Search

Abstract COVID-19 disease is associated with a hyperinflammatory, pro-thrombotic state and a high mortality. Our primary objective was to assess the change in inflammatory and thrombotic markers associated with PEX, and secondary objectives were to assess the effects of PEX on progression of respiratory failure and incidence of acute thrombotic events. We conducted a prospective, phase II, non-blinded randomised control trial of plasma exchange compared to standard of care in critically ill adults with severe COVID-19 associated respiratory failure, requiring supplemental oxygen or ventilatory support and elevated thrombo-inflammatory markers (LDH, CRP, ferritin, and D-Dimer). Patients randomised to receive PEX were treated with a daily single volume plasma exchange for a minimum of five days. Twenty-two patients were randomised of who 11 received PEX. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups at presentation. PEX was associated with a significant reduction in pro-thrombotic markers FVIII, VWF and VWF Ag: ADAMTS 13 ratio (p 0.99) at 28 days. PEX successfully reduced pro-thrombotic markers, although was not associated with reduction in inflammatory markers, respiratory failure, or thrombotic events. Trial registration: (NCT04623255); first posted on 10/11/2020.

Abstract Background Risk prediction models are routinely used to assist in clinical decision making. A small sample size for model development can compromise model performance when the model is applied to new patients. For binary outcomes, the calibration slope (CS) and the mean absolute prediction error (MAPE) are two key measures on which sample size calculations for the development of risk models have been based. CS quantifies the degree of model overfitting while MAPE assesses the accuracy of individual predictions. Methods Recently, two formulae were proposed to calculate the sample size required, given anticipated features of the development data such as the outcome prevalence and c-statistic, to ensure that the expectation of the CS and MAPE (over repeated samples) in models fitted using MLE will meet prespecified target values. In this article, we use a simulation study to evaluate the performance of these formulae. Results We found that both formulae work reasonably well when the anticipated model strength is not too high (c-statistic

Summary: Background: Adverse non-motor outcomes have a major impact on patients and caregivers after stroke, but knowledge of their prevalence, predictors and patterns across multiple health domains remains limited; we therefore aimed to obtain these data in a large observational prospective cohort study. Methods: We included data from the Stroke Investigation Group in North and Central London (SIGNAL) registry based at the University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Comprehensive Stroke Service which serves a multi-ethnic population of ∼1.6 million people. In adult patients diagnosed with acute stroke due to cerebral ischaemia or intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) from January 2017 to January 2020 we evaluated non-motor outcomes (anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, social participation, pain, bowel dysfunction, bladder dysfunction, mood problems, communication problems, activities of daily living (ADL), memory and thinking problems) at 6-month follow-up. We evaluated baseline predictors in multivariable logistic regression, and correlations between domains using kappa statistics. Findings: Follow-up was complete for 3080 of 3338 (92.3%) eligible surviving patients (2534 ischaemic stroke, 547 with ICH; mean age 71.2 years, 1379 (44.8%) female, 1774 (59.3%) white). The most prevalent adverse non-motor outcomes were fatigue 1756 (57%), reduced social participation 1694 (55%), sleep disturbance 1663 (54%), and constipation 1355 (44%). The rates of adverse non-motor outcomes in ⩾ 1, ⩾ 2, ⩾ 3, ⩾ 4, and ⩾ 5 domains were 2310 (75%), 1571 (51%), 1519 (49%), 1232 (40%), and 801 (26%), respectively. Factors associated with adverse non-motor outcomes included stroke due to ICH, stroke severity, previous stroke, or history of cardiovascular disease. We identified moderate correlations between fatigue and sleep disturbance (kappa = 0.72); memory and thinking impairment and reduced ADL (kappa = 0.68); and communication problems and ADL (kappa = 0.70). Interpretation: Adverse non-motor outcomes are highly prevalent and often multiple at 6-months after stroke: 75% have at least one affected domain; fatigue, sleep disturbance, and reduced social participation each affect over 50% of survivors, and 26% of patients report ≥5 adverse outcomes. Our findings suggest an urgent need to better detect and mitigate these outcomes to improve quality of life after stroke. Funding: The National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) UCLH Biomedical Research Centre.

Abstract Background The Live Well with Parkinson’s Self-Management Toolkit is designed for use in the NHS to support people with Parkinson’s, their carers and health professionals in managing motor and non-motor symptoms and promoting well-being. The Toolkit was developed based on theory-based behaviour change and self-management techniques in consultation with people living with Parkinson’s and health and social care practitioners. There are digital (e-Toolkit) and paper (manual) versions. Methods Single-blind two-arm randomised controlled trial RCT of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Toolkit, facilitated by up to six sessions with a trained non-specialist supporter, in improving quality of life. People with Parkinson’s will be assessed at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Assessors will be blind to the treatment group. The primary outcome measure is the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39, Parkinson’s related quality of life) score at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures include the MDS Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (Part I, II, III, IV), EQ-5D, and a Client Service Receipt Inventory shortened, adapted for Parkinson’s. Carer outcomes include the Zarit Carer Burden Inventory and Carer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Parkinsonism. A total of 338 people with Parkinson’s, and their carers if appropriate, will be recruited from diverse settings across England. Those with advanced dementia, at end-of-life or with atypical Parkinsonism will be excluded. A parallel mixed methods process evaluation will explore the factors promoting or inhibiting implementation, uptake, use, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Toolkit and sessions. Discussion If successful, the Live Well with Parkinson’s Toolkit could be used as a model for other complex long-term disorders, including dementia. This would bridge existing gaps in the NHS (as shown by the national Parkinson’s audit data), by enabling patients and carers to access personalised information, advice and support on symptom management and ‘living well’ with Parkinson’s. Trial registration ISRCTN92831552. Registered on 26th Oct 2021.

Abstract Background New treatments are needed for people with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), who do not benefit from anti-depressants and many of whom do not recover fully with psychological treatments. The Community Navigator programme was co-produced with service users and practitioners. It is a novel social intervention which aims to reduce loneliness and thus improve health outcomes for people with TRD. Participants receive up to 10 individual meetings with a Community Navigator, who helps them to map their social world and set and enact goals to enhance their social connections and reduce loneliness. Participants may also access group meet-ups with others in the programme every 2 months, and may be offered modest financial support to enable activities to support social connections. Methods A researcher-blind, multi-site, 1:1 randomised controlled trial with N = 306 participants will test the effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme for people with TRD in secondary community mental health teams (CMHTs). Our primary hypothesis is that people who are offered the Community Navigator programme as an addition to usual CMHT care will be less depressed, assessed using the PHQ-9 self-report measure, at 8-month, end-of-treatment follow-up, compared to a control group receiving usual CMHT care and a booklet with information about local social groups and activities. We will follow participants up at end-of-treatment and at 14 months, 6 months after end-of-treatment follow-up. Secondary outcomes include the following: loneliness, anxiety, personal recovery, self-efficacy, social network, social identities. We will collect data about health-related quality of life and service use to investigate the cost-effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme. Discussion This trial will provide definitive evidence about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Community Navigator programme and whether it can be recommended for use in practice. The trial is due to finish in August 2025. Trial registration Prospectively registered on 8th July 2022 at: ISRCTN13205972.

Abstract COVID-19 is associated with higher inflammatory markers, illness severity and mortality in males compared to females. Differences in immune responses to COVID-19 may underpin sex- specific outcome differences. We hypothesised that anti-IL-6 receptor monoclonal antibodies are associated with heterogenous treatment effects between male and female patients. We conducted a retrospective cohort study assessing the interaction between biological sex and anti-IL-6 receptor antibody treatment with respect to hospital mortality or progression of respiratory failure. We used a Cox proportional hazards regression model to adjust for age, ethnicity, steroid use, baseline C-reactive protein, and COVID-19 variant. We included 1274 patients, of which 58% were male and 15% received anti-IL-6 receptor antibodies. There was a significant interaction between sex and anti-IL-6 receptor antibody use on progression to respiratory failure or death (p = 0.05). For patients who did not receive anti-IL-6 receptor antibodies, the risk of death was slightly higher in males (HR = 1.13 (0.72–1.79)), whereas in patients who did receive anti-IL-6 receptor antibodies, the risk was lower in males (HR = 0.65 (0.32–1.33)). There was a heterogenous treatment effect with anti-IL-6 receptor antibodies between males and females; with anti-IL-6 receptor antibody use having a greater benefit in preventing progression to respiratory failure or death in males (p = 0.05).

ObjectivesThere is limited evidence on the effectiveness of parenting interventions to improve disruptive behaviour in children with intellectual developmental disabilities. This clinical trial evaluated whether an adapted group parenting intervention for preschool children with intellectual developmental disabilities who display challenging behaviour is superior to treatment as usual in England.Study design261 children aged 30-59 months with moderate to severe intellectual developmental disabilities and challenging behaviour were randomised to either the intervention (Stepping Stones Triple P) and treatment as usual or treatment as usual alone. The primary outcome was the parent-rated Child Behaviour Checklist at 52 weeks after randomisation. A health economic evaluation was also completed.ResultsWe found no significant difference between arms on the primary outcome (mean difference -4.23; 95% CI: -9.99 to 1.53; p = 0.147). However, a subgroup analysis suggests the intervention was effective for participants randomised before the COVID-19 pandemic (mean difference -7.12; 95% CI: -13.44 to -0.81; p = 0.046). Furthermore, a complier average causal effects analysis (mean difference -11.53; 95% CI: -26.97 to 3.91; p = 0.143) suggests the intervention requires participants to receive a sufficient intervention dose. The intervention generated statistically significant cost savings (-£1,057.88; 95% CI -£3,218.6 to -£46.67) but the mean point estimate in Quality Adjusted Life Years was similar in both groups.ConclusionThis study did not find an effect of the intervention on reducing challenging behaviour, but this may have been influenced by problems with engagement. The intervention could be considered by services as an early intervention if families are supported to attend, especially given its low cost.

