Search

Made available in DSpace on 2022-04-28T19:29:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2020-07-01 Medical Research Council Canada National Institute for Health Research Objectives: To develop consensus definitions for the core outcome set for pre-eclampsia. Study design: Potential definitions for individual core outcomes were identified across four formal definition development initiatives, nine national and international guidelines, 12 Cochrane systematic reviews, and 79 randomised trials. Eighty-six definitions were entered into the consensus development meeting. Ten healthcare professionals and three researchers, including six participants who had experience of conducting research in low- and middle-income countries, participated in the consensus development process. The final core outcome set was approved by an international steering group. Results: Consensus definitions were developed for all core outcomes. When considering stroke, pulmonary oedema, acute kidney injury, raised liver enzymes, low platelets, birth weight, and neonatal seizures, consensus definitions were developed specifically for low- and middle-income countries because of the limited availability of diagnostic interventions including computerised tomography, chest x-ray, laboratory tests, equipment, and electroencephalogram monitoring. Conclusions: Consensus on measurements for the pre-eclampsia core outcome set will help to ensure consistency across future randomised trials and systematic reviews. Such standardization should make research evidence more accessible and facilitate the translation of research into clinical practice. Video abstract can be available at: www.dropbox.com/s/ftrgvrfu0u9glqd/6.%20Standardising%20definitions%20in%20teh%20pre-eclampsia%20core%20outcome%20set%3A%20a%20consensus%20development%20study.mp4?dl=0. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences University of Oxford Institute for Women’s Health University College London Department of Women and Children’s Health School of Life Course Sciences King’s College London Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Amsterdam UMC Academic Medical Center Academic Neonatal Medicine Imperial College London Department of Renal Medicine St George Hospital and University of New South Wales Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Feinberg School of Medicine Northwestern University Health Services Research Unit Nuffield Department of Population Health University of Oxford Cedars-Sinai Medical Center London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust Women’s Health Care Research Group Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Monash University Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology University of Adelaide Women’s Health Research Unit Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry School of Health and Related Research University of Sheffield MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research Department of Biostatistics University of Liverpool Centro Rosarino de Estudios Perinatales Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Babcock University Ailem Academic Counselling KU Leuven Universidad Nacional de Colombia Northwell Health University of Oxford Université de Montréal University of Montreal Hospital Centre Ondokuz Mayıs University Prince Sultan Military Medical City Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research King's Fertility Fetal Medicine Research Institute University Hospital Limerick Drexel University University of Aberdeen University of Groningen University of Auckland Haaglanden Medisch Centrum Nottingham University Medical School Utrecht University King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust Jean-Verdier Hospital Downland Practice University of Campinas Université Lyon University of North Carolina School of Medicine South Ural State Medical University Stellenbosch University Irish Neonatal Health Alliance University of Rzeszow Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust University Hospitals of Leicester North Bristol NHS Trust University of Nottingham Soroka University Medical Center Ben Gurion University of the Negev St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Hospitalsenhed Midt University of Glasgow Amsterdam Universitair Medische Centra All India Institute of Medical Sciences Patna Luton and Dunstable University Hospital Khyber Medical University Institution of Medical Sciences Midwife Mid Essex Hospitals NHS Trust University of Oulu University of Michigan Bastyr University Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation University of Toronto Barts Health NHS Trust University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust Burnet Institute Aga Khan University Medical University of Graz Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Mount Royal University Université de Paris Royal Surrey County Hospital University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust University of Washington School of Nursing Evelina London Children's Hospital Neonatal Unit University of Sydney University of Leicester Academic Hospital of Udine NHS Borders Weill Cornell Medical College University of Dundee University of Edinburgh South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute University of Sheffield Monash University and Monash Health United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust University of Kwa Zulu-Natal Beatrix Hospital Keele University Government Medical College Institut Catala de la Salut. IdiapJgol University College London National Center for Child Health and Development Basavatarakam Indo-American Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Axon Anaesthesia Associates Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust St George's University of London Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital Jichi Medical University School of Medicine São Paulo State University National Institute of Public Health University of Kyrenia King Edward Memorial Hospital Amsterdam University Centres University of British Columbia Chulalongkorn University University of Brescia University Of British Columbia University of Montreal Women's Clinic of Tartu University Hospital Universidade Federal de São Paulo Université de Sherbrooke University Hospital of Wales University of Iowa King's College London Westmead Hospital Princess Royal Maternity Leipzig University Centre Hospitalier Public du Cotentin Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust Juntendo University Faculty of Medicine Western Sydney University National Institute of Health Research University of Washington Baylor College of Medicine Capelle aan den Ijssel Sanatorio Anchorena Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust University of Leeds Institute of Medical Sciences UPMC Magee Womens Hospital Penn Medicine Princeton Health University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill São Paulo State University

