Search

OBJECTIVES: To (i) evaluate psychological distress and general health in Australian golfers and compare with a general population-based sample, and (ii) explore the relationship between playing golf, psychological distress and general health in individuals with osteoarthritis. DESIGN: Cross sectional. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey collected outcomes in 459 Australian Golfers (Kessler-10 Psychological Distress Scale, Short-Form 12 (Health Status), International Physical Activity Questionnaire, osteoarthritis status). Outcomes were compared between Australian golfers and a general population-based sample (Australian Health Survey, n = 16,370). Modified Poisson regression estimated the relationship between playing golf and general health in all participants and a subgroup with osteoarthritis (n = 128 golfers, n = 2216 general population). All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, education and smoking status. RESULTS: Playing golf was associated with lower psychological distress (adjusted mean difference (95 % confidence interval) -2.5 (-4.1 to -0.9)) and a greater likelihood of reporting good to excellent general health (adjusted relative risk (95 % confidence interval) 1.09 (1.05 to 1.13)) compared to the general population. Amongst people with osteoarthritis, playing golf was associated with lower psychological distress (adjusted mean difference -4.0 (95 % confidence interval -6.5 to -1.5)) and a greater likelihood of reporting good to excellent general health (adjusted relative risk (95 % confidence interval) 1.3 (1.2 to 1.4)). CONCLUSIONS: Golfers had lower levels of psychological distress and better general health than the general population, and this relationship was strongest in individuals with osteoarthritis.

Background: In 2020, the National Health Service Low-Calorie Diet Programme (NHS-LCD) was launched, piloting a total diet (TDR) replacement intervention with behaviour change support for people living with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) and excess weight. Four independent service providers were commissioned to design and deliver theoretically grounded programmes in localities across England. Aims: 1) to develop a logic model detailing how the NHS-LCD programme is expected to produce changes in health behaviour, and (2) to analyse and evaluate the use of behaviour change theory in providers’ NHS-LCD Programme designs. Methods: A documentary review was conducted. Information was extracted from the NHS-LCD service specification documents on how the programme expected to produce outcomes. The Theory Coding Scheme (TCS) was used to analyse theory use in providers’ programme design documents. Results: The NHS-LCD logic model included techniques aimed at enhancing positive outcome expectations of programme participation and beliefs about social approval of behaviour change, to facilitate programme uptake and behaviour change intentions. This was followed by techniques aimed at shaping knowledge and enhancing the ability of participants to self-regulate their health behaviours, alongside a supportive social environment and person-centred approach. Application and type of behaviour change theory within service providers’ programme designs varied. One provider explicitly linked theory to programme content; two providers linked 63% and 70% of intervention techniques to theory; and there was limited underpinning theory identified in the programme design documents for one of the providers. Conclusion: The nature and extent of theory use underpinning the NHS-LCD varied greatly amongst service providers, with some but not all intervention techniques explicitly linked to theory. How this relates to outcomes across providers should be evaluated. It is recommended that explicit theory use in

BACKGROUND: NHS England commissioned four independent service providers to pilot low-calorie diet programmes to drive weight loss, improve glycaemia and potentially achieve remission of Type 2 Diabetes across 10 localities. Intervention fidelity might contribute to programme success. Previous research has illustrated a drift in fidelity in the design and delivery of other national diabetes programmes. AIMS: (1) To describe and compare the programme designs across the four service providers; (2) To assess the fidelity of programme designs to the NHS England service specification. METHODS: The NHS England service specification documents and each provider's programme design documents were double-coded for key intervention content using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication Framework and the Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy. RESULTS: The four providers demonstrated fidelity to most but not all of the service parameters stipulated in the NHS England service specification. Providers included between 74% and 87% of the 23 BCTs identified in the NHS specification. Twelve of these BCTs were included by all four providers; two BCTs were consistently absent. An additional seven to 24 BCTs were included across providers. CONCLUSIONS: A loss of fidelity for some service parameters and BCTs was identified across the provider's designs; this may have important consequences for programme delivery and thus programme outcomes. Furthermore, there was a large degree of variation between providers in the presence and dosage of additional BCTs. How these findings relate to the fidelity of programme delivery and variation in programme outcomes and experiences across providers will be examined.