Background Stepping Stones Triple P is an adapted intervention for parents of young children with developmental disabilities who display behaviours that challenge, aiming at teaching positive parenting techniques and promoting a positive parent–child relationship. Objective To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P in reducing behaviours that challenge in children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Design, setting, participants A parallel two-arm pragmatic multisite single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited a total of 261 dyads (parent and child). The children were aged 30–59 months and had moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Participants were randomised, using a 3 : 2 allocation ratio, into the intervention arm (Stepping Stones Triple P; n = 155) or treatment as usual arm (n = 106). Participants were recruited from four study sites in Blackpool, North and South London and Newcastle. Intervention Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P consists of six group sessions and three individual phone or face-to-face contacts over 9 weeks. These were changed to remote sessions after 16 March 2020 due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Main outcome measure The primary outcome measure was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist, which assesses the severity of behaviours that challenge. Results We found a small non-significant difference in the mean Child Behaviour Checklist scores (−4.23, 95% CI −9.98 to 1.52, p = 0.146) in the intervention arm compared to treatment as usual at 12 months. Per protocol and complier average causal effect sensitivity analyses, which took into consideration the number of sessions attended, showed the Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference at 12 months was lower in the intervention arm by −10.77 (95% CI −19.12 to −2.42, p = 0.014) and −11.53 (95% CI −26.97 to 3.91, p = 0.143), respectively. The Child Behaviour Checklist mean score difference between participants who were recruited before and after the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was estimated as −7.12 (95% CI −13.44 to −0.81) and 7.61 (95% CI −5.43 to 20.64), respectively (p = 0.046), suggesting that any effect pre-pandemic may have reversed during the pandemic. There were no differences in all secondary measures. Stepping Stones Triple P is probably value for money to deliver (−£1057.88; 95% CI −£3218.6 to −£46.67), but decisions to roll this out as an alternative to existing parenting interventions or treatment as usual may be dependent on policymaker willingness to invest in early interventions to reduce behaviours that challenge. Parents reported the intervention boosted their confidence and skills, and the group format enabled them to learn from others and benefit from peer support. There were 20 serious adverse events reported during the study, but none were associated with the intervention. Limitations There were low attendance rates in the Stepping Stones Triple P arm, as well as the coronavirus disease 2019-related challenges with recruitment and delivery of the intervention. Conclusions Level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P did not reduce early onset behaviours that challenge in very young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. However, there was an effect on child behaviours for those who received a sufficient dose of the intervention. There is a high probability of Stepping Stones Triple P being at least cost neutral and therefore worth considering as an early therapeutic option given the long-term consequences of behaviours that challenge on people and their social networks. Future work Further research should investigate the implementation of parenting groups for behaviours that challenge in this population, as well as the optimal mode of delivery to maximise engagement and subsequent outcomes. Study registration This study is registered as NCT03086876 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876?term=Hassiotis±Angela&draw=1&rank=1). Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: HTA 15/162/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. Plain language summary Research shows that in children without learning disabilities, parenting groups which support parents to develop skills to manage behaviours that challenge in their child can be helpful. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence recommended that more research was needed to strengthen the evidence for such interventions for children with moderate to severe learning disability who are more likely to display behaviours that challenge in England. In this study, we tested in real-world conditions a programme called level 4 Stepping Stones Triple P, which has shown positive results in trials outside of the United Kingdom. Trained therapists delivered six groups and three individual sessions over 9 weeks to parents of children aged 30–59 months with moderate to severe learning disabilities. Two hundred and sixty-one parents were allocated to one of two arms by chance (randomisation): one received Stepping Stones Triple P and treatment as usual and the other treatment as usual only. Treatment as usual included support and advice by general practitioners or community child development teams. Our primary outcome was parent-reported child behaviour at 12 months after randomisation. We also collected data on other outcomes and carried out interviews with parents, service managers and therapists to find out their views about Stepping Stones Triple P. We did not find that Stepping Stones Triple P reduces behaviours that challenge in the child more than treatment as usual at 12 months. However, when we looked at people who received more than half of the sessions, there was a larger reduction in behaviours which suggests that Stepping Stones Triple P works for families if they attend the full programme. Stepping Stones Triple P seems to be good value for money, as we found that at 12 months (covering 10 months of costs), the Stepping Stones Triple P cost £1058 less than treatment as usual from a health and social care perspective. As such, Stepping Stones Triple P is fairly cheap to deliver and a suitable early intervention for behaviours that challenge especially because of positive feedback from parents. Throughout the trial, we included a Parent Advisory Group that oversaw study materials, interview topic guides and promotion of the study. Scientific summary Background Intellectual disability is a lifelong condition impairing an individual’s intellectual and adaptive functioning, affecting approximately 1.2 million children, young people and adults in England. Between 10% and 45% of children with intellectual disability display behaviours that challenge, including self-injury, aggression, destructiveness and stereotypical behaviours. These behaviours can be very distressing for both the parent and the child, and parents may find them difficult to manage. Interventions for early-onset conduct problems and disruptive behaviour in the general population are known to reduce such behaviours, improve long-term outcomes and reduce care costs. Early interventions are often delivered through group parenting programmes, which are known to increase parent efficacy through learning positive parenting techniques and contingency management strategies within a social learning framework. One such intervention, adapted for children with intellectual disability and socio-emotional disabilities, is Stepping Stones Triple P (SSTP). The SSTP programme combines psycho-educational and behavioural components, which aim to promote a positive parent–child relationship. The intervention also encourages the development of children’s skills within everyday parenting situations, for example during mealtimes, bathing or dressing. Studies outside the UK have shown that SSTP is effective, acceptable to parents, reduces behaviours that challenge and improves parenting styles. The current study (EPICC-ID) describes a randomised multicentre evaluation of level 4 group SSTP in very young children with moderate to severe intellectual disability. To our knowledge, it is the first study to test such an intervention in this population group in the UK (England). Objectives To undertake a pragmatic randomised controlled trial to evaluate level 4 group SSTP in addition to treatment as usual (TAU); To undertake an economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to TAU. Research questions Does the addition of level 4 SSTP to TAU reduce behaviour that challenges displayed by children aged 30–59 months with moderate to severe intellectual disability at 12 months post randomisation compared to TAU alone? Does the addition of level 4 SSTP to TAU reduce behaviours that challenge at 12 months post randomisation in blind-rated observations and caregiver/teacher outcome measures? Is the addition of level 4 SSTP to TAU more cost-effective than TAU alone? Methods The current study was a pragmatic parallel two-armed multisite single-blind randomised control trial with a 3 : 2 randomisation ratio (SSTP vs. TAU). The chief investigator, researchers and the lead statistician were blinded to participant allocation. Altogether, 261 dyads (parent with index child) were enrolled in this trial, of whom 155 were allocated to the SSTP and TAU arm and 106 were allocated to the TAU arm alone. The inclusion criteria were (1) to be a parent aged 18 years or over, (2) consenting to take part, (3) having a child with moderate to severe intellectual disability, (4) the child to be aged 30–59 months at identification and (5) the child to display behaviours that challenge as reported by a parent over a 6-month period prior to the study. The participant was excluded if the child had mild, profound or no intellectual disability, if a sibling was participating in the study, or if the parent had insufficient English language skills to complete or understand the study questionnaires. Participants were recruited from various community services including Participant Identification Centres in four main areas in England: North West of England (Blackpool, Site 1), North London (Site 2), South London (Site 3) and North East of England (Newcastle, Site 4). The primary outcome measure was the parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL). We also assessed secondary outcomes using parent–child observations, other caregiver/teacher reports, questionnaires of parents’ mental health, stress, sense of competence and parent and child health-related quality of life. We further conducted a process evaluation using a mixed methods approach to assess intervention delivery (fidelity, dose, adaptations, reach) and to capture the views of the participants, therapists and service managers. The study was ethically reviewed and approved by the London – Camden and Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee (reference: 17/LO/0659). The last 18 months of the trial took place during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Fifty-one out of 261 families were randomised after 16 March 2020 (i.e. the beginning of the pandemic) with 219 baseline and follow-up assessments carried out from that date to the end of the study (the last participant follow-up was completed in December 2021). We made changes to the study to comply with the public health measures implemented by the UK government. This ensured participant and researcher safety and allowed us to safeguard the study validity and quantify, where possible, the impact of this event. After the start of the pandemic, all study procedures, for example obtaining consent, carrying out assessments and delivering the intervention, were carried out remotely. We also adjusted the a priori statistical and health economic analysis plans to account for these changes. We were unable to continue carrying out behavioural observations and completing cognitive assessments with the children, as techniques for doing so remotely were unavailable at the time. Stepping Stones Triple P In the EPICC-ID study, we delivered a manualised level 4 SSTP intervention composed of six group sessions and three individual telephone or face-to-face contacts with the parent over a period of 9 weeks. Each group session lasted approximately 2.5 hours. Individual sessions took around 30 minutes. SSTP has the most evidence for efficacy, and while available in the UK via Triple P UK, it has not been formally tested for its clinical and cost-effectiveness and is not rolled out in the National Health Service or a part of the local offer (resources available from Local Authorities for children with disabilities). The group sessions were delivered in person until March 2020 and on the online platforms zoom and Microsoft Teams thereafter. Parents allocated to both arms also received a list of national resources and the Contact (a Family) charity guide for managing behaviours that challenge, which included signposting to social and health care support. Treatment as usual Treatment as usual was available to participants in both trial arms. The local services provided professional health and social care support, which was available at the time of the study at all of the sites. Our survey of parenting programmes showed that none of the sites offered SSTP to parents of children with intellectual disabilities. However, it is possible that parents of children with mild developmental delay who were ineligible for the trial could have been attending other universal parenting groups. Results Clinical effectiveness Our primary analysis was based on intention-to-treat in which we adjusted for baseline CBCL total score, centre, level of intellectual disability and therapist clustering, showed a mean difference between arms of −4.23 [95% confidence interval (CI) −9.98 to 1.52, p = 0.146]. We found that SSTP, as delivered in this trial, did not reduce behaviours that challenge compared to TAU at 12 months post-randomisation. Our initial sample size estimation was predicated on a minimal clinically significant difference of eight points between the two study arms. Of the 155 patients who were randomised to the SSTP arm, 50 participants were adherent to the SSTP intervention, meaning they attended at least 4 (out of 6) group sessions and 2 (out of 3) individual sessions. We carried out a per-protocol analysis which excluded non-adherent participants; we found that the intervention effect at 12 months was −10.77 (95% CI −19.12 to −2.42, p = 0.014). We also carried out a complier-average causal effect (CACE) analysis to measure the effect of the intervention on CBCL total scores at 12 months. We found a reduction of −11.53 (95% CI −26.97 to 3.91, p = 0.143) compared to TAU. We further performed a subgroup analysis to investigate whether the effect of SSTP differed depending on whether recruitment was before or after 16 March 2020. In this model, the mean difference of the effect of SSTP on CBCL total scores at 12 months was estimated as −7.12 (95% CI −13.44 to −0.81) and 7.61 (95% CI −5.43 to 20.64), respectively, with a p = 0.046. This suggests that the effect of SSTP was different before and during the pandemic. The point estimates suggest the direction of effect may have reversed during the pandemic. There were no statistically significant differences between arms in any of the secondary outcome measures. However, we noted a reduction in negative child behaviours as shown in observations of parent–child interaction. A total of 20 serious adverse events were reported, with 12 in the SSTP and 8 in the TAU arms. Of these, 13 were reported for children and 7 for parents. None of these were determined to be related to the intervention. Cost-effectiveness We found that training in level 4 SSTP costs £26 per participant. From a health and social care perspective, SSTP is cost-effective at −£1057.88 per participant (95% CI −£3218.6 to −£46.67). A cost-utility analysis within the cost-effectiveness approach indicates a non-significant quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) difference of 0.005 (95% CI −0.023 to 0.051). Using National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) thresholds for willingness to pay (WPT) for the intervention, there is an 89% probability that SSTP is cost-effective compared to TAU at a WTP for a QALY gained of £20,000 and £30,000. There is a 90% probability that SSTP is cost-effective compared to TAU at a WTP for a QALY gained of £13,000. Therefore, a rollout of an alternative parenting programme such as SSTP is likely dependent on how behaviours that challenge may be prioritised within a host of other clinical considerations at local and national levels. Process evaluation A total of 155 parents were randomised to receive SSTP and 91 (59%) attended at least one group session. The remainder of parents did not attend any sessions. Group sizes ranged from 1 to 8 [M = 3.64, standard deviation (SD) = 1.66]. Eleven therapists delivered the intervention across all sites. Fidelity scores ranged from 7 to 10 (M = 9.38, SD = 0.96). Eight sessions (62%) were scored as having the maximum score for fidelity. In terms of quality, two sessions were rated as 3 (adequate), with the remainder of the sessions being rated at 4 (good). We interviewed service managers to understand their views on possible challenges with the implementation and delivery of this intervention. They expressed concerns about potential low interest by parents due to competition with other therapies being offered in their services. However, none of those other therapies specifically address behaviours that challenge displayed by children with developmental disabilities nor were delivered in groups. Service managers described challenges finding a venue with a good location, appropriate equipment and parking facilities. There were several adaptations made to the delivery of SSTP, especially during COVID-19 when all sessions were moved online. The benefits and challenges of remote delivery were discussed with therapists and advice was obtained from the UK Triple P providers. Some benefits included larger group sizes and increased flexibility for parents and therapists with the timings and length of sessions. However, remote delivery limited opportunities for informal conversations between participants and was a challenge for rapport building, which is essential for group therapy. Overall, therapists found the intervention helpful and enjoyed the training and delivery. They also appreciated the opportunity to have expert group supervision. Therapists expressed concerns about some parents’ ability to comprehend and apply the skills taught. Therapists felt that flexibility may be needed in the number of sessions offered for parents who struggle with learning new skills or managing behaviour change. We also conducted interviews with 18 parents from the study (9 in each arm). Parents who received the SSTP enjoyed learning new techniques and strategies for managing their child’s behaviours, such as distraction the child during a meltdown, planning activities, setting house rules using visual aids (e.g. symbols, timetables) and using reward charts. The intervention boosted their confidence as a parent and helped them to better understand and accept their child’s behaviours. Most of the respondents were in favour of the group format, which provided peer support, normalised their situation and allowed them to create valuable networks with others. Parents described timing, group size, transport and setting as barriers affecting the accessibility of the groups, which are important to consider when delivering this programme. Conclusion The main statistical analysis did not reveal any statistical differences in mean CBCL scores between the intervention arms, suggesting that SSTP at 12 months is not effective compared with TAU. However, the sensitivity analyses showed that those receiving the intervention experienced a positive, albeit non-statistically significant change in the child’s behaviours of concern (reduction). Parents reported that the intervention boosted their confidence and skills, and the group format enabled them to learn from others and receive peer support. Overall, the findings suggest the intervention has clinical utility and should be available to underserved children who are more likely to have long-term adverse consequences due to the early onset of behaviours that challenge. Further, SSTP appears to be cost-effective and well within the NICE threshold for cost-effectiveness at £20,000–30,000 and at the lower cost of £13,000. Therefore, there are indications the intervention may be beneficial under certain conditions and can be delivered within NHS care. Further research is needed to explore and find solutions to the implementation of parenting groups for behaviours that challenge in this underserved population, as well as the optimal mode of delivery to maximise engagement and outcomes. Study registration This study is registered as NCT03086876. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: HTA 15/162/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 6. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of simvastatin 80 mg/day versus placebo in patients with noninfectious nonanterior uveitis receiving prednisolone ≥ 10 mg/day. Design: Randomized, double-masked, controlled trial. Subjects: Adult patients with noninfectious nonanterior uveitis on oral prednisolone dose of ≥ 10 mg/day. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive either simvastatin 80 mg/day or placebo. A total of 32 patients were enrolled (16 in each arm), all of whom completed the primary end point, and 21 reached the 2-year visit (secondary end points). Main Outcome Measures: The primary end point was mean reduction in the daily prednisolone dose at 12 months follow-up. Secondary end points were mean reduction in prednisolone dose at 24 months, percent of patients with a reduction in second-line immunomodulatory agents, time to disease relapse, and adverse events. Results: Our results show that simvastatin 80 mg/day did not have a significant corticosteroid-sparing effect at 12 months (estimate: 3.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −8.15 to 15.38; P = 0.54). There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to prednisolone dose or change in dose at 12 and 24 months. There was no difference between the 2 groups in percent of patients with reduction in second-line agent by 24 months. Among patients who achieved disease quiescence, the median time to first relapse was longer for those receiving simvastatin (38 weeks, 95% CI: 14–54) than placebo (14 weeks, 95% CI: 12–52), although this was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in adverse events or serious adverse events between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Simvastatin 80 mg/day did not have an effect on the dose reduction of corticosteroids or conventional immunomodulatory drugs at 1 and 2 years. The results suggest that it may extend the time to disease relapse among those who achieve disease quiescence. Financial Disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