Made available in DSpace on 2022-04-28T19:28:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2020-11-01 National Institute for Health Research Barts Charity Objective: To develop a core outcome set for pre-eclampsia. Design: Consensus development study. Setting: International. Population: Two hundred and eight-one healthcare professionals, 41 researchers and 110 patients, representing 56 countries, participated. Methods: Modified Delphi method and Modified Nominal Group Technique. Results: A long-list of 116 potential core outcomes was developed by combining the outcomes reported in 79 pre-eclampsia trials with those derived from thematic analysis of 30 in-depth interviews of women with lived experience of pre-eclampsia. Forty-seven consensus outcomes were identified from the Delphi process following which 14 maternal and eight offspring core outcomes were agreed at the consensus development meeting. Maternal core outcomes: death, eclampsia, stroke, cortical blindness, retinal detachment, pulmonary oedema, acute kidney injury, liver haematoma or rupture, abruption, postpartum haemorrhage, raised liver enzymes, low platelets, admission to intensive care required, and intubation and ventilation. Offspring core outcomes: stillbirth, gestational age at delivery, birthweight, small-for-gestational-age, neonatal mortality, seizures, admission to neonatal unit required and respiratory support. Conclusions: The core outcome set for pre-eclampsia should underpin future randomised trials and systematic reviews. Such implementation should ensure that future research holds the necessary reach and relevance to inform clinical practice, enhance women's care and improve the outcomes of pregnant women and their babies. Tweetable abstract: 281 healthcare professionals, 41 researchers and 110 women have developed #preeclampsia core outcomes @HOPEoutcomes @jamesmnduffy. [Correction added on 29 June 2020, after first online publication: the order has been corrected.]. Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences University of Oxford Institute for Women's Health University College London Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Amsterdam UMC Academic Medical Centre Academic Neonatal Medicine Imperial College London Department of Renal Medicine St George Hospital and University of New South Wales Department of Women and Children's Health School of Life Course Sciences King's College London Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Feinberg School of Medicine Northwestern University Health Services Research Unit Nuffield Department of Population Health University of Oxford Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Vascular Biology Research Centre Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute St George's University of London London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Monash University Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology University of Adelaide Women's Health Research Unit Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry School of Health and Related Research University of Sheffield MRC North West Hub for Trials Methodology Research Department of Biostatistics University of Liverpool Centro Rosarino de Estudios Perinatales Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Babcock University Ailem Academic Counselling KU Leuven Universidad Nacional de Colombia Northwell Health University of Oxford Université de Montréal University of Montreal Hospital Centre Ondokuz Mayis University Prince Sultan Military Medical City Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Chandigarh University Hospital Limerick Drexel University University of Aberdeen University of Groningen University of Auckland Haaglanden Medisch Centrum Nottingham University Medical School Utrecht University King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust Jean-Verdier Hospital Downland Practice University of Campinas Université Lyon University of North Carolina School of Medicine South Ural State Medical University Stellenbosch University Irish Neonatal Health Alliance University of Rzeszow Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust University Hospitals of Leicester North Bristol NHS Trust University of Nottingham Soroka University Medical Centre Ben Gurion University of the Negev St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Hospitalsenhed Midt University of Glasgow Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Amsterdam Universitair Medische Centra All India Institute of Medical Sciences Patna Luton and Dunstable University Hospital Khyber Medical University Institution of Medical Sciences Midwife Mid Essex Hospitals NHS Trust University of Oulu University of Michigan Bastyr University Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation University of Toronto Barts Health NHS Trust University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust Burnet Institute Aga Khan University Medical University of Graz Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Mount Royal University Université de Paris Royal Surrey County Hospital University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust University of Washington School of Nursing Evelina London Children's Hospital Neonatal Unit University of Sydney University of Leicester Academic Hospital of Udine NHS Borders Weill Cornell Medical College University of Dundee University of Edinburgh South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute University of Sheffield Monash University and Monash Health United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust University of Kwa Zulu-Natal Beatrix Hospital Keele University Government Medical College Nagpur Institut Catala de la Salut. IdiapJgol University College London National Centre for Child Health and Development Basavatarakam Indo-American Cancer Hospital and Research Institute Axon Anaesthesia Associates Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust St George's University of London Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital Jichi Medical University School of Medicine São Paulo State University National Institute of Public Health University of Kyrenia King Edward Memorial Hospital Amsterdam University Centres University of British Columbia Chulalongkorn University University of Brescia University of Montreal Women's Clinic of Tartu University Hospital Universidade Federal de São Paulo Université de Sherbrooke University Hospital of Wales University of Iowa King's College London Westmead Hospital Princess Royal Maternity Leipzig University Centre Hospitalier Public du Cotentin Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust Juntendo University Faculty of Medicine Western Sydney University National Institute of Health Research University of Washington Baylor College of Medicine Capelle aan den Ijssel Sanatorio Anchorena Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust University of Leeds Institute of Medical Sciences Lahore UPMC Magee Womens Hospital Penn Medicine Princeton Health University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill USA and Dr Arnold G. Zermansky University of Leeds São Paulo State University

