Search

BackgroundElectronic health records (EHRs) are a cost-effective approach to provide the necessary foundations for clinical trial research. The ability to use EHRs in real-world clinical settings allows for pragmatic approaches to intervention studies with the emerging adult HIV population within these settings; however, the regulatory components related to the use of EHR data in multisite clinical trials poses unique challenges that researchers may find themselves unprepared to address, which may result in delays in study implementation and adversely impact study timelines, and risk noncompliance with established guidance.ObjectiveAs part of the larger Adolescent Trials Network (ATN) for HIV/AIDS Interventions Protocol 162b (ATN 162b) study that evaluated clinical-level outcomes of an intervention including HIV treatment and pre-exposure prophylaxis services to improve retention within the emerging adult HIV population, the objective of this study is to highlight the regulatory process and challenges in the implementation of a multisite pragmatic trial using EHRs to assist future researchers conducting similar studies in navigating the often time-consuming regulatory process and ensure compliance with adherence to study timelines and compliance with institutional and sponsor guidelines.MethodsEight sites were engaged in research activities, with 4 sites selected from participant recruitment venues as part of the ATN, who participated in the intervention and data extraction activities, and an additional 4 sites were engaged in data management and analysis. The ATN 162b protocol team worked with site personnel to establish the necessary regulatory infrastructure to collect EHR data to evaluate retention in care and viral suppression, as well as para-data on the intervention component to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the mobile health intervention. Methods to develop this infrastructure included site-specific training activities and the development of both institutional reliance and data use agreements.ResultsDue to variations in site-specific activities, and the associated regulatory implications, the study team used a phased approach with the data extraction sites as phase 1 and intervention sites as phase 2. This phased approach was intended to address the unique regulatory needs of all participating sites to ensure that all sites were properly onboarded and all regulatory components were in place. Across all sites, the regulatory process spanned 6 months for the 4 data extraction and intervention sites, and up to 10 months for the data management and analysis sites.ConclusionsThe process for engaging in multisite clinical trial studies using EHR data is a multistep, collaborative effort that requires proper advanced planning from the proposal stage to adequately implement the necessary training and infrastructure. Planning, training, and understanding the various regulatory aspects, including the necessity of data use agreements, reliance agreements, external institutional review board review, and engagement with clinical sites, are foremost considerations to ensure successful implementation and adherence to pragmatic trial timelines and outcomes.