BACKGROUND Severe, early-onset fetal growth restriction (FGR) causes significant fetal and neonatal mortality and morbidity. Predicting the outcome of affected pregnancies at the time of diagnosis is difficult, thus preventing accurate patient counseling. We investigated the use of maternal serum protein and ultrasound measurements at diagnosis to predict fetal or neonatal death and 3 secondary outcomes: fetal death or delivery at or before 28+0 weeks, development of abnormal umbilical artery (UmA) Doppler velocimetry, and slow fetal growth.METHODS Women with singleton pregnancies (n = 142, estimated fetal weights [EFWs] below the third centile, less than 600 g, 20+0 to 26+6 weeks of gestation, no known chromosomal, genetic, or major structural abnormalities) were recruited from 4 European centers. Maternal serum from the discovery set (n = 63) was analyzed for 7 proteins linked to angiogenesis, 90 additional proteins associated with cardiovascular disease, and 5 proteins identified through pooled liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry. Patient and clinician stakeholder priorities were used to select models tested in the validation set (n = 60), with final models calculated from combined data.RESULTS The most discriminative model for fetal or neonatal death included the EFW z score (Hadlock 3 formula/Marsal chart), gestational age, and UmA Doppler category (AUC, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86–0.97) but was less well calibrated than the model containing only the EFW z score (Hadlock 3/Marsal). The most discriminative model for fetal death or delivery at or before 28+0 weeks included maternal serum placental growth factor (PlGF) concentration and UmA Doppler category (AUC, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83–0.94).CONCLUSION Ultrasound measurements and maternal serum PlGF concentration at diagnosis of severe, early-onset FGR predicted pregnancy outcomes of importance to patients and clinicians.TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02097667.FUNDING The European Union, Rosetrees Trust, Mitchell Charitable Trust.

Abstract Background Institutions or clinicians (units) are often compared according to a performance indicator such as in-hospital mortality. Several approaches have been proposed for the detection of outlying units, whose performance deviates from the overall performance. Methods We provide an overview of three approaches commonly used to monitor institutional performances for outlier detection. These are the common-mean model, the ‘Normal-Poisson’ random effects model and the ‘Logistic’ random effects model. For the latter we also propose a visualisation technique. The common-mean model assumes that the underlying true performance of all units is equal and that any observed variation between units is due to chance. Even after applying case-mix adjustment, this assumption is often violated due to overdispersion and a post-hoc correction may need to be applied. The random effects models relax this assumption and explicitly allow the true performance to differ between units, thus offering a more flexible approach. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each approach and illustrate their application using audit data from England and Wales on Adult Cardiac Surgery (ACS) and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). Results In general, the overdispersion-corrected common-mean model and the random effects approaches produced similar p-values for the detection of outliers. For the ACS dataset (41 hospitals) three outliers were identified in total but only one was identified by all methods above. For the PCI dataset (88 hospitals), seven outliers were identified in total but only two were identified by all methods. The common-mean model uncorrected for overdispersion produced several more outliers. The reason for observing similar p-values for all three approaches could be attributed to the fact that the between-hospital variance was relatively small in both datasets, resulting only in a mild violation of the common-mean assumption; in this situation, the overdispersion correction worked well. Conclusion If the common-mean assumption is likely to hold, all three methods are appropriate to use for outlier detection and their results should be similar. Random effect methods may be the preferred approach when the common-mean assumption is likely to be violated.