Objectives: Triaging patients with suspected high blood pressure for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), on the basis of their clinic blood pressure and characteristics, may reduce the need for ABPM. This study aimed to prospectively validate this new approach using data from routine practice. Design: Prospective observational cohort study. Setting: Ten primary care practices and one hospital in the UK. Participants: Consecutive patients aged >18 years referred for ABPM in routine practice. Interventions: All patients underwent ABPM and had the new triage algorithm (PROOF-BP) applied. Main outcome measures: Proportion correctly classified with hypertension using the triaging strategy compared to the reference standard of daytime ABPM. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) for detecting hypertension. Results: A total of 887 patients (mean age 52.8±16.2 years) were referred for ABPM and enrolled during the study period. The triaging strategy correctly classified hypertensive status in 801 patients (90%, 95% CI 88% to 92%) and had a sensitivity of 97% (95% CI 96% to 99%) and specificity of 76% (95% CI 71% to 81%) for hypertension. The AUROC was 0.86 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.89). Use of triaging, rather than uniform referral for ABPM in routine practice would have resulted in 435 patients (49%, 95% CI 46% to 52%) being referred for ABPM and the remainder managed on the basis of their clinic measurements. Of these, 69 (8%, 95% CI 6% to 10%) would have received treatment that would have been deemed unnecessary had they received ABPM. Conclusions: In a population of patients referred for ABPM, this new triaging approach accurately classified hypertensive status for most, with half the utilisation of ABPM compared with usual care. This triaging strategy can therefore be recommended for diagnosis or management of hypertension in patients where ABPM is being considered, particularly in settings where resources may be limited.

INTRODUCTION: Self-monitoring of blood pressure is effective in reducing blood pressure in hypertension. However previous meta-analyses have shown a considerable amount of heterogeneity between studies, only part of which can be accounted for by meta-regression. This may be due to differences in design, recruited populations, intervention components or results among patient subgroups. To further investigate these differences, an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of self-monitoring of blood pressure will be performed.METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will identify randomised trials that have compared patients with hypertension who are self-monitoring blood pressure with those who are not and invite trialists to provide IPD including clinic and/or ambulatory systolic and diastolic blood pressure at baseline and all follow-up points where both intervention and control groups were measured. Other data requested will include measurement methodology, length of follow-up, cointerventions, baseline demographic (age, gender) and psychosocial factors (deprivation, quality of life), setting, intensity of self-monitoring, self-monitored blood pressure, comorbidities, lifestyle factors (weight, smoking) and presence or not of antihypertensive treatment. Data on all available patients will be included in order to take an intention-to-treat approach. A two-stage procedure for IPD meta-analysis, stratified by trial and taking into account age, sex, diabetes and baseline systolic BP will be used. Exploratory subgroup analyses will further investigate non-linear relationships between the prespecified variables. Sensitivity analyses will assess the impact of trials which have and have not provided IPD.ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study does not include identifiable data. Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed publication and by international conference presentations.CONCLUSIONS: IPD analysis should help the understanding of which self-monitoring interventions for which patient groups are most effective in the control of blood pressure.