Background: Diabetes self-management education and support can be effectively and efficiently delivered in primary care in the form of shared medical appointments (SMAs). Comparative effectiveness of SMA delivery features such as topic choice, multi-disciplinary care teams, and peer mentor involvement is not known. Objective: To compare effects of standardized and patient-driven models of diabetes SMAs on patient-level diabetes outcomes. Design: Pragmatic cluster randomized trial. Participants: A total of 1060 adults with type 2 diabetes in 22 primary care practices. Interventions: Practice personnel delivered the 6-session Targeted Training in Illness Management (TTIM) curriculum using either standardized (set content delivered by a health educator) or patient-driven SMAs (patient-selected topic order delivered by health educators, behavioral health providers [BHPs], and peer mentors). Main measures: Outcomes included self-reported diabetes distress and diabetes self-care behaviors from baseline and follow-up surveys (assessed at 1st and final SMA session), and HbA1c, BMI, and blood pressure from electronic health records. Analyses used descriptive statistics, linear regression, and linear mixed models. Key Results: Both standardized and patient-driven SMAs effectively improved diabetes distress, self-care behaviors, BMI (− 0.29 on average), and HbA1c (− 0.45% (mmol/mol) on average, 8.3 to 7.8%). Controlling for covariates, there was a small, significant effect of condition on overall diabetes distress in favor of standardized SMAs (F(1,841) = 4.3, p =.04), attributable to significant effects of condition on emotion and regimen distress subscales. There was a small, significant effect of condition on diastolic blood pressure in favor of standardized SMAs (F(1,5199) = 4.50, p =.03). There were no other differences between conditions. Conclusions: Both SMA models using the TTIM curriculum yielded significant improvement in diabetes distress, self-care, and HbA1c. Patient-driven diabetes SMAs involving BHPs and peer mentors and topic selection did not lead to better clinical or patient-reported outcomes than standardized diabetes SMAs facilitated by a health educator following a set topic order. NIH trial registry number: NCT03590041. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care can be an important setting for communication and advance care planning (ACP), including for those with dementia and their families. The study objective was to explore experiences with a pragmatic trial of a communication and ACP intervention, SHARING Choices, in primary care for older adults with and without dementia. Method s : We conducted qualitative interviews using tailored semi‐structured guides with three groups: ACP facilitators who conducted the intervention; clinicians, managers, and administrators from sites randomized to the intervention; and patients and families who met with ACP facilitators. We used thematic analysis to identify and synthesize emergent themes based on key Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research concepts and Proctor's Implementation Outcomes, triangulating the three groups' perspectives. Results: We identified five key themes. For acceptability, perceptions of the intervention were mostly positive, although some components were not generally implemented. For adoption, respondents perceived that ACP facilitators mainly focused on conducting ACP, although facilitators often did not implement the ADRD and family engagement aspects with the ACP. For relational connections, ACP facilitator—practice and clinician communication and engagement were key to how the intervention was implemented. For adaptability, ACP facilitators and health systems adapted how the ACP facilitation component was implemented to local preferences and over time, given the pragmatic nature of the trial. And, for sustainability, ACP facilitators and clinicians/managers/facilitators were positive that the intervention should be continued but noted barriers to its sustainability. Patients and families generally did not recall the intervention. Conclusions: ACP facilitators and clinicians, managers, and administrators had positive perceptions of the ACP facilitator component of the intervention in this pragmatic trial with adaptation to local preferences. However, engaging those with dementia and families was more challenging in the implementation of this intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Despite the increased availability of evidence-based treatments for chronic pain, many patients in rural areas experience poor access to services. Patients receiving care through the VA may also need to navigate multiple systems of care. Objective To examine the effectiveness of a remotely delivered collaborative care intervention for improving pain interference among veterans with high-impact chronic pain living in rural areas. Design We will conduct a four-site pragmatic effectiveness trial of remotely delivered collaborative care for high-impact chronic pain. Participants (n  = 608) will be randomized to the Tele-Collaborative Outreach to Rural Patients (CORPs) intervention or to minimally enhanced usual care (MEUC). Participants randomized to CORPs will complete a biopsychosocial assessment and five follow-up sessions with a nurse care manager (NCM), who will collaborate with a consulting clinician to provide personalized recommendations and care management. CORP participants will also be invited to a virtual 6-session pain education group class. Participants randomized to MEUC will receive a one-time education session with the NCM to review available pain services. All participants will complete quarterly research assessments for one year. The primary study outcome is pain interference. This trial will oversample veterans of female birth sex and minoritized race or ethnicity to test heterogeneity of treatment effects across these patient characteristics. We will conduct an implementation process evaluation and incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. Discussion This pragmatic trial will test the real-world effectiveness of a remotely delivered collaborative care intervention for chronic pain. Study findings will inform future implementation efforts to support potential uptake of the intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Using one of the largest heart failure pragmatic trials (CONNECT-HF; (Care Optimization Through Patient and Hospital Engagement For HF), we assessed the completeness and validity of remote follow-up, integrating participant-reported via a centralized call center and site-reported approaches. • Both participant-reported via centralized call center- and site-reported approaches substantially missed hospitalization events. In contrast, both approaches demonstrated high and comparable adjudication rates for hospitalizations among the reported hospitalization events. • Our study highlighted that integrating both approaches remains essential to capture and validate effective clinical outcomes in the context of current pragmatic trials. Randomized controlled trials typically require study-specific visits, which can burden participants and sites. Remote follow-up, such as centralized call centers for participant-reported or site-reported, holds promise for reducing costs and enhancing the pragmatism of trials. In this secondary analysis of the CONNECT-HF (Care Optimization Through Patient and Hospital Engagement For HF) trial, we aimed to evaluate the completeness and validity of the remote follow-up process. The CONNECT-HF trial evaluated the effect of a post-discharge quality-improvement intervention for heart failure compared to usual care for up to 1 year. Suspected events were reported either by participants or by health care proxies through a centralized call center or by sites through medical-record queries. When potential hospitalization events were suspected, additional medical records were collected and adjudicated. Among 5942 potential hospitalizations, 18% were only participant-reported, 28% were reported by both participants and sites, and 50% were only site-reported. Concordance rates between the participant/site reports and adjudication for hospitalization were high: 87% participant-reported, 86% both, and 86% site-reported. Rates of adjudicated heart failure hospitalization events among adjudicated all-cause hospitalization were lower but also consistent: 45% participant-reported, 50% both, and 50% site-reported. Participant-only and site-only reports missed a substantial number of hospitalization events. We observed similar concordance between participant/site reports and adjudication for hospitalizations. Combining participant-reported and site-reported outcomes data is important to capture and validate hospitalizations effectively in pragmatic heart failure trials. Both approaches (centralized call center and site reports) substantially missed hospitalization events. However, both approaches demonstrated high and comparably adjudicated hospitalization rates among the reported potential hospitalization events. Integrating both approaches remains essential to capture and validate clinical outcomes effectively.   [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Methods Conclusion Benefits of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF/HFmrEF) have not been established. Conventional randomized controlled trials are complex and expensive. The Spironolactone Initiation Registry Randomized Interventional Trial in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (SPIRRIT‐HFpEF) is a unique pragmatic registry‐based randomized controlled trial.SPIRRIT‐HFpEF is a multicentre, prospective, randomized, open‐label, blinded endpoint trial conducted on platforms in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) and the United States (US) Trial Innovation Network. Patients with HFpEF/HFmrEF are randomized 1:1 to spironolactone (or eplerenone) in addition to usual care, versus usual care alone. The primary outcome is total number of cardiovascular deaths and hospitalizations for heart failure. Outcomes are collected from Swedish administrative complete coverage registries and a US call centre and subsequently adjudicated. Simple eligibility criteria were based on data available in SwedeHF: heart failure as outpatient or at discharge from hospital, left ventricular ejection fraction ≥40%, N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide >300 ng/L (in sinus rhythm) or >750 ng/L (in atrial fibrillation), with pre‐specified adjustment for elevated body mass index, and chronic loop diuretic use. Power and sample size assessments were based on an event‐driven design allowing enrolment over approximately 6 years, and application of hazard ratios from the TOPCAT trial, Americas subset. The final sample size is expected to be approximately 2400 patients.SPIRRIT‐HFpEF will be informative on the effectiveness of generic MRAs in HFpEF and HFmrEF, and on the feasibility of conducting pragmatic and registry‐based trials in heart failure and other chronic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Bladder cancer poses a significant public health burden, with high recurrence and progression rates in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Current treatment options include bladder-sparing therapies (BST) and radical cystectomy, both with associated risks and benefits. However, evidence supporting optimal management decisions for patients with recurrent high-grade NMIBC remains limited, leading to uncertainty for patients and clinicians. The CISTO (Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options) Study aims to address this critical knowledge gap by comparing outcomes between patients undergoing BST and radical cystectomy. METHODS: The CISTO Study is a pragmatic, prospective observational cohort trial across 36 academic and community urology practices in the US. The study will enroll 572 patients with a diagnosis of recurrent high-grade NMIBC who select management with either BST or radical cystectomy. The primary outcome is health-related quality of life (QOL) at 12 months as measured with the EORTC-QLQ-C30. Secondary outcomes include bladder cancer-specific QOL, progression-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and financial toxicity. The study will also assess patient preferences for treatment outcomes. Statistical analyses will employ targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) to address treatment selection bias and confounding by indication. DISCUSSION: The CISTO Study is powered to detect clinically important differences in QOL and cancer-specific survival between the two treatment approaches. By including a diverse patient population, the study also aims to assess outcomes across the following patient characteristics: age, gender, race, burden of comorbid health conditions, cancer severity, caregiver status, social determinants of health, and rurality. Treatment outcomes may also vary by patient preferences, health literacy, and baseline QOL. The CISTO Study will fill a crucial evidence gap in the management of recurrent high-grade NMIBC, providing evidence-based guidance for patients and clinicians in choosing between BST and radical cystectomy. The CISTO study will provide an evidence-based approach to identifying the right treatment for the right patient at the right time in the challenging clinical setting of recurrent high-grade NMIBC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03933826. Registered on May 1, 2019.