BackgroundMental health acute crisis episodes are associated with high inpatient costs. Self-management interventions may reduce readmission by enabling individuals to manage their condition. Delivery of such interventions by Peer Support Workers (PSWs) may be cost-effective. CORE, a randomized control trial of a PSW self-management intervention compared to usual care, found a significant reduction in admissions to acute mental healthcare for participants receiving the intervention. This paper aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention over 12 months from a mental health service perspective. Analysis methods of increasing complexity were used to account for data missingness and distribution.MethodsParticipants were recruited from six crisis resolution teams in England from 12 March 2014 to 3 July 2015 (trial registration ISRCTN: 01027104). Resource use was collected from patient records at baseline and 12 months. The EQ-5D-3L was collected at baseline and 4 and 18 months, and linear interpolation was used to calculate 12-month values for quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The primary analysis of adjusted mean incremental costs and QALYs for complete cases are calculated separately using OLS regression. Secondly, a complete-case non-parametric two-stage bootstrap (TSB) was performed. The impacts of missing data and skewed cost data were explored using multiple imputation using chained equations and general linear models, respectively.ResultsFour hundred and forty-one participants were recruited to CORE; 221 randomized to the PSW intervention and 220 to usual care plus workbook. The probability that the PSW intervention was cost-effective compared with the workbook plus usual care control at 12 months varied with the method used, and ranged from 57% to 96% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained.DiscussionThere was a minimum 57% chance that the intervention was cost-effective compared to the control using 12-month costs and QALYs. The probability varied by 40% when methods were employed to account for the relationship between costs and QALYs, but which restricted the sample to those who provided both complete cost and utility data. Caution should therefore be applied when selecting methods for the evaluation of healthcare interventions that aim to increase precision but may introduce bias if missing data are heavily unbalanced between costs and outcomes.

Abstract Background The objective of this study was to assess the impact of consultant presence, volume of patients seen and weekend opening on the health and cost-related outcomes associated with different Early Pregnancy Assessment Unit (EPAU) configurations. Methods This was an observational study with a prospective cohort design. Six thousand six hundred six pregnant women (16 years of age and over) attending EPAUs because of suspected early pregnancy complications were recruited from 44 EPAUs across the UK. The main outcome measures were quality of life, costs, and anxiety. Results Costs, quality of life and anxiety scores were similar across configurations with little evidence to suggest an impact of consultant presence, weekend opening or volume of patients seen. Mean overall costs varied from £92 (95% CI £85 - £98) for a diagnosis of normally developing pregnancy to £1793 (95% CI £1346 - £2240) for a molar pregnancy. EQ-5D-5L score increased from 0.85 (95% CI 0.84–0.86) at baseline to 0.91 (95% CI 0.90–0.92) at 4 weeks for the 573 women who completed questionnaires at both time points, largely due to improvements in the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression dimensions. 78% of women reported a decrease in their anxiety score immediately following their EPAU appointment. Conclusions EPAU configuration, as specified in this study, had limited impact on any of the outcomes examined. However, it is clear that care provided in the EPAU has a positive overall effect on women’s health and emotional wellbeing, with significant improvements in EQ-5D and anxiety shown following an EPAU visit.

Abstract Background Parkinson’s disease is a complex neurodegenerative condition with significant impact on quality of life (QoL), wellbeing and function. The objective of this review is to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of self-management interventions for people with Parkinson’s disease, taking a broad view of self-management and considering effects on QoL, wellbeing and function. Methods Systematic searches of four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were conducted for studies evaluating self-management interventions for people with Parkinson’s disease published up to 16th November 2020. Original quantitative studies of adults with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease were included, whilst studies of atypical Parkinsonism were excluded. Full-text articles were independently assessed by two reviewers, with data extracted by one reviewer and reliability checked by a second reviewer, then synthesised through a narrative approach and, for sufficiently similar studies, a meta-analysis of effect size was conducted (using a random-effects meta-analysis with restricted maximum likelihood method pooled estimate). Interventions were subdivided into self-management components according to PRISMS Taxonomy. Risk of bias was examined with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool or ROBIN-I tool as appropriate. Results Thirty-six studies were included, evaluating a diverse array of interventions and encompassing a range of study designs (RCT n = 19; non-randomised CT n = five; within subject pre- and post-intervention comparisons n = 12). A total of 2884 participants were assessed in studies across ten countries, with greatest output from North America (14 studies) and UK (six studies). Risk of bias was moderate to high for the majority of studies, mostly due to lack of participant blinding, which is not often practical for interventions of this nature. Only four studies reported statistically significant improvements in QoL, wellbeing or functional outcomes for the intervention compared to controls. These interventions were group-based self-management education and training programmes, either alone, combined with multi-disciplinary rehabilitation, or combined with Cognitive Behaviour Therapy; and a self-guided community-based exercise programme. Four of the RCTs evaluated sufficiently similar interventions and outcomes for meta-analysis: these were studies of self-management education and training programmes evaluating QoL (n = 478). Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference between the self-management and the control groups with a standardised mean difference (Hedges g) of − 0.17 (− 0.56, 0.21) p = 0.38. By the GRADE approach, the quality of this evidence was deemed “very low” and the effect of the intervention is therefore uncertain. Components more frequently observed in effective interventions, as per PRISMS taxonomy analysis, were: information about resources; training or rehearsing psychological strategies; social support; and lifestyle advice and support. The applicability of these findings is weakened by the ambiguous and at times overlapping nature of self-management components. Conclusion Approaches and outcomes to self-management interventions in Parkinson’s disease are heterogenous. There are insufficient high quality RCTs in this field to show effectiveness of self-management interventions in Parkinson’s disease. Whilst it is not possible to draw conclusions on specific intervention components that convey effectiveness, there are promising findings from some studies, which could be targeted in future evaluations.

Stroke risk is currently estimated as part of the composite risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). We investigated if composite-CVD risk prediction tools QRISK3 and Pooled Cohort Equations-PCE, derived from middle-aged adults, are as good as stroke-specific Framingham Stroke Risk Profile-FSRP and QStroke for capturing the true risk of stroke in older adults. External validation for 10y stroke outcomes was performed in men (60-79y) of the British Regional Heart Study. Discrimination and calibration were assessed in separate validation samples (FSRP n = 3762, QStroke n = 3376, QRISK3 n = 2669 and PCE n = 3047) with/without adjustment for competing risks. Sensitivity/specificity were examined using observed and clinically recommended thresholds. Performance of FSRP, QStroke and QRISK3 was further compared head-to-head in 2441 men free of a range of CVD, including across age-groups. Observed 10y risk (/1000PY) ranged from 6.8 (hard strokes) to 11 (strokes/transient ischemic attacks). All tools discriminated weakly, C-indices 0.63–0.66. FSRP and QStroke overestimated risk at higher predicted probabilities. QRISK3 and PCE showed reasonable calibration overall with minor mis-estimations across the risk range. Performance worsened on adjusting for competing non-stroke deaths. However, in men without CVD, QRISK3 displayed relatively better calibration for stroke events, even after adjustment for competing deaths, including in oldest men. All tools displayed similar sensitivity (63–73 %) and specificity (52–54 %) using observed risks as cut-offs. When QRISK3 and PCE were evaluated using thresholds for CVD prevention, sensitivity for stroke events was 99 %, with false positive rate 97 % suggesting existing intervention thresholds may need to be re-examined to reflect age-related stroke burden.

Background: Whether low-dose alteplase is similar to standard-dose bridging alteplase prior to endovascular mechanical thrombectomy in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) remains uncertain. Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of low- versus standard-dose bridging alteplase therapy (BT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who are eligible for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) within 4.5 h after onset. Methods: We conducted an indirect comparison of low- versus standard-dose bridging alteplase before mechanical thrombectomy in AIS of current available clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared direct mechanical thrombectomy treatment (dMT) to BT. Primary efficacy outcomes were functional independence and excellent recovery defined as a dichotomized modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0–2 and 0–1 at 90 days. Safety outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Results: We included six RCTs of 2334 AIS patients in this analysis, including one trial using low-dose bridging alteplase ( n = 103) and five trials using standard-dose bridging alteplase ( n = 1067) against a common comparator (dMT). Indirect comparisons of low- to standard-dose bridging alteplase yielded an odds ratio (OR) of 0.84 (95% CI 0.47–1.50) for 90-day mRS 0–2, 1.18 (95% CI 0.65–2.12) for 90-day mRS 0–1, 1.21 (95% CI 0.44–3.36) for mortality, and 1.11 (95% CI 0.39–3.14) for successful recanalization. There were no significant differences in the odds for sICH (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.32–3.41) or any ICH (OR 1.71, 95% CI 0.94–3.10) between low- and standard-dose bridging alteplase. Conclusion: Indirect evidence shows that the effects of low- and standard-dose bridging alteplase are similar for key efficacy and safety outcomes. Due to the wide confidence intervals, larger randomized trials comparing low- and standard-dose alteplase bridging therapy are required.

Abstract Background Clustered data arise in research when patients are clustered within larger units. Generalised Estimating Equations (GEE) and Generalised Linear Models (GLMM) can be used to provide marginal and cluster-specific inference and predictions, respectively. Methods Confounding by Cluster (CBC) and Informative cluster size (ICS) are two complications that may arise when modelling clustered data. CBC can arise when the distribution of a predictor variable (termed ‘exposure’), varies between clusters causing confounding of the exposure-outcome relationship. ICS means that the cluster size conditional on covariates is not independent of the outcome. In both situations, standard GEE and GLMM may provide biased or misleading inference, and modifications have been proposed. However, both CBC and ICS are routinely overlooked in the context of risk prediction, and their impact on the predictive ability of the models has been little explored. We study the effect of CBC and ICS on the predictive ability of risk models for binary outcomes when GEE and GLMM are used. We examine whether two simple approaches to handle CBC and ICS, which involve adjusting for the cluster mean of the exposure and the cluster size, respectively, can improve the accuracy of predictions. Results Both CBC and ICS can be viewed as violations of the assumptions in the standard GLMM; the random effects are correlated with exposure for CBC and cluster size for ICS. Based on these principles, we simulated data subject to CBC/ICS. The simulation studies suggested that the predictive ability of models derived from using standard GLMM and GEE ignoring CBC/ICS was affected. Marginal predictions were found to be mis-calibrated. Adjusting for the cluster-mean of the exposure or the cluster size improved calibration, discrimination and the overall predictive accuracy of marginal predictions, by explaining part of the between cluster variability. The presence of CBC/ICS did not affect the accuracy of conditional predictions. We illustrate these concepts using real data from a multicentre study with potential CBC. Conclusion Ignoring CBC and ICS when developing prediction models for clustered data can affect the accuracy of marginal predictions. Adjusting for the cluster mean of the exposure or the cluster size can improve the predictive accuracy of marginal predictions.