INTRODUCTION: Rugby football (Union and League) provides physical activity (PA) with related physical and mental health benefits. However, as a collision sport, rugby research and media coverage predominantly focus on injuries in elite players while the overall impact on health and well-being remains unclear. This study aims to provide a greater understanding of the risks and benefits of rugby participation in a diverse sample of men and women, current and former rugby Union and League players from recreational to the elite level of play. We will explore: (1) joint-specific injuries and concussion; (2) joint pain and osteoarthritis (OA); (3) medical and mental health conditions; (4) PA and sedentary behaviour and (5) well-being (quality of life, flourishing and resilience). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Rugby Health and Well-being Study is designed in two phases: (1) a UK-wide cross-sectional survey and (2) cross-validation using health register data from Scotland. Participants will be at least 16 years old, current or former rugby players who have played rugby for at least one season. We will report standardised, level of play-, sex- and age-stratified prevalence of joint injury, concussion, medical conditions and PA. We will describe injury/concussion prevention expectations and protective equipment use. Rugby-related factors associated with injury, pain, OA, PA, health and well-being will be explored in regression models. We will compare joint pain intensity and duration, elements of pain perception and well-being between recreational and elite players and further investigate these associations in regression models while controlling for confounding variables. In the second phase, we will validate self-reported with health register data, and provide further information on healthcare use. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Yorkshire and the Humber-Leeds East Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 19/HY/0377) has approved this study (IRAS project ID 269424). The results w

STUDY QUESTION: What are the key core outcomes to be reported in studies on polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: We identified 3 generic and 30 specific core outcomes in 6 specialist domains: metabolic (8), reproductive (7), pregnancy (10), oncological (1), psychological (1) and long-term outcomes (1). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Research reporting PCOS is heterogeneous with high variation in outcome selection, definition and quality. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Evidence synthesis and a modified Delphi method with e-surveys were used as well as a consultation meeting. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Overall, 71 health professionals and 123 lay consumers (women with lived experience of PCOS and members of advocacy and peer support groups) from 17 high-, middle- and low-income countries were involved in this analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The final core outcome set included 3 generic outcomes (BMI, quality of life, treatment satisfaction) that are applicable to all studies on women with PCOS and 30 specific outcomes that were categorised into six specialist domains: 8 metabolic outcomes (waist circumference, type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance, impaired glucose tolerance, hypertension, coronary heart disease, lipid profile, venous thromboembolic disease); 7 reproductive outcomes [viable pregnancy (confirmed by ultrasound including singleton, twins and higher multiples), clinical and biochemical hyperandrogenism, menstrual regularity, reproductive hormonal profile, chronic anovulation, ovulation stimulation success including the number of stimulated follicles >= 12 mm, incidence and severity of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome]; 10 pregnancy outcomes (live birth, miscarriage, stillbirth, neonatal mortality, gestational weight gain, gestational diabetes, preterm birth, hypertensive disease in pregnancy, baby birth weight, major congenital abnormalities); 3 psychological outcomes (depression, anxiety, eating disorders); 1 oncological

STUDY QUESTION: What are the key core outcomes to be reported in studies on polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: We identified 3 generic and 30 specific core outcomes in 6 specialist domains: metabolic (8), reproductive (7), pregnancy (10), oncological (1), psychological (1) and long-term outcomes (1). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Research reporting PCOS is heterogeneous with high variation in outcome selection, definition and quality. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Evidence synthesis and a modified Delphi method with e-surveys were used as well as a consultation meeting. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Overall, 71 health professionals and 123 lay consumers (women with lived experience of PCOS and members of advocacy and peer support groups) from 17 high-, middle- and low-income countries were involved in this analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The final core outcome set included 3 generic outcomes (BMI, quality of life, treatment satisfaction) that are applicable to all studies on women with PCOS and 30 specific outcomes that were categorised into six specialist domains: 8 metabolic outcomes (waist circumference, type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance, impaired glucose tolerance, hypertension, coronary heart disease, lipid profile, venous thromboembolic disease); 7 reproductive outcomes [viable pregnancy (confirmed by ultrasound including singleton, twins and higher multiples), clinical and biochemical hyperandrogenism, menstrual regularity, reproductive hormonal profile, chronic anovulation, ovulation stimulation success including the number of stimulated follicles ≥ 12 mm, incidence and severity of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome]; 10 pregnancy outcomes (live birth, miscarriage, stillbirth, neonatal mortality, gestational weight gain, gestational diabetes, preterm birth, hypertensive disease in pregnancy, baby birth weight, major congenital abnormalities); 3 psychological outcomes (depression, anxiety, eating disorders); 1 onco