Abstract Background High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been increasingly adopted in the past 2 decades as a mode of respiratory support for children hospitalized with bronchiolitis. The growing use of HFNC despite a paucity of high-quality data regarding the therapy’s efficacy has led to concerns about overutilization. We developed an electronic health record (EHR) embedded, quality improvement (QI) oriented clinical trial to determine whether standardized management of HFNC weaning guided by clinical decision support (CDS) results in a reduction in the duration of HFNC compared to usual care for children with bronchiolitis. Methods The design and summary of the statistical analysis plan for the REspiratory SupporT for Efficient and cost-Effective Care (REST EEC; “rest easy”) trial are presented. The investigators hypothesize that CDS-coupled, standardized HFNC weaning will reduce the duration of HFNC, the trial’s primary endpoint, for children with bronchiolitis compared to usual care. Data supporting trial design and eventual analyses are collected from the EHR and other real world data sources using existing informatics infrastructure and QI data sources. The trial workflow, including randomization and deployment of the intervention, is embedded within the EHR of a large children’s hospital using existing vendor features. Trial simulations indicate that by assuming a true hazard ratio effect size of 1.27, equivalent to a 6-h reduction in the median duration of HFNC, and enrolling a maximum of 350 children, there will be a > 0.75 probability of declaring superiority (interim analysis posterior probability of intervention effect > 0.99 or final analysis posterior probability of intervention effect > 0.9) and a > 0.85 probability of declaring superiority or the CDS intervention showing promise (final analysis posterior probability of intervention effect > 0.8). Iterative plan-do-study-act cycles are used to monitor the trial and provide targeted education to the workforce. Discussion Through incorporation of the trial into usual care workflows, relying on QI tools and resources to support trial conduct, and relying on Bayesian inference to determine whether the intervention is superior to usual care, REST EEC is a learning health system intervention that blends health system operations with active evidence generation to optimize the use of HFNC and associated patient outcomes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05909566. Registered on June 18, 2023.

Hyun Ji Cha,1,* Chang-Hyun Han,2,3,* Ju Hyun Jeon,1 Jeong Kyo Jeong,1 In Chul Jung,4 Changsop Yang,2 Byoung-Kab Kang,2 Min Ji Kim,5 Young Eun Choi,5 Young Il Kim1 1Department of Acupuncture & Moxibustion Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Daejeon University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea; 2Korean Medicine Research Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea; 3Korean Convergence Medicine, University of Science & Technology (UST), Campus of Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea; 4Department of Oriental Neuropsychiatry, College of Korean Medicine, Daejeon University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea; 5Clinical Research Coordinating Team, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Young Il Kim, Tel +82-42-470-9137, Email omdkim01@dju.krPurpose: Pharmacopuncture therapy has been used in the conservative treatment of rotator cuff disease adjuvant to acupuncture treatment. Despite the increasing utilization of pharmacopuncture therapy, there is still a lack of high-quality research to support its effectiveness. This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of pharmacopuncture therapy adjuvant to acupuncture treatment for rotator cuff disease.Patients and Methods: This was a parallel-grouped, pragmatic randomized controlled, pilot study. Forty patients were randomly allocated to either the experimental or the control group. All patients received acupuncture treatment for four weeks, and pharmacopuncture was additionally administered to the experimental group. After eight treatments were delivered over four weeks, follow-up assessments were performed. The primary outcome was the mean change in the visual analog scale (VAS) score for shoulder pain from baseline to visit 8. Secondary outcomes included shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) at visits 4, 8, and 9, shoulder range of motion (ROM) at visits 4, 8, and 9, EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) at visits 8 and 9, patient global impression of change (PGIC) at visits 8 and 9, and mean rescue medication consumption at visits 8 and 9.Results: Both groups showed that each treatment effectively improved rotator cuff disease in most assessments. Particularly, the group that received acupuncture plus pharmacopuncture required fewer rescue medications than the group that received acupuncture alone. However, there was little statistically significant difference between the two groups. There were no serious adverse events experienced by patients in this study.Conclusion: Although there was little statistical difference between the two groups, the combination of acupuncture and pharmacopuncture for rotator cuff disease was associated with a reduction in the rescue medicine dosage compared with acupuncture alone. Also, it confirmed the safety of pharmacopuncture therapy. This pilot study would help design future research on the effectiveness of pharmacopuncture in rotator cuff disease.Keywords: rotator cuff disease, pharmacopuncture, acupuncture, pragmatic trial, randomized controlled trial