Abstract Background Lithium is the most effective treatment in bipolar disorder. Its use is limited by concerns about risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD). We aimed to develop a model to predict risk of CKD following lithium treatment initiation, by identifying individuals with a high-risk trajectory of kidney function. Methods We used United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) electronic health records (EHRs) from 2000 to 2018. CPRD Aurum for prediction model development and CPRD Gold for external validation. We used elastic net regularised regression to generate a prediction model from potential features. We performed discrimination and calibration assessments in an external validation data set. We included all patients aged ≥ 16 with bipolar disorder prescribed lithium. To be included patients had to have ≥ 1 year of follow-up before lithium initiation, ≥ 3 estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) measures after lithium initiation (to be able to determine a trajectory) and a normal (≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) eGFR at lithium initiation (baseline). In the Aurum development cohort, 1609 fulfilled these criteria. The Gold external validation cohort included 934 patients. We included 44 potential baseline features in the prediction model, including sociodemographic, mental and physical health and drug treatment characteristics. We compared a full model with the 3-variable 5-year kidney failure risk equation (KFRE) and a 3-variable elastic net model. We used group-based trajectory modelling to identify latent trajectory groups for eGFR. We were interested in the group with deteriorating kidney function (the high-risk group). Results The high risk of deteriorating eGFR group included 191 (11.87%) of the Aurum cohort and 137 (14.67%) of the Gold cohort. Of these, 168 (87.96%) and 117 (85.40%) respectively developed CKD 3a or more severe during follow-up. The model, developed in Aurum, had a ROC area of 0.879 (95%CI 0.853–0.904) in the Gold external validation data set. At the empirical optimal cut-point defined in the development dataset, the model had a sensitivity of 0.91 (95%CI 0.84–0.97) and a specificity of 0.74 (95% CI 0.67–0.82). However, a 3-variable elastic net model (including only age, sex and baseline eGFR) performed similarly well (ROC area 0.888; 95%CI 0.864–0.912), as did the KFRE (ROC area 0.870; 95%CI 0.841–0.898). Conclusions Individuals at high risk of a poor eGFR trajectory can be identified before initiation of lithium treatment by a simple equation including age, sex and baseline eGFR. Risk was increased in individuals who were younger at commencement of lithium, female and had a lower baseline eGFR. We did not identify strong predicters of eGFR decline specific to lithium-treated patients. Notably, lithium duration and toxicity were not associated with high-risk trajectory.

Background: An unprecedented coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) wave occurred in China between December 2022 and January 2023, challenging the efficacy of the primary series of COVID-19 vaccines. The attitudes toward future COVID-19 booster vaccines (CBV) after the massive breakthrough infection among healthcare workers remain unknown. This study aimed to explore the prevalence and determinants of future CBV refusal after the unprecedented COVID-19 wave among healthcare workers. Methods: Between 9 and 19 February 2023, a cross-sectional nationwide online survey was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire vaccine among healthcare workers in China. Sociodemographics, profession, presence of chronic medical conditions, previous COVID-19 infection, attitudes towards future CBV, and reasons for future CBV refusal were collected. We estimated odds ratio [OR] with 95% confidence interval [CI] using a multivariable logistic regression model to explore the factors associated with future CBV refusal. Results: Among the 1618 participants who completed the survey, 1511 respondents with two or more doses of COVID-19 vaccines were analyzed. A total of 648 (41.8%) of respondents were unwilling to receive a future CBV. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed the association of CBV refusal with profession (vs. other staff, physician-adjusted OR 1.17, 95%CI 0.79–1.72, nurse-adjusted OR 1.88, 95%CI 1.24−2.85, p = 0.008), history of allergy (adjusted OR 1.72, 95%CI 1.05–2.83, p = 0.032), a lower self-perceived risk of future COVID-19 infection (p < 0.001), and a lower belief in CBV effectiveness (p = 0.014), safety (p < 0.001), and necessities for healthcare workers and the public (p < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Our findings highlight that a considerable proportion of healthcare workers were against a future booster dose after an unprecedented COVID-19 wave. Self-perception of future COVID-19 risk, and potential harm or doubtful efficacy of vaccines are the main determinants. Our findings may help public health authorities to establish future COVID-19 vaccination programs.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the association of total cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD) score with the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) in patients with acute ischemic stroke who received intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) using recombinant tissue-plasminogen activator (rt-PA).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed clinical data from two stroke registries of patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with IVT. We assessed the baseline magnetic resonance (MR) visible cSVD markers and total cSVD score (ranging from 0 to 4) between patients with and without ICH after IVT. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association of total cSVD score with the risk of ICH after IVT, adjusted for cofounders selected by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). We additionally performed an E-value analysis to fully explain away a specific exposure-outcome association. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to quantify the predictive potential of the total cSVD score for any ICH after IVT.ResultsAmong 271 eligible patients, 55 (20.3%) patients experienced any ICH, 16 (5.9%) patients experienced a symptomatic ICH (sICH), and 5 (1.85%) patients had remote intracranial parenchymal hemorrhage (rPH). Logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of any ICH increased with increasing cSVD score [per unit increase, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.03, 95% CI 1.22–3.41, P = 0.007]. Sensitivity analyses using E-value revealed that it would need moderately robust unobserved confounding to render the exposure-outcome (cSVD-any ICH) association null. ROC analysis showed that compared with the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score alone, a combination of cSVD and NIHSS score had a larger area under the curve for any ICH (0.811, 95% CI 0.756–0.866 vs. 0.784, 95% CI 0.723–0.846, P = 0.0004).ConclusionThe total cSVD score is associated with an increased risk of any ICH after IVT and improves prediction for any ICH compared with NIHSS alone.

Abstract Background Patients with cardiovascular comorbidities are at high risk of poor outcome from COVID-19. However, how the burden (number) of vascular risk factors influences the risk of severe COVID-19 disease remains unresolved. Our aim was to investigate the association of severe COVID-19 illness with vascular risk factor burden. Methods We included 164 (61.8 ± 13.6 years) patients with COVID-19 in this retrospective study. We compared the difference in clinical characteristics, laboratory findings and chest computed tomography (CT) findings between patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19 illness. We evaluated the association between the number of vascular risk factors and the development of severe COVID-19 disease, using a Cox regression model. Results Sixteen (9.8%) patients had no vascular risk factors; 38 (23.2%) had 1; 58 (35.4%) had 2; 34 (20.7%) had 3; and 18 (10.9%) had ≥4 risk factors. Twenty-nine patients (17.7%) experienced severe COVID-19 disease with a median (14 [7–27] days) duration between onset to developing severe COVID-19 disease, an event rate of 4.47 per 1000-patient days (95%CI 3.10–6.43). Kaplan-Meier curves showed a gradual increase in the risk of severe COVID-19 illness (log-rank P

Abstract Background Children with intellectual disabilities are likely to present with challenging behaviour. Parent mediated interventions have shown utility in influencing child behaviour, although there is a paucity of UK research into challenging behaviour interventions in this population. NICE guidelines favour Stepping Stones Triple P (SSTP) as a challenging behaviour intervention and this trial aims to evaluate its clinical and cost effectiveness in preschool children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Methods This trial launched in 2017 at four sites across England, with the aim of recruiting 258 participants (aged 30–59 months). The Intervention Group receive nine weeks of SSTP parenting therapy (six group sessions and three individualised face to face or telephone sessions) in addition to Treatment as Usual, whilst the Treatment as Usual only group receive other available services in each location. Both study groups undergo the study measurements at baseline and at four and twelve months. Outcome measures include parent reports and structured observations of behaviour. Service use and health related quality of life data will also be collected to carry out a cost effectiveness and utility evaluation. Discussion Findings from this study will inform policy regarding interventions for challenging behaviour in young children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Trial registration number Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03086876. Registered 22nd March 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086876.

Background Whether intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy provides additional benefit for functional outcome in acute ischemic stroke remains uncertain. We performed a meta‐analysis to compare the outcomes of direct mechanical thrombectomy (dMT) to mechanical thrombectomy with bridging using intravenous thrombolysis (bridging therapy [BT]) in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods and Results We performed a literature search in the PubMed, Excerpta Medica database, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 2003, to April 26, 2021. We included randomized clinical trials and observational studies that reported the 90‐day functional outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing dMT compared with BT. The 12 included studies (3 randomized controlled trials and 9 observational studies) yielded 3924 participants (mean age, 68.0 years [SD, 13.1 years]; women, 44.2%; 1887 participants who received dMT and 2037 participants who received BT). A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trial and observational data revealed similar 90‐day functional independence (odds ratio [OR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90–1.19), mortality (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78–1.36), and successful recanalization (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76–1.14) for patients treated with dMT or BT. Compared with those in the BT group, patients in the dMT group were less likely to experience symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51–0.91; P=0.008) or any intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61–0.84; P

Background: Neoadjuvant cancer treatment is associated with improved survival following major oesophagogastric cancer surgery. The impact of neoadjuvant chemo/chemoradiotherapy on physical fitness and operative outcomes is however unclear. This study aims to investigate the impact of neoadjuvant chemo/chemoradiotherapy on fitness and post-operative mortality. Methods: Patients with oesophagogastric cancer scheduled for chemo/chemoradiotherapy and surgery were recruited to a prospective, blinded, multi-centre, observational cohort study. Primary outcomes were changes in fitness with chemo/chemoradiotherapy, measured using cardiopulmonary exercise testing and its association with mortality one-year after surgery. Patients were followed up for re-admission at 30-days, in-hospital morbidity and quality of life (exploratory outcomes). Results: In total, 384 patients were screened, 217 met the inclusion criteria, 160 consented and 159 were included (72% male, mean age 65 years). A total of 132 patients (83%) underwent chemo/chemoradiotherapy, 109 (71%) underwent chemo/chemoradiotherapy and two exercise tests, 100 (63%) completed surgery and follow-up. A significant decline in oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold and oxygen uptake peak was observed following chemo/chemoradiotherapy: -1.25ml.kg-1.min-1 (-1.80 to -0.69) and -3.02ml.kg-1.min-1 (-3.85 to -2.20); p

Abstract Background Multiple primary outcomes may be specified in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). When analysing multiple outcomes it’s important to control the family wise error rate (FWER). A popular approach to do this is to adjust the p-values corresponding to each statistical test used to investigate the intervention effects by using the Bonferroni correction. It’s also important to consider the power of the trial to detect true intervention effects. In the context of multiple outcomes, depending on the clinical objective, the power can be defined as: ‘disjunctive power’, the probability of detecting at least one true intervention effect across all the outcomes or ‘marginal power’ the probability of finding a true intervention effect on a nominated outcome. We provide practical recommendations on which method may be used to adjust for multiple comparisons in the sample size calculation and the analysis of RCTs with multiple primary outcomes. We also discuss the implications on the sample size for obtaining 90% disjunctive power and 90% marginal power. Methods We use simulation studies to investigate the disjunctive power, marginal power and FWER obtained after applying Bonferroni, Holm, Hochberg, Dubey/Armitage-Parmar and Stepdown-minP adjustment methods. Different simulation scenarios were constructed by varying the number of outcomes, degree of correlation between the outcomes, intervention effect sizes and proportion of missing data. Results The Bonferroni and Holm methods provide the same disjunctive power. The Hochberg and Hommel methods provide power gains for the analysis, albeit small, in comparison to the Bonferroni method. The Stepdown-minP procedure performs well for complete data. However, it removes participants with missing values prior to the analysis resulting in a loss of power when there are missing data. The sample size requirement to achieve the desired disjunctive power may be smaller than that required to achieve the desired marginal power. The choice between whether to specify a disjunctive or marginal power should depend on the clincial objective.