Introduction Help4Mood is an interactive system with an embodied virtual agent (avatar) to assist in self-monitoring of patients receiving treatment for depression. Help4Mood supports self-report and biometric monitoring and includes elements of cognitive behavioural therapy. We aimed to evaluate system use and acceptability, to explore likely recruitment and retention rates in a clinical trial and to obtain an estimate of potential treatment response with a view to conducting a future randomised controlled trial (RCT). Methods We conducted a pilot RCT of Help4Mood in three centres, in Romania, Spain and Scotland, UK. Patients with diagnosed depression (major depressive disorder) and current mild/moderate depressive symptoms were randomised to use the system for four weeks in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) or to TAU alone. Results Twenty-seven individuals were randomised and follow-up data were obtained from 21 participants (12/13 Help4Mood, 9/14 TAU). Half of participants randomised to Help4Mood used it regularly (more than 10 times); none used it every day. Acceptability varied between users. Some valued the emotional responsiveness of the system, while others found it too repetitive. Intention to treat analysis showed a small difference in change of Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-2) scores (Help4Mood -5.7 points, TAU -4.2). Post-hoc on-treatment analysis suggested that participants who used Help4Mood regularly experienced a median change in BDI-2 of -8 points. Conclusion Help4Mood is acceptable to some patients receiving treatment for depression although none used it as regularly as intended. Changes in depression symptoms in individuals who used the system regularly reached potentially meaningful levels.

Objective To test the effectiveness of telemonitoring integrated into existing clinical services such that intervention and control groups have access to the same clinical care.Design Researcher blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.Setting UK primary care (Lothian, Scotland).Participants Adults with at least one admission for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the year before randomisation. We excluded people who had other significant lung disease, who were unable to provide informed consent or complete the study, or who had other significant social or clinical problems.Interventions Participants were recruited between 21 May 2009 and 28 March 2011, and centrally randomised to receive telemonitoring or conventional self monitoring. Using a touch screen, telemonitoring participants recorded a daily questionnaire about symptoms and treatment use, and monitored oxygen saturation using linked instruments. Algorithms, based on the symptom score, generated alerts if readings were omitted or breached thresholds. Both groups received similar care from existing clinical services.Main outcome measures The primary outcome was time to hospital admission due to COPD exacerbation up to one year after randomisation. Other outcomes included number and duration of admissions, and validated questionnaire assessments of health related quality of life (using St George’s respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ)), anxiety or depression (or both), self efficacy, knowledge, and adherence to treatment. Analysis was intention to treat.Results Of 256 patients completing the study, 128 patients were randomised to telemonitoring and 128 to usual care; baseline characteristics of each group were similar. The number of days to admission did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 1.44). Over one year, the mean number of COPD admissions was similar in both groups (telemonitoring 1.2 admissions per person (standard deviation 1.9) v control 1.1 (1.6); P=0.59). Mean duration of COPD admissions over one year was also similar between groups (9.5 days per person (standard deviation 19.1) v 8.8 days (15.9); P=0.88). The intervention had no significant effect on SGRQ scores between groups (68.2 (standard deviation 16.3) v 67.3 (17.3); adjusted mean difference 1.39 (95% confidence interval −1.57 to 4.35)), or on other questionnaire outcomes. Conclusions In participants with a history of admission for exacerbations of COPD, telemonitoring was not effective in postponing admissions and did not improve quality of life. The positive effect of telemonitoring seen in previous trials could be due to enhancement of the underpinning clinical service rather than the telemonitoring communication.