To investigate the usability and effectiveness of standardized circuit class group training (CCT) compared to individualized goal-directed group training (GDT) in subacute stroke survivors. This study consists of three parts. Part 1 involved a pragmatic, non-randomized controlled trial with subacute participants and their therapists, who participated in four weeks either CCT or GDT. Superiority of the intervention was defined as significantly larger improvement on the Motor Activity Log for patients and lower workload for therapists. In Part 2, six additional workstations were developed for CCT. Part 3 replicated the study of Part 1 with the expanded CCT. Part 1 showed no difference in effectiveness between training methods. CCT did not match the rehabilitation goals of the patient sufficiently, however mental workload seemed lower for therapists. An expansion of CCT could improve the match between the patient's goals and the training (Part 2). Results of Part 3 showed again no difference in effectiveness between methods. CCT was however perceived as less engaging compared to GDT, but mental load for therapists remained lower. A standardized training could reduce the mental workload for therapists, but patients seemed less engaged. A combination of both might be most beneficial.Trial registration: Dutch Trial Register: NL8844 and NL9471 Providing a standardized training program after stroke reduces therapists' mental workload. Individualized goal-directed group training results in the best achievement of rehabilitation goals. A combination of standardized and individual training would use best of both intervention modalities. Patients should be involved in the co-creation developing process of training programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: High flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been increasingly adopted in the past 2 decades as a mode of respiratory support for children hospitalized with bronchiolitis. The growing use of HFNC despite a paucity of high-quality data regarding the therapy's efficacy has led to concerns about overutilization. We developed an electronic health record (EHR) embedded, quality improvement (QI) oriented clinical trial to determine whether standardized management of HFNC weaning guided by clinical decision support (CDS) results in a reduction in the duration of HFNC compared to usual care for children with bronchiolitis. Methods: The design and summary of the statistical analysis plan for the REspiratory SupporT for Efficient and cost-Effective Care (REST EEC; "rest easy") trial are presented. The investigators hypothesize that CDS-coupled, standardized HFNC weaning will reduce the duration of HFNC, the trial's primary endpoint, for children with bronchiolitis compared to usual care. Data supporting trial design and eventual analyses are collected from the EHR and other real world data sources using existing informatics infrastructure and QI data sources. The trial workflow, including randomization and deployment of the intervention, is embedded within the EHR of a large children's hospital using existing vendor features. Trial simulations indicate that by assuming a true hazard ratio effect size of 1.27, equivalent to a 6-h reduction in the median duration of HFNC, and enrolling a maximum of 350 children, there will be a > 0.75 probability of declaring superiority (interim analysis posterior probability of intervention effect > 0.99 or final analysis posterior probability of intervention effect > 0.9) and a > 0.85 probability of declaring superiority or the CDS intervention showing promise (final analysis posterior probability of intervention effect > 0.8). Iterative plan-do-study-act cycles are used to monitor the trial and provide targeted education to the workforce. Discussion: Through incorporation of the trial into usual care workflows, relying on QI tools and resources to support trial conduct, and relying on Bayesian inference to determine whether the intervention is superior to usual care, REST EEC is a learning health system intervention that blends health system operations with active evidence generation to optimize the use of HFNC and associated patient outcomes. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05909566. Registered on June 18, 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To discuss the utility of pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) to help advance research in eating disorders (EDs). Methods: We describe challenges associated with traditional explanatory research trials and examine PCTs as an alternative, including a review of the PRECIS‐2 tool. Results: There are many challenges associated with the design and completion of traditional RCTs within the field of EDs. Pragmatic clinical trials are studies that closely align with conditions available in everyday practice and focus on outcomes that are relevant to patients and clinicians. Results of PCTS maximize applicability and generalizability to clinical settings. Discussion: Available therapies established for the treatment of EDs provide remission rates that rarely exceed 50%, implying a need for additional research on new or adjunctive treatments. In addition to a general overview of PCTs, we draw upon published literature and our own experiences involving adjunctive olanzapine for the treatment of children and youth with anorexia nervosa to help highlight challenges associated with randomized controlled trial (RCT) design and implementation, and offer pragmatic suggestions that would allow patients greater choice in treatment trials, while at the same time capturing outcomes that are most likely to advance treatment efforts. Conclusions: Pragmatic clinical trials provide alternatives to RCT design that can help bolster research in EDs that aims to explore real‐world effects of interventions. Public Significance: Available therapies established for the treatment of eating disorders (EDs) in children and adolescents provide remission rates that rarely exceed 50%, implying a need for additional research on new or adjunctive treatments. In this article, we discuss the utility of pragmatic trials to help promote research that can help advance knowledge that is relevant to clinical care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND/PROBLEM: Advance care planning (ACP) pragmatic trials are needed. PROPOSED SOLUTION: We determined key system-level activities to implement ACP interventions for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial. We identified patients with serious illness from 50 primary care clinics across three University of California health systems using a validated algorithm. If patients lacked documented ACP within the last 3 years, they were eligible for an intervention: (Arm 1) an advance directive (AD); (Arm 2) AD + PREPAREforYourCare.org; (Arm 3) AD + PREPARE + lay health navigator outreach. Triggered by an appointment, we mailed and sent interventions through automated electronic health record (EHR) messaging. We collaborated with patients/caregivers, clinicians, payors, and national/health system leader advisors. We are currently finalizing 24 months follow-up data. OUTCOMES/METHODS: We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) frameworks to track secular trends and implementation efforts. KEY MESSAGE/RESULTS: Required multisite, system-level activities: 1) obtaining leadership, legal/privacy, and EHR approvals; 2) standardizing ACP documentation; 3) providing clinician education; 3) validating an automated serious illness identification algorithm; 4) standardizing ACP messaging with input from over 100 key advisors; 5) monitoring secular trends (e.g., COVID); and 6) standardizing ACP workflows (e.g., scanned ADs). Of 8707 patients with serious illness, 6883 were eligible for an intervention. Across all arms, 99% received the mailed intervention, 78.3% had an active patient portal (64.2% opened intervention), and 90.5% of arm three patients (n = 2243) received navigator outreach. LESSONS LEARNED: Implementing a multisite health system-wide ACP program and pragmatic trial, with automated EHR-based cohort identification and intervention delivery, requires a high level of multidisciplinary key advisor engagement, standardization, and monitoring. These activities provide guidance for the implementation of other large-scale, population-based ACP efforts.

Background: Although several studies have reported the effectiveness of acupuncture treatment for adhesive capsulitis (AC), research on pharmacopuncture therapy for AC remains limited. We compared the effectiveness and safety of pharmacopuncture and physiotherapy for AC. Methods: This pragmatic, randomized, controlled, parallel-group pilot study enrolled patients with limitations of shoulder movement and a numeric rating scale (NRS) score for shoulder pain ≥5 randomized (1:1) to the pharmacopuncture therapy (PPT) and physiotherapy (PT) groups. Treatment sessions were administered twice weekly for 6 weeks, and the participants were followed up for 13 weeks after randomization. The primary outcome was the NRS score for shoulder pain, and the secondary outcomes were the visual analog scale (VAS), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), range of motion (ROM), patient global impression of change (PGIC), EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), and Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12) scores. The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was set as the primary analysis. Results: Among 50 participants, for the primary endpoint (week 7) the PPT group showed a significantly superior improvement in NRS, VAS, SPADI, ROM for flexion, ROM for abduction, and EQ-5D-5L scores. The ROM for extension, ROM for adduction, physical component summary, and patient global impression of change were significantly better in the PPT than in the PT group, and these effects were sustained until week 13. Conclusion: In this pilot study, PPT showed better effects than PT, confirming the feasibility of a follow-up main study. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05292482) and cris.nih.go.kr (KCT0007198).

