interest, support and engagement regarding an RCT and permissions have been gained from sites that have shown readiness to participate. As maltreated children are among the most vulnerable in society, and as there are currently no treatments with RCT evidence, such a trial would be a major advance in the field.

Background: Children with maltreatment associated psychiatric problems are at increased risk of developing behavioural or mental health disorders. Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy (DDP) was proposed as treatment for children with maltreatment histories in the USA, however, being new to the UK little is known of its effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. As part of an exploratory study, this paper explores the feasibility of undertaking economic analysis of DDP in the UK., Methods: Feasibility for economic analysis was determined by ensuring such analysis could meet key criteria for economic evaluation. Phone interviews were conducted with professionals (therapists trained and accredited or in the process of becoming accredited DDP practitioners). Three models were developed to represent alternative methods of DDP service delivery. Once appropriate comparators were determined, economic scenarios were constructed. Cost analyses were undertaken from a societal perspective. Finally, appropriate outcome measurement was explored through clinical opinion, literature and further discussions with clinical experts., Results: Three DDP models were constructed: DDP Full-Basic, DDP Home-Based and DDP Long-Term. Two potential comparator interventions were identified and defined as Consultation with Carers and Individual Psychotherapy. Costs of intervention completion per case were estimated to be: £6,700 (DDP Full-Basic), £7,100 (Consultations with Carers), £7,200 (DDP Home-Based), £11,400 (Individual Psychotherapy) and £14,500 (DDP Long-Term). None of the models of service delivery were found to currently measure effectiveness consistently. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was deemed an appropriate primary outcome measure, however, it does not cover all disorders DDP intends to treat and the SDQ is not a direct measure of health gain. Inclusion of quality of life measurement is required for comprehensive economic analysis., Conclusions: Economic analysis of DDP in the UK is feasible if vital next steps are taken to measure intervention outcomes consistently, ideally with a quality of life measurement. An economic analysis using the models constructed could determine the potential cost-effectiveness of DDP in the UK and identify the most efficient mode of service delivery.