ObjectiveTo determine whether the participation of consultant gynaecologists in delivering early pregnancy care results in a lower rate of acute hospital admissions.DesignProspective cohort study and emergency hospital care audit; data were collected as part of the national prospective mixed-methods VESPA study on the "Variations in the organization of EPAUs in the UK and their effects on clinical, Service and PAtient-centred outcomes".Setting44 Early Pregnancy Assessment Units (EPAUs) across the UK randomly selected in balanced numbers from eight pre-defined mutually exclusive strata.Participants6606 pregnant women (≥16 years old) with suspected first trimester pregnancy complications attending the participating EPAUs or Emergency Departments (ED) from December 2016 to July 2017.ExposuresPlanned and actual senior clinician presence, unit size, and weekend opening.Main outcome measuresUnplanned admissions to hospital following any visit for investigations or treatment for first trimester complications as a proportion of women attending EPAUs.Results205/6397 (3.2%; 95% CI 2.8-3.7) women were admitted following their EPAU attendance. The admission rate among 44 units ranged from 0% to 13.7% (median 2.8). Neither planned senior clinician presence (p = 0.874) nor unit volume (p = 0.247) were associated with lower admission rates from EPAU, whilst EPAU opening over the weekend resulted in lower admission rates (p = 0.027). 1445/5464 (26.4%; 95%CI 25.3 to 27.6) women were admitted from ED. There was little evidence of an association with planned senior clinician time (p = 0.280) or unit volume (p = 0.647). Keeping an EPAU open over the weekend for an additional hour was associated with 2.4% (95% CI 0.1% to 4.7%) lower odds of an emergency admission from ED.ConclusionsInvolvement of senior clinicians in delivering early pregnancy care has no significant impact on emergency hospital admissions for early pregnancy complications. Weekend opening, however, may be an effective way of reducing emergency admissions from ED.

Background: Early pregnancy complications are common and account for the largest proportion of emergency work in gynaecology. Although early pregnancy assessment units operate in most UK acute hospitals, recent National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidance emphasised the need for more research to identify configurations that provide the optimal balance between cost-effectiveness, clinical effectiveness and service- and patient-centred outcomes [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Ectopic Pregnancy and Miscarriage: Diagnosis and Initial Management. URL: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG154 (accessed 23 March 2016)]. Objectives: The primary aim was to test the hypothesis that the rate of hospital admissions for early pregnancy complications is lower in early pregnancy assessment units with high consultant presence than in units with low consultant presence. The key secondary objectives were to assess the effect of increased consultant presence on other clinical outcomes, to explore patient satisfaction with the quality of care and to make evidence-based recommendations about the future configuration of UK early pregnancy assessment units. Design: The Variations in the organisations of Early Pregnancy Assessment Units in the UK and their effects on clinical, Service and PAtient-centred outcomes (VESPA) study employed a multimethods approach and included a prospective cohort study of women attending early pregnancy assessment units to measure clinical outcomes, an economic evaluation, a patient satisfaction survey, qualitative interviews with service users, an early pregnancy assessment unit staff survey and a hospital emergency care audit. Setting: The study was conducted in 44 early pregnancy assessment units across the UK. Participants: Participants were pregnant women (aged ≥ 16 years) attending the early pregnancy assessment units or other hospital emergency services because of suspected early pregnancy complications. Staff members directly involved in providing early pregnancy care completed the staff survey. Main outcome measure: Emergency hospital admissions as a proportion of women attending the participating early pregnancy assessment units. Methods: Data sources – demographic and routine clinical data were collected from all women attending the early pregnancy assessment units. For women who provided consent to complete the questionnaires, clinical data and questionnaires were linked using the women’s study number. Data analysis and results reporting – the relationships between clinical outcomes and consultant presence, unit volume and weekend opening hours were investigated using appropriate regression models. Qualitative interviews with women, and patient and staff satisfaction, health economic and workforce analyses were also undertaken, accounting for consultant presence, unit volume and weekend opening hours. Results: We collected clinical data from 6606 women. There was no evidence of an association between admission rate and consultant presence (p = 0.497). Health economic evaluation and workforce analysis data strands indicated that lower-volume units with no consultant presence were associated with lower costs than their alternatives. Limitations: The relatively low level of direct consultant involvement could explain the lack of significant impact on quality of care. We were also unable to estimate the potential impact of factors such as scanning practices, level of supervision, quality of ultrasound equipment and clinical care pathway protocols. Conclusions: We have shown that consultant presence in the early pregnancy assessment unit has no significant impact on key outcomes, such as the proportion of women admitted to hospital as an emergency, pregnancy of unknown location rates, ratio of new to follow-up visits, negative laparoscopy rate and patient satisfaction. All data strands indicate that low-volume units run by senior or specialist nurses and supported by sonographers and consultants may represent the optimal early pregnancy assessment unit configuration. Future work: Our results show that further research is needed to assess the potential impact of enhanced clinical and ultrasound training on the performance of all disciplines working in early pregnancy assessment units. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10728897. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 46. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: Pre-treatment severity is a key indicator of prognosis for those with depression. Knowledge is limited on how best to encompass severity of disorders. A number of non-severity related factors such as social support and life events are also indicators of prognosis. It is not clear whether this holds true after adjusting for pre-treatment severity as a) a depressive symptom scale score, and b) a broader construct encompassing symptom severity and related indicators: “disorder severity”. In order to investigate this, data from the individual participants of clinical trials which have measured a breadth of “disorder severity” related factors are needed. Aims: 1) To assess the association between outcomes for adults seeking treatment for depression and the severity of depression pre-treatment, considered both as i) depressive symptom severity only and ii) “disorder severity” which includes depressive symptom severity and comorbid anxiety, chronicity, history of depression, history of previous treatment, functional impairment and health-related quality of life. 2) To determine whether i) social support, ii) life events, iii) alcohol misuse, and iv) demographic factors (sex, age, ethnicity, marital status, employment status, level of educational attainment, and financial wellbeing) are prognostic indicators of outcomes, independent of baseline “disorder severity” and the type of treatment received. Methods: Databases were searched for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that recruited adults seeking treatment for depression from their general practitioners and used the same diagnostic and screening instrument to measure severity at baseline – the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule; outcome measures could differ between studies. Chief investigators of all studies meeting inclusion criteria were contacted and individual patient data (IPD) were requested. Conclusions: In total 15 RCTs met inclusion criteria. The Dep-GP database will include the 6271 participants from the 13 studies that provided IPD. This protocol outlines how these data will be analysed. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019129512 (01/04/2019)

Background It is likely that a proportion of poststroke cognitive impairment is sometimes attributable to unidentified prestroke decline; prestroke cognitive function is also clinically relevant because it is associated with poor functional outcomes, including death. We investigated the radiological and prognostic associations of preexisting cognitive impairment in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack associated with atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results We included 1102 patients from the prospective multicenter observational CROMIS‐2 (Clinical Relevance of Microbleeds in Stroke 2) atrial fibrillation study. Preexisting cognitive impairment was identified using the 16‐item Informant Questionnaire for Cognitive Decline in the Elderly. Functional outcome was measured using the modified Rankin scale. Preexisting cognitive impairment was common (n=271; 24.6%). The presence of lacunes (odds ratio [OR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.03–1.05; P=0.034), increasing periventricular white matter hyperintensity grade (per grade increase, OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.17–1.63; P2; adjusted OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.42–4.20; P=0.001). Conclusions Preexisting cognitive impairment in patients with atrial fibrillation–associated ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack is common, and associated with imaging markers of cerebral small vessel disease and neurodegeneration, as well as with longer‐term functional outcome. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02513316.

Abstract Background In healthcare research, outcomes with skewed probability distributions are common. Sample size calculations for such outcomes are typically based on estimates on a transformed scale (e.g. log) which may sometimes be difficult to obtain. In contrast, estimates of median and variance on the untransformed scale are generally easier to pre-specify. The aim of this paper is to describe how to calculate a sample size for a two group comparison of interest based on median and untransformed variance estimates for log-normal outcome data. Methods A log-normal distribution for outcome data is assumed and a sample size calculation approach for a two-sample t-test that compares log-transformed outcome data is demonstrated where the change of interest is specified as difference in median values on the untransformed scale. A simulation study is used to compare the method with a non-parametric alternative (Mann-Whitney U test) in a variety of scenarios and the method is applied to a real example in neurosurgery. Results The method attained a nominal power value in simulation studies and was favourable in comparison to a Mann-Whitney U test and a two-sample t-test of untransformed outcomes. In addition, the method can be adjusted and used in some situations where the outcome distribution is not strictly log-normal. Conclusions We recommend the use of this sample size calculation approach for outcome data that are expected to be positively skewed and where a two group comparison on a log-transformed scale is planned. An advantage of this method over usual calculations based on estimates on the log-transformed scale is that it allows clinical efficacy to be specified as a difference in medians and requires a variance estimate on the untransformed scale. Such estimates are often easier to obtain and more interpretable than those for log-transformed outcomes.