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials are the gold standard for generating clinical practice evidence, but follow-up and outcome ascertainment are resource-intensive. Electronic health record (EHR) data from routine care can be a cost-effective means of follow-up, but concordance with trial-ascertained outcomes is less well-studied. METHODS: We linked EHR and trial data for participants of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), a randomized trial comparing intensive and standard blood pressure targets. Among participants with available EHR data concurrent to trial-ascertained outcomes, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for EHR-recorded cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, using the gold standard of SPRINT-adjudicated outcomes (myocardial infarction (MI)/acute coronary syndrome (ACS), heart failure, stroke, and composite CVD events). We additionally compared the incidence of non-CVD adverse events (hyponatremia, hypernatremia, hypokalemia, hyperkalemia, bradycardia, and hypotension) in trial versus EHR data. RESULTS: 2468 SPRINT participants were included (mean age 68 (SD 9) years; 26% female). EHR data demonstrated ≥80% sensitivity and specificity, and ≥ 99% negative predictive value for MI/ACS, heart failure, stroke, and composite CVD events. Positive predictive value ranged from 26% (95% CI; 16%, 38%) for heart failure to 52% (95% CI; 37%, 67%) for MI/ACS. EHR data uniformly identified more non-CVD adverse events and higher incidence rates compared with trial ascertainment. CONCLUSIONS: These results support a role for EHR data collection in clinical trials, particularly for capturing laboratory-based adverse events. EHR data may be an efficient source for CVD outcome ascertainment, though there is clear benefit from adjudication to avoid false positives.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a growing epidemic and is independently associated with increased risk of death, chronic kidney disease (CKD) and cardiovascular events. Randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) in this domain are notoriously challenging and many clinical studies in AKI have yielded inconclusive findings. Underlying this conundrum is the inherent heterogeneity of AKI in its etiology, presentation and course. AKI is best understood as a syndrome and identification of AKI subphenotypes is needed to elucidate the disease's myriad etiologies and to tailor effective prevention and treatment strategies. Conventional RCTs are logistically cumbersome and often feature highly selected patient populations that limit external generalizability and thus alternative trial designs should be considered when appropriate. In this narrative review of recent developments in AKI trials based on the Kidney Disease Clinical Trialists (KDCT) 2020 meeting, we discuss barriers to and strategies for improved design and implementation of clinical trials for AKI patients, including predictive and prognostic enrichment techniques, the use of pragmatic trials and adaptive trials.

INTRODUCTION: Poor sleep is ubiquitous in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) and is associated with a myriad of negative symptoms. Non-pharmacological interventions can improve sleep, yet sustainability has not been demonstrated. The Improving Sleep Using Mentored Behavioral and Environmental Restructuring (SLUMBER) trial will test whether a staff mentoring approach to address resident sleep issues positively impacts sleep quality and whether improved sleep benefits mood, cognitive performance, and activity engagement for residents living in SNFs. INTERVENTION: This is a four-year hybrid type I effectiveness/implementation randomized stepped-wedge trial using a comprehensive sleep improvement program conducted in three urban SNFs. METHODS: We will provide SNF staff with sleep promotion strategies over a four-month intervention. Staff will have access to in-person workshops, webinars, weekly sleep pearls via text messaging, environmental data, and expert program mentors. We will consent residents for data collection (at baseline, end of intervention, and three- and six-months post-intervention) including resident observations, questionnaires, and wrist actigraphy (to objectively measure sleep). We will also use selected Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) measures. CONCLUSION: SLUMBER uses a unique strategy to iteratively improve sleep interventions through SNF staff buy-in, expert mentoring, and technological supports within a quality improvement framework. As a stepped-wedge trial, the initial SNF units provide opportunities for program improvement in subsequent units, accounting for variation across resident populations at different sites. Protocol limitations include strategies which may require substantial customization for greater spread. A comprehensive staff training program that addresses both sleep quality and related symptoms has the opportunity for considerable dissemination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: USGOV Clinical Trials ID: NCT03327324.

Abstract Background Pragmatic acupuncture trials (PATs) are a research tool for assessing the effectiveness of acupuncture treatments in a real-world setting. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive methodological analysis of PATs using the PRECIS-2(PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2) tool to determine their pragmatism. Methods The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, WANFANG, Taiwan Periodical Literature Database, KoreaMed, KMbase, Research Information Service System, Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System, CiNii and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. The search included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and protocols of RCTs that investigated all types of acupuncture and used self-declared pragmatic design. Two authors independently collected the basic information and characteristics of the studies and assessed their pragmatism using the nine PRECIS-2 domains and the additional domain of control. Results A total of 93 studies were included. The means of eligibility, recruitment, organisation, primary outcome, primary analysis, and control domains were statistically larger than three and were shown to be pragmatic. The means of setting, flexibility:delivery, and follow-up domains were not greater than three and were shown to be non-pragmatic. For flexibility:adherence domain was inappropriate for assessment owing to insufficient information in the studies. Conclusions PATs were pragmatic in the domain of eligibility, recruitment, organisation, primary outcome, primary analysis, and control and were not pragmatic in the domain of setting, flexibility:delivery, and follow-up. Future PATs need to strengthen the pragmatism in the setting, flexibility:delivery, and follow-up domains and to describe the flexibility:adherence domain in more detail. Trial registration CRD42021236975.