Objective To determine if an intervention consisting of telemonitoring and supervision by usual primary care clinicians of home self measured blood pressure and optional patient decision support leads to clinically important reductions in daytime systolic and diastolic ambulatory blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled blood pressure.Design Multicentre randomised controlled trial.Setting 20 primary care practices in south east Scotland.Participants 401 people aged 29-95 years with uncontrolled blood pressure (mean daytime ambulatory measurement ≥135/85 mm Hg but ≤210/135 mm Hg).Intervention Self measurement and transmission of blood pressure readings to a secure website for review by the attending nurse or doctor and participant, with optional automated patient decision support by text or email for six months.Main outcome measures Blinded assessment of mean daytime systolic ambulatory blood pressure six months after randomisation.Results 200 participants were randomised to the intervention and 201 to usual care; primary outcome data were available for 90% of participants (182 and 177, respectively). The mean difference in daytime systolic ambulatory blood pressure adjusted for baseline and minimisation factors between intervention and usual care was 4.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 6.5; P=0.0002) and for daytime diastolic ambulatory blood pressure was 2.3 mm Hg (0.9 to 3.6; P=0.001), with higher values in the usual care group. The intervention was associated with a mean increase of one general practitioner (95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.6; P=0.0002) and 0.6 (0.1 to 1.0; P=0.01) practice nurse consultations during the course of the study.Conclusions Supported self monitoring by telemonitoring is an effective method for achieving clinically important reductions in blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in primary care settings. However, it was associated with increase in use of National Health Service resources. Further research is required to determine if the reduction in blood pressure is maintained in the longer term and if the intervention is cost effective

These proceedings document the various presentations at the Fourth Resilience Engineering Symposium held on June 8-10, 2011, in Sophia-Antipolis, France. The Symposium gathered participants from five continents and provided them with a forum to exchange experiences and problems, and to learn about Resilience Engineering from the latest scientific achievements to recent practical applications. The First Resilience Engineering Symposium was held in Söderköping, Sweden, on October 25-29 2004. The Second Resilience Engineering Symposium was held in Juan-les-Pins, France, on November 8-10 2006, The Third Resilience Engineering Symposium was held in Juan-les-Pins, France, on October 28-30 2008. Since the first Symposium, resilience engineering has fast become recognised as a valuable complement to the established approaches to safety. Both industry and academia have recognised that resilience engineering offers valuable conceptual and practical basis that can be used to attack the problems of interconnectedness and intractability of complex socio-technical systems. The concepts and principles of resilience engineering have been tested and refined by applications in such fields as air traffic management, offshore production, patient safety, and commercial fishing. Continued work has also made it clear that resilience is neither limited to handling threats and disturbances, nor confined to situations where something can go wrong. Today, resilience is understood as the intrinsic ability of a system to adjust its functioning prior to, during, or following changes and disturbances, so that it can sustain required operations under both expected and unexpected conditions. This definition emphasizes the ability to continue functioning, rather than simply to react and recover from disturbances and the ability to deal with diverse conditions of functioning, expected as well as unexpected. For anyone who is interested in learning more about Resilience Engineering, the books published in the Ashgate Studies in Resilience Engineering provide an excellent starting point. Another sign that Resilience Engineering is coming of age is the establishment of the Resilience Engineering Association. The goal of this association is to provide a forum for coordination and exchange of experiences, by bringing together researchers and professionals working in the Resilience Engineering domain and organisations applying or willing to apply Resilience Engineering principles in their operations. The Resilience Engineering Association held its first General Assembly during the Fourth Symposium, and will in the future play an active role in the organisation of symposia and other activities related to Resilience Engineering.

Our earlier work on socio-technical hazards identified some key new hazard classes: Boundary Hazards, Evolutionary Hazards, and Performativity Hazards. These classes help ground an account of emergent risk in socio-technical systems. From the insights underpinning these new hazard classes we consider how these contribute to flexibility or brittleness in organizational responses to events. We exemplify these ideas in the healthcare domain.