Abstract Background When developing a prediction model for survival data it is essential to validate its performance in external validation settings using appropriate performance measures. Although a number of such measures have been proposed, there is only limited guidance regarding their use in the context of model validation. This paper reviewed and evaluated a wide range of performance measures to provide some guidelines for their use in practice. Methods An extensive simulation study based on two clinical datasets was conducted to investigate the performance of the measures in external validation settings. Measures were selected from categories that assess the overall performance, discrimination and calibration of a survival prediction model. Some of these have been modified to allow their use with validation data, and a case study is provided to describe how these measures can be estimated in practice. The measures were evaluated with respect to their robustness to censoring and ease of interpretation. All measures are implemented, or are straightforward to implement, in statistical software. Results Most of the performance measures were reasonably robust to moderate levels of censoring. One exception was Harrell’s concordance measure which tended to increase as censoring increased. Conclusions We recommend that Uno’s concordance measure is used to quantify concordance when there are moderate levels of censoring. Alternatively, Gönen and Heller’s measure could be considered, especially if censoring is very high, but we suggest that the prediction model is re-calibrated first. We also recommend that Royston’s D is routinely reported to assess discrimination since it has an appealing interpretation. The calibration slope is useful for both internal and external validation settings and recommended to report routinely. Our recommendation would be to use any of the predictive accuracy measures and provide the corresponding predictive accuracy curves. In addition, we recommend to investigate the characteristics of the validation data such as the level of censoring and the distribution of the prognostic index derived in the validation setting before choosing the performance measures.

Background: Pre-treatment severity is a key indicator of prognosis for those with depression. Knowledge is limited on how best to encompass severity of disorders. A number of non-severity related factors such as social support and life events are also indicators of prognosis. It is not clear whether this holds true after adjusting for pre-treatment severity as a) a depressive symptom scale score, and b) a broader construct encompassing symptom severity and related indicators: “disorder severity”. In order to investigate this, data from the individual participants of clinical trials which have measured a breadth of “disorder severity” related factors are needed. Aims: 1) To assess the association between outcomes for adults seeking treatment for depression and the severity of depression pre-treatment, considered both as i) depressive symptom severity only and ii) “disorder severity” which includes depressive symptom severity and comorbid anxiety, chronicity, history of depression, history of previous treatment, functional impairment and health-related quality of life. 2) To determine whether i) social support, ii) life events, iii) alcohol misuse, and iv) demographic factors (sex, age, ethnicity, marital status, employment status, level of educational attainment, and financial wellbeing) are prognostic indicators of outcomes, independent of baseline “disorder severity” and the type of treatment received. Methods: Databases were searched for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that recruited adults seeking treatment for depression from their general practitioners and used the same diagnostic and screening instrument to measure severity at baseline – the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule; outcome measures could differ between studies. Chief investigators of all studies meeting inclusion criteria were contacted and individual patient data (IPD) were requested. Conclusions: In total 15 RCTs met inclusion criteria. The Dep-GP database will include the 6271 participants from the 13 studies that provided IPD. This protocol outlines how these data will be analysed. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019129512 (01/04/2019)

Objective We report on: (1) the proportion of patients with known atrial fibrillation (AF); and (2) demographic, clinical or radiological differences between patients with known AF (and not treated) and patients with newly diagnosed AF, in a cohort of patients who presented with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) not previously treated with anticoagulation.Design We reviewed cross-sectional baseline demographic and clinical data from a prospective observational cohort study, (CROMIS-2).Setting Patients were recruited from 79 hospital stroke centres throughout the UK and one centre in the Netherlands.Participants Patients were eligible if they were adults who presented with ischaemic stroke or TIA and AF and had not been previously treated with oral anticoagulation.Main outcome measures Proportion of patients with known AF before index ischaemic stroke or TIA from a cohort of patients who have not been previously treated with oral anticoagulation. Secondary analysis includes the comparison of CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores and other demographics and risk factors between those with newly diagnosed AF and those with previously known AF.Results Of 1470 patients included in the analysis (mean age 76 years (SD 10)), 622 (42%) were female; 999 (68%) patients had newly diagnosed AF and 471 (32%) patients had known AF. Of the 471 patients with known AF, 68% had a strong indication for anticoagulation and 89% should have been considered for anticoagulation based upon CHA2DS2-VASc score. Patients with known AF were more likely to have a prior history of dementia (4% vs 2%, p=0.02) and had higher HAS-BLED scores (median 3 vs 2). CHA2DS2-VASc, other risk factors and demographics were similar.Conclusions About 1/3 of patients who present with stroke and have AF who have not been treated with oral anticoagulation have previously known AF. Of these patients, at least 68% were not adequately treated with oral anticoagulation.Trial registration number NCT02513316.

Background: Newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) are habitually treated with intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering eyedrops. Selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) is a safe alternative to drops and is rarely used as first-line treatment. Objectives: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients with OAG or OHT, treated with two treatment pathways: topical IOP-lowering medication from the outset (Medicine-1st) or primary SLT followed by topical medications as required (Laser-1st). We also compared the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the two pathways. Design: A 36-month pragmatic, unmasked, multicentre randomised controlled trial. Settings: Six collaborating specialist glaucoma clinics across the UK. Participants: Newly diagnosed patients with OAG or OHT in one or both eyes who were aged ≥ 18 years and able to provide informed consent and read and understand English. Patients needed to qualify for treatment, be able to perform a reliable visual field (VF) test and have visual acuity of at least 6 out of 36 in the study eye. Patients with VF loss mean deviation worse than –12 dB in the better eye or –15 dB in the worse eye were excluded. Patients were also excluded if they had congenital, early childhood or secondary glaucoma or ocular comorbidities; if they had any previous ocular surgery except phacoemulsification, at least 1 year prior to recruitment or any active treatment for ophthalmic conditions; if they were pregnant; or if they were unable to use topical medical therapy or had contraindications to SLT. Interventions: SLT according to a predefined protocol compared with IOP-lowering eyedrops, as per national guidelines. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was HRQoL at 3 years [as measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire]. Secondary outcomes were cost and cost-effectiveness, disease-specific HRQoL, clinical effectiveness and safety. Results: Of the 718 patients enrolled, 356 were randomised to Laser-1st (initial SLT followed by routine medical treatment) and 362 to Medicine-1st (routine medical treatment only). A total of 652 (91%) patients returned the primary outcome questionnaire at 36 months. The EQ-5D-5L score was not significantly different between the two arms [adjusted mean difference (Laser-1st – Medicine-1st) 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.01 to 0.03; p = 0.23] at 36 months. Over 36 months, the proportion of visits at which IOP was within the target range was higher in the Laser-1st arm (93.0%, 95% CI 91.9% to 94.0%) than in the Medicine-1st arm (91.3%, 95% CI 89.9% to 92.5%), with IOP-lowering glaucoma surgery required in 0 and 11 patients, respectively. There was a 97% probability of Laser-1st being more cost-effective than Medicine-1st for the NHS, at a willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year of £20,000, with a reduction in ophthalmology costs of £458 per patient (95% of bootstrap iterations between –£585 and –£345). Limitation: An unmasked design, although a limitation, was essential to capture any treatment effects on patients’ perception. The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire is a generic tool used in multiple settings and may not have been the most sensitive tool to investigate HRQoL. Conclusions: Compared with medication, SLT provided a stable, drop-free IOP control to 74.2% of patients for at least 3 years, with a reduced need for surgery, lower cost and comparable HRQoL. Based on the evidence, SLT seems to be the most cost-effective first-line treatment option for OAG and OHT, also providing better clinical outcomes. Future work: Longitudinal research into the clinical efficacy of SLT as a first-line treatment will specify the long-term differences of disease progression, treatment intensity and ocular surgery rates between the two pathways. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN32038223. 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. 31. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: Crisis resolution teams (CRTs) seek to avert hospital admissions by providing intensive home treatment for people experiencing a mental health crisis. The CRT model has not been highly specified. CRT care is often experienced as ending abruptly and relapse rates following CRT discharge are high. Aims: The aims of CORE (Crisis resolution team Optimisation and RElapse prevention) workstream 1 were to specify a model of best practice for CRTs, develop a measure to assess adherence to this model and evaluate service improvement resources to help CRTs implement the model with high fidelity. The aim of CORE workstream 2 was to evaluate a peer-provided self-management programme aimed at reducing relapse following CRT support. Methods: Workstream 1 was based on a systematic review, national CRT manager survey and stakeholder qualitative interviews to develop a CRT fidelity scale through a concept mapping process with stakeholders (n = 68). This was piloted in CRTs nationwide (n = 75). A CRT service improvement programme (SIP) was then developed and evaluated in a cluster randomised trial: 15 CRTs received the SIP over 1 year; 10 teams acted as controls. The primary outcome was service user satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included CRT model fidelity, catchment area inpatient admission rates and staff well-being. Workstream 2 was a peer-provided self-management programme that was developed through an iterative process of systematic literature reviewing, stakeholder consultation and preliminary testing. This intervention was evaluated in a randomised controlled trial: 221 participants recruited from CRTs received the intervention and 220 did not. The primary outcome was re-admission to acute care at 1 year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included time to re-admission and number of days in acute care over 1 year of follow-up and symptoms and personal recovery measured at 4 and 18 months’ follow-up. Results: Workstream 1 – a 39-item CRT fidelity scale demonstrated acceptability, face validity and promising inter-rater reliability. CRT implementation in England was highly variable. The SIP trial did not produce a positive result for patient satisfaction [median Client Satisfaction Questionnaire score of 28 in both groups at follow-up; coefficient 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) –1.02 to 2.97]. The programme achieved modest increases in model fidelity. Intervention teams achieved lower inpatient admission rates and less inpatient bed use. Qualitative evaluation suggested that the programme was generally well received. Workstream 2 – the trial yielded a statistically significant result for the primary outcome, in which rates of re-admission to acute care over 1 year of follow-up were lower in the intervention group than in the control group (odds ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.99; p = 0.044). Time to re-admission was lower and satisfaction with care was greater in the intervention group at 4 months’ follow-up. There were no other significant differences between groups in the secondary outcomes. Limitations: Limitations in workstream 1 included uncertainty regarding the representativeness of the sample for the primary outcome and lack of blinding for assessment. In workstream 2, the limitations included the complexity of the intervention, preventing clarity about which were effective elements. Conclusions: The CRT SIP did not achieve all its aims but showed potential promise as a means to increase CRT model fidelity and reduce inpatient service use. The peer-provided self-management intervention is an effective means to reduce relapse rates for people leaving CRT care. Study registration: The randomised controlled trials were registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN47185233 and ISRCTN01027104. The systematic reviews were registered as PROSPERO CRD42013006415 and CRD42017043048. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Introduction Bladder cancer (BC) is a common malignancy and one of the most expensive to manage. Radical cystectomy (RC) with pelvic lymphadenectomy is a gold standard treatment for high-risk BC. Reductions in morbidity and mortality from RC may be achieved through robot-assisted RC (RARC). Prospective comparisons between open RC (ORC) and RARC have been limited by sample size, use of extracorporeal reconstruction and use of outcomes important for ORC. Conversely, while RARC is gaining in popularity, there is little evidence to suggest it is superior to ORC. We are undertaking a prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare RARC with intracorporeal reconstruction (iRARC) and ORC using multimodal outcomes to explore qualitative and quantitative recovery after surgery.Methods and analysis iROC is a multicentre prospective RCT in English National Health Service (NHS) cancer centres. We will randomise 320 patients undergoing RC to either iRARC or ORC. Treatment allocation will occur after trial entry and consent. The primary outcome is days alive and out of hospital within the first 90 days from surgery. Secondary outcomes will measure functional recovery (activity trackers, chair-to-stand tests and health related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires), morbidity (complications and readmissions), cost-effectiveness (using EuroQol-5 Domain-5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) and unit costs) and surgeon fatigue. Patients will be analysed according to intention to treat. The primary outcome will be transformed and analysed using regression. All statistical assumptions will be investigated. Secondary outcomes will be analysed using appropriate regression methods. An internal feasibility study of the first 30 patients will evaluate recruitment rates, acceptance of randomised treatment choice, compliance outcome collection and to revise our sample size.Ethics and dissemination The study has ethical approval (REC reference 16/NE/0418). Findings will be made available to patients, clinicians, funders and the NHS through peer-reviewed publications, social media and patient support groups.Trial registration numbers ISRCTN13680280 and NCT03049410.