Abstract Background Two million people in the UK are living with or beyond cancer and a third of them report poor quality of life (QoL) due to problems such as fatigue, fear of cancer recurrence, and concerns about returning to work. We aimed to develop and evaluate an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), suited to address the concerns of cancer survivors and in improving their QoL. We also recognise the importance of exercise and vocational activity on QoL and therefore will integrate options for physical activity and return to work/vocational support, thus ACT Plus (+). Methods We will conduct a multi-centre, pragmatic, theory driven, randomised controlled trial. We will assess whether ACT+ including usual aftercare (intervention) is more effective and cost-effective than usual aftercare alone (control). The primary outcome is QoL of participants living with or beyond cancer measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General scale (FACT-G) at 52 weeks. We will recruit 344 participants identified from secondary care sites who have completed hospital-based treatment for cancer with curative intent, with low QoL (determined by the FACT-G) and randomise with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the intervention or control. The intervention (ACT+) will be delivered by NHS Talking Therapies, specialist services, and cancer charities. The intervention consists of up to eight sessions at weekly or fortnightly intervals using different modalities of delivery to suit individual needs, i.e. face-to-face sessions, over the phone or skype. Discussion To date, there have been no robust trials reporting both clinical and cost-effectiveness of an ACT based intervention for people with low QoL after curative cancer treatment in the UK. We will provide high quality evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding ACT+ to usual aftercare provided by the NHS. If shown to be effective and cost-effective then commissioners, providers and cancer charities will know how to improve QoL in cancer survivors and their families. Trial registration ISRCTN: ISRCTN67900293 . Registered on 09 December 2019. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set for this protocol can be found in Additional file 2 Table S1.

Background: Elder abuse often goes unreported and undetected. Older people may be ashamed, fearful, or otherwise reticent to disclose abuse, and many health providers are not confident in asking about it. In the No More Shame study, we will evaluate a co-designed, multi-component intervention that aims to improve health providers' recognition, response, and referral of elder abuse. Methods: This is a single-blinded, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. Ten subacute hospital sites (i.e. clusters) across Australia will be allocated 1:1, stratified by state to a multi-component intervention comprising a training programme for health providers, implementation of a screening tool and use of site champions, or no additional training or support. Outcomes will be collected at baseline, 4 and 9 months. Our co-primary outcomes are change in health providers' knowledge of responding to elder abuse and older people's sense of safety and quality of life. We will include all inpatients at participating sites, aged 65 + (or aged 50 + if Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander), who are able to provide informed consent and all unit staff who provide direct care to older people; a sample size of at least 92 health providers and 612 older people will provide sufficient power for primary analyses. Discussion: This will be one of the first trials in the world to evaluate a multi-component elder abuse intervention. If successful, it will provide the most robust evidence base to date for health providers to draw on to create a safe environment for reporting, response, and referral. Trial registration: ANZCTR, ACTRN12623000676617p. Registered 22 June 2023. Key points: - Underreporting of elder abuse is significant due to barriers to disclosure. - Health providers may not feel confident in asking about or responding to elder abuse. - Hospital-based health providers are in a unique position to detect and respond to elder abuse. - We report our protocol for No More Shame, a pragmatic cluster randomised control trial that aims to train health providers to recognise and respond to elder abuse. - Our outcomes include health providers' knowledge and management of elder abuse, older people's quality of life and sense of safety, and rates of elder abuse detection and referrals at hospital sites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: High‐risk medications like benzodiazepines, sedative hypnotics, and antipsychotics are commonly prescribed for hospitalized older adults, despite guidelines recommending avoidance. Prior interventions have not fully addressed how physicians make such prescribing decisions, particularly when experiencing stress or cognitive overload. Simulation training may help improve prescribing decision‐making but has not been evaluated for overprescribing. Methods: In this two‐arm pragmatic trial, we randomized 40 first‐year medical resident physicians (i.e., interns) on inpatient general medicine services at an academic medical center to either intervention (a 40‐minute immersive simulation training) or control (online educational training) groups. The primary outcome was the number of new benzodiazepine, sedative hypnotic, or antipsychotic orders for treatment‐naïve older adults during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included the same outcome by all providers, being discharged on one of the medications, and orders for related or control medications. Outcomes were measured using electronic health record data over each intern's service period (~2 weeks). Outcomes were evaluated using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for clustering. Results: In total, 522 treatment‐naïve older adult patients were included in analyses. Over follow‐up, interns prescribed ≥1 high‐risk medication for 13 (4.9%) intervention patients and 13 (5.0%) control patients. The intervention led to no difference in the number of new prescriptions (Rate Ratio [RR]: 0.85, 95%CI: 0.31–2.35) versus control and no difference in secondary outcomes. In secondary analyses, intervention interns wrote significantly fewer "as‐needed" ("PRN") order types for the high‐risk medications (RR: 0.29, 95%CI: 0.08–0.99), and instead tended to write more "one‐time" orders than control interns, though this difference was not statistically significant (RR: 2.20, 95%CI: 0.60–7.99). Conclusions: Although this simulation intervention did not impact total high‐risk prescribing for hospitalized older adults, it did influence how the interns prescribed, resulting in fewer PRN orders, suggesting possibly greater ownership of care. Future interventions should consider this insight and implementation lessons raised. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov(NCT04668248). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pragmatic acupuncture trials (PATs) are a research tool for assessing the effectiveness of acupuncture treatments in a real-world setting. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive methodological analysis of PATs using the PRECIS-2(PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2) tool to determine their pragmatism. Methods: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, WANFANG, Taiwan Periodical Literature Database, KoreaMed, KMbase, Research Information Service System, Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System, CiNii and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. The search included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and protocols of RCTs that investigated all types of acupuncture and used self-declared pragmatic design. Two authors independently collected the basic information and characteristics of the studies and assessed their pragmatism using the nine PRECIS-2 domains and the additional domain of control. Results: A total of 93 studies were included. The means of eligibility, recruitment, organisation, primary outcome, primary analysis, and control domains were statistically larger than three and were shown to be pragmatic. The means of setting, flexibility:delivery, and follow-up domains were not greater than three and were shown to be non-pragmatic. For flexibility:adherence domain was inappropriate for assessment owing to insufficient information in the studies. Conclusions: PATs were pragmatic in the domain of eligibility, recruitment, organisation, primary outcome, primary analysis, and control and were not pragmatic in the domain of setting, flexibility:delivery, and follow-up. Future PATs need to strengthen the pragmatism in the setting, flexibility:delivery, and follow-up domains and to describe the flexibility:adherence domain in more detail. Trial registration: CRD42021236975. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Two million people in the UK are living with or beyond cancer and a third of them report poor quality of life (QoL) due to problems such as fatigue, fear of cancer recurrence, and concerns about returning to work. We aimed to develop and evaluate an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), suited to address the concerns of cancer survivors and in improving their QoL. We also recognise the importance of exercise and vocational activity on QoL and therefore will integrate options for physical activity and return to work/vocational support, thus ACT Plus (+). Methods: We will conduct a multi-centre, pragmatic, theory driven, randomised controlled trial. We will assess whether ACT+ including usual aftercare (intervention) is more effective and cost-effective than usual aftercare alone (control). The primary outcome is QoL of participants living with or beyond cancer measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General scale (FACT-G) at 52 weeks. We will recruit 344 participants identified from secondary care sites who have completed hospital-based treatment for cancer with curative intent, with low QoL (determined by the FACT-G) and randomise with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the intervention or control. The intervention (ACT+) will be delivered by NHS Talking Therapies, specialist services, and cancer charities. The intervention consists of up to eight sessions at weekly or fortnightly intervals using different modalities of delivery to suit individual needs, i.e. face-to-face sessions, over the phone or skype. Discussion: To date, there have been no robust trials reporting both clinical and cost-effectiveness of an ACT based intervention for people with low QoL after curative cancer treatment in the UK. We will provide high quality evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding ACT+ to usual aftercare provided by the NHS. If shown to be effective and cost-effective then commissioners, providers and cancer charities will know how to improve QoL in cancer survivors and their families. Trial registration: ISRCTN: ISRCTN67900293. Registered on 09 December 2019. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set for this protocol can be found in Additional file 2 Table S1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) self-management support (SMS) programs can yield improved clinical outcomes but may be limited in application or impact without considering individuals' unique social and personal challenges that may impede successful diabetes outcomes. The current study compares an evidence-based SMS program with an enhanced version that adds a patient engagement protocol, to elicit and address unique patient-level challenges to support improved SMS and diabetes outcomes. Staff from 12 Community Health Center (CHC) clinical sites were trained on and delivered: Connection to Health (CTH; 6 sites), including a health survey and collaborative action planning, or Enhanced Engagement CTH (EE-CTH; 6 sites), including additional relationship building training/support. Impact of CTH and EE-CTH on behavioral self-management, psychological outcomes, and modifiable social risks was examined using general linear mixed effects. Clinics enrolled 734 individuals with T2DM (CTH = 408; EE-CTH = 326). At 6- to 12-month postenrollment, individuals in both programs reported significant improvements in self-management behaviors (sugary beverages, missed medications), psychological outcomes (stress, health-related distress), and social risks (food security, utilities; all p < .05). Compared with CTH, individuals in EE-CTH reported greater decreases in high fat foods, salt, stress and health-related distress; and depression symptoms improved within EE-CTH (all p < .05). CTH and EE-CTH demonstrated positive behavioral, psychological, and social risk impacts for T2DM in CHCs delivered within existing clinical work flows and a range of clinical roles. Given the greater improvements in psychological outcomes and behavioral self-management in EE-CTH, increased attention to relationship building strategies within SMS programs is warranted.

Abstract Background Robotic-assisted bronchoscopy has recently emerged as an alternative to electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy for the evaluation of peripheral pulmonary lesions. While robotic-assisted bronchoscopy is proposed to have several advantages, such as an easier learning curve, it is unclear if it has comparable diagnostic utility as electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy. Methods Robotic versus Electromagnetic bronchoscopy for pulmonary LesIon AssessmeNT (RELIANT) is an investigator-initiated, single-center, open label, noninferiority, cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in two operating rooms at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Each operating room (OR) is assigned to either robotic-assisted or electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy each morning, with each OR day considered one cluster. All patients undergoing diagnostic bronchoscopy for evaluation of a peripheral pulmonary lesion in one of the two operating rooms are eligible. Schedulers, patients, and proceduralists are blinded to daily group allocations until randomization is revealed for each operating room each morning. The primary endpoint is the diagnostic yield defined as the proportion of cases yielding lesional tissue. Secondary and safety endpoints include procedure duration and procedural complications. Enrolment began on March 6, 2023, and will continue until 202 clusters have been accrued, with expected enrolment of approximately 400 patients by the time of completion in March of 2024. Discussion RELIANT is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial that will compare the diagnostic yield of the two most commonly used bronchoscopic approaches for sampling peripheral pulmonary lesions. This will be the first known cluster randomized pragmatic trial in the interventional pulmonology field and the first randomized controlled trial of robotic-assisted bronchoscopy. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov registration (NCT05705544) on January 30, 2023.

Abstract Background Vonoprazan results in more potent acid suppression for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) than proton pump inhibitors. It has only been approved for treating erosive esophagitis in China, but 30–40% of GERD patients cannot achieve the goal of treatment with vonoprazan 20 mg daily. This study aims to investigate whether vonoprazan could relieve the symptoms of Chinese patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and whether increased dosage or different times of dosing could increase the response rate of GERD. Methods This study is a pragmatic, open-label, crossover-cluster, randomized controlled trial with patient preference arms. Two thousand eight hundred eighty patients with GERD from 48 hospitals in China will be enrolled. These hospitals will be divided into a compulsory randomization cluster (24 hospitals) and a patient preference cluster (24 hospitals). Patients in the compulsory randomization cluster will be randomized to three regimens according to the crossover-cluster randomization. Patients in the patient preference cluster may choose to receive any regimen if they have a preference; otherwise, patients will be randomly assigned. The three treatment regimens will last 4 weeks, including (1) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after breakfast, (2) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after dinner, and (3) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after breakfast and after dinner. Patients will attend a baseline visit, a 4-week e-diary, a fourth-week visit, and a sixth-month visit online. The primary outcome is the symptom relief rate of all patients after 4-week therapy. Secondary outcomes include the healing rate of EE patients, the severity of symptoms, compliance with the therapy at the fourth-week follow-up visit, recurrent symptoms, and the frequency of self-conscious doctor visits at the sixth-month follow-up visit. Discussion This trial will explore the effectiveness of different regimens of vonoprazan that will be implemented with GERD patients in China. The randomization with patient preferences considered and the crossover-cluster component may improve the robustness and extrapolation of study conclusions. Trial registration https://www.chictr.org.cn ChiCTR2300069857. Registered on 28 March 2023. Protocol version: February 18, 2023, Version 2.