Background: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a rare, severe post-traumatic pain condition affecting distal limbs. Patients who do not spontaneously improve in 12 months are classed as having ‘long-standing CRPS’ and often cannot be effectively treated, leading to a poor prognosis. CRPS is associated with functional autoantibodies. Two small trials, including a randomised controlled trial, have suggested that low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) may be an effective treatment for some patients. Objective: We hypothesised that low-dose IVIg is effective for reducing pain in long-standing CRPS. Methods: A randomised, double blinded placebo-controlled multicentre trial in seven UK pain management centres. Patients were eligible if they had moderate or severe long-standing CRPS that they had experienced for up to 5 years. Participants were randomly allocated to receive 0.5 g/kg IVIg, the active intervention, or visually indistinguishable 0.1% albumin in saline placebo. Randomisation was initiated by study sites via an independent online randomisation system and was 1 : 1 with varying block sizes, stratified by study centre. Participants, investigators and assessors were blinded to group assignment. The study drug/placebo was infused intravenously at the study centres on day 1 and day 23 after randomisation. The primary outcome was the 24-hour average pain intensity between day 6 and day 42, on an 11-point (0–10) numeric rating scale, compared between the groups. Outcomes were analysed using a mixed-effects regression model that used 37 measurements of pain intensity (the primary outcome) per participant. All patients who received an infusion and provided any outcome were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Results: A total of 111 patients were recruited and assigned between 27 August 2013 and 28 October 2015. Three patients were excluded because they had been inappropriately randomised, five patients were withdrawn from the primary analysis because they provided no outcomes and 103 patients were analysed for the primary outcome. The average pain score in the IVIg group was 0.27 units (95% confidence interval –0.24 to 0.80 units) higher than in the placebo group. Therefore, there is no significant evidence of a treatment effect at the 5% level and there was no significant difference between groups. Six serious adverse events but no suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions were reported during the blinded and open-label phase. Conclusion and future work: Low-dose immunoglobulin was not effective in relieving pain in patients with moderate to severe CRPS of 1–5 years’ duration. Better drug treatments for long-standing CRPS are urgently required. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42179756. Funding: This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership. Additional funding was obtained by the Pain Relief Foundation. Biotest UK Ltd provided the active study medication at no cost.

Background: In 2011, we developed a risk model for 30-day mortality after children’s heart surgery. The PRAiS (Partial Risk Adjustment in Surgery) model uses data on the procedure performed, diagnosis, age, weight and comorbidity. Our treatment of comorbidity was simplistic because of data quality. Software that implements PRAiS is used by the National Congenital Heart Disease Audit (NCHDA) in its audit work. The use of PRAiS triggered the temporary suspension of surgery at one unit in 2013. The public anger that surrounded this illustrated the need for public resources around outcomes monitoring. Objectives: (1) To improve the PRAiS risk model by incorporating more information about comorbidities. (2) To develop online resources for the public to help them to understand published mortality data. Design: Objective 1 The outcome measure was death within 30 days of the start of each surgical episode of care. The analysts worked with an expert panel of clinical and data management representatives. Model development followed an iterative process of clinical discussion of risk factors, development of regression models and assessment of model performance under cross-validation. Performance was measured using the area under the receiving operator characteristic (AUROC) curve and calibration in the cross-validation test sets. The final model was further assessed in a 2014–15 validation data set. Objective 2 We developed draft website material that we iteratively tested through four sets of two workshops (one workshop for parents of children who had undergone heart surgery and one workshop for other interested users). Each workshop recruited new participants. The academic psychologists ran two sets of three experiments to explore further understanding of the web content. Data: We used pseudonymised NCHDA data from April 2009 to April 2014. We later unexpectedly received a further year of data (2014–15), which became a prospective validation set. Results: Objective 1 The cleaned 2009–14 data comprised 21,838 30-day surgical episodes, with 539 deaths. The 2014–15 data contained 4207 episodes, with 97 deaths. The final regression model included four new comorbidity groupings. Under cross-validation, the model had a median AUROC curve of 0.83 (total range 0.82 to 0.83), a median calibration slope of 0.92 (total range 0.64 to 1.25) and a median intercept of –0.23 (range –1.08 to 0.85). In the validation set, the AUROC curve was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 0.89], and its calibration slope and intercept were 1.01 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.18) and 0.11 (95% CI –0.45 to 0.67), respectively. We recalibrated the final model on 2009–15 data and updated the PRAiS software. Objective 2 We coproduced a website (http://childrensheartsurgery.info/) that provides interactive exploration of the data, two animations and background information. It was launched in June 2016 and was very well received. Limitations: We needed to use discharge status as a proxy for 30-day life status for the 14% of overseas patients without a NHS number. We did not have sufficient time or resources to extensively test the usability and take-up of the website following its launch. Conclusions: The project successfully achieved its stated aims. A key theme throughout has been the importance of collaboration and coproduction. In particular for aim 2, we generated a great deal of generalisable learning about how to communicate complex clinical and mathematical information. Further work: Extending our codevelopment approach to cover many other aspects of quality measurement across congenital heart disease and other specialised NHS services. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Background: Current pathways for testing fetuses at increased risk of a chromosomal anomaly because of an ultrasound anomaly involve karyotyping after rapid aneuploidy exclusion. Chromosomal microarray (CMA) may detect more clinically significant chromosomal imbalances than karyotyping but evidence to guide UK health service providers on whether or not CMA should replace karyotyping is limited. Objectives: (1) To compare detection rates of copy number variants (CNVs) and laboratory turnaround times (TATs) by karyotyping and CMA in fetuses with ultrasound anomalies, (2) to calculate test costs and the cost per additional pathogenic CNV detected by CMA relative to karyotyping and (3) to determine what factors influence parents’ and health professionals’ choice and decision-making about CMA. Design: A multicentre experimental research cohort study with an additional cost analysis. Setting: A total of 20 fetal medicine units and nine cytogenetic laboratories across England and Wales. Participants: Women with a fetus undergoing quantitative fluorescent polymerase chain reaction (QF-PCR) and karyotyping for clinical indications with (1) one or more structural anomalies identified on ultrasound or (2) an isolated nuchal translucency (NT) of ≥ 3.5 mm. Interventions: Karyotyping and CMA after exclusion of major chromosomal anomalies by QF-PCR. The array design consisted of 8-plex 60,000 60-mer oligonucleotides with a backbone resolution of ≈75 kb. Main outcome measures: Rates of abnormal karyotypes and pathogenic CNVs and variants of unknown significance on CMA. Laboratory TATs for karyotyping and CMA. Costs of karyotyping and CMA and cost per additional pathogenic CNV detected by CMA. Parent and health professional attitudes to CMA. Results: Out of the 1718 probands recruited, 1123 cases with normal QF-PCR and both karyotype and CMA were available for analysis. In the group with structural anomalies (n = 629), CMA detected more CNVs [6.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.4% to 9.3%] and more pathogenic CNVs (3.5%, 95% CI 1.5% to 5.5%) than karyotyping. In the increased NT group (n = 494), CMA detected more CNVs (4.5%, 95% CI 1.8% to 7.1%) than karyotyping but not more pathogenic CNVs. Compared with karyotyping, median TAT was 3 days [interquartile range (IQR) 0–13 days] longer with CMA but when actual set-up to reporting times were compared, CMA was 5 days (IQR 2–8 days) quicker. Cost calculations of the respective pathways indicated that, per patient, CMA is on average £113 more costly than karyotyping. The incremental cost per extra pathogenic CNV detected by CMA was greater in the increased NT than the structural anomaly group (£9439 vs. £3635). Qualitative evaluation suggested that parents find CMA acceptable, despite the uncertainties it may introduce, and that in the main it is acceptable to health professionals and commissioners. Conclusions: CMA is a robust, acceptable and probably cost-effective method to detect more clinically significant chromosomal imbalances in the anomalous fetus. The results suggest that CMA should replace karyotyping in these care pathways. Future work: The application of CMA (and exome sequencing) on cell-free DNA in maternal plasma. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN01058191. Funding: This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, a MRC and NIHR partnership. The funder had no role in the identification, design and conduct of the study and the reporting of the analysis. The funder did recommend the inclusion of the cell-free DNA aspects of the EACH study. Funding was also received from the Great Ormond Street Biomedical Research Centre.

In the original publication of this article [1], “=1 − = 1 − ≈ s” was mistakenly added after the sentence “ In this method, the unadjusted p-values pj are multiplied by the number of primary outcome” in the Methods section, and should be deleted.