Background: Robotic-assisted bronchoscopy has recently emerged as an alternative to electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy for the evaluation of peripheral pulmonary lesions. While robotic-assisted bronchoscopy is proposed to have several advantages, such as an easier learning curve, it is unclear if it has comparable diagnostic utility as electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy. Methods: Robotic versus Electromagnetic bronchoscopy for pulmonary LesIon AssessmeNT (RELIANT) is an investigator-initiated, single-center, open label, noninferiority, cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in two operating rooms at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Each operating room (OR) is assigned to either robotic-assisted or electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy each morning, with each OR day considered one cluster. All patients undergoing diagnostic bronchoscopy for evaluation of a peripheral pulmonary lesion in one of the two operating rooms are eligible. Schedulers, patients, and proceduralists are blinded to daily group allocations until randomization is revealed for each operating room each morning. The primary endpoint is the diagnostic yield defined as the proportion of cases yielding lesional tissue. Secondary and safety endpoints include procedure duration and procedural complications. Enrolment began on March 6, 2023, and will continue until 202 clusters have been accrued, with expected enrolment of approximately 400 patients by the time of completion in March of 2024. Discussion: RELIANT is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial that will compare the diagnostic yield of the two most commonly used bronchoscopic approaches for sampling peripheral pulmonary lesions. This will be the first known cluster randomized pragmatic trial in the interventional pulmonology field and the first randomized controlled trial of robotic-assisted bronchoscopy. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov registration (NCT05705544) on January 30, 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vonoprazan results in more potent acid suppression for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) than proton pump inhibitors. It has only been approved for treating erosive esophagitis in China, but 30–40% of GERD patients cannot achieve the goal of treatment with vonoprazan 20 mg daily. This study aims to investigate whether vonoprazan could relieve the symptoms of Chinese patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and whether increased dosage or different times of dosing could increase the response rate of GERD. Methods: This study is a pragmatic, open-label, crossover-cluster, randomized controlled trial with patient preference arms. Two thousand eight hundred eighty patients with GERD from 48 hospitals in China will be enrolled. These hospitals will be divided into a compulsory randomization cluster (24 hospitals) and a patient preference cluster (24 hospitals). Patients in the compulsory randomization cluster will be randomized to three regimens according to the crossover-cluster randomization. Patients in the patient preference cluster may choose to receive any regimen if they have a preference; otherwise, patients will be randomly assigned. The three treatment regimens will last 4 weeks, including (1) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after breakfast, (2) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after dinner, and (3) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after breakfast and after dinner. Patients will attend a baseline visit, a 4-week e-diary, a fourth-week visit, and a sixth-month visit online. The primary outcome is the symptom relief rate of all patients after 4-week therapy. Secondary outcomes include the healing rate of EE patients, the severity of symptoms, compliance with the therapy at the fourth-week follow-up visit, recurrent symptoms, and the frequency of self-conscious doctor visits at the sixth-month follow-up visit. Discussion: This trial will explore the effectiveness of different regimens of vonoprazan that will be implemented with GERD patients in China. The randomization with patient preferences considered and the crossover-cluster component may improve the robustness and extrapolation of study conclusions. Trial registration: ChiCTR2300069857. Registered on 28 March 2023. Protocol version: February 18, 2023, Version 2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Bladder cancer poses a significant public health burden, with high recurrence and progression rates in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Current treatment options include bladder-sparing therapies (BST) and radical cystectomy, both with associated risks and benefits. However, evidence supporting optimal management decisions for patients with recurrent high-grade NMIBC remains limited, leading to uncertainty for patients and clinicians. The CISTO (Comparison of Intravesical Therapy and Surgery as Treatment Options) Study aims to address this critical knowledge gap by comparing outcomes between patients undergoing BST and radical cystectomy. Methods The CISTO Study is a pragmatic, prospective observational cohort trial across 36 academic and community urology practices in the US. The study will enroll 572 patients with a diagnosis of recurrent high-grade NMIBC who select management with either BST or radical cystectomy. The primary outcome is health-related quality of life (QOL) at 12 months as measured with the EORTC-QLQ-C30. Secondary outcomes include bladder cancer-specific QOL, progression-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and financial toxicity. The study will also assess patient preferences for treatment outcomes. Statistical analyses will employ targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) to address treatment selection bias and confounding by indication. Discussion The CISTO Study is powered to detect clinically important differences in QOL and cancer-specific survival between the two treatment approaches. By including a diverse patient population, the study also aims to assess outcomes across the following patient characteristics: age, gender, race, burden of comorbid health conditions, cancer severity, caregiver status, social determinants of health, and rurality. Treatment outcomes may also vary by patient preferences, health literacy, and baseline QOL. The CISTO Study will fill a crucial evidence gap in the management of recurrent high-grade NMIBC, providing evidence-based guidance for patients and clinicians in choosing between BST and radical cystectomy. The CISTO study will provide an evidence-based approach to identifying the right treatment for the right patient at the right time in the challenging clinical setting of recurrent high-grade NMIBC. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03933826. Registered on May 1, 2019.

Background/aimsDespite evidence that preferential use of balanced/buffered fluids may improve outcomes compared with chloride-rich 0.9% saline, saline remains the most commonly used fluid for children with septic shock. We aim to determine if resuscitation with balanced/buffered fluids as part of usual care will improve outcomes, in part through reduced kidney injury and without an increase in adverse effects, compared to 0.9% saline for children with septic shock.MethodsThe Pragmatic Pediatric Trial of Balanced versus Normal Saline Fluid in Sepsis (PRoMPT BOLUS) study is an international, open-label pragmatic interventional trial being conducted at > 40 sites in the USA, Canada, and Australia/New Zealand starting on August 25, 2020, and continuing for 5 years. Children > 6 months to

BackgroundThe SARS CoV-2 virus has caused one of the deadliest pandemics in recent history, resulting in over 170 million deaths and global economic disruption. There remains an urgent need for clinical trials to test therapies for treatment and prevention.DesignAn online research platform was created to support a registry community of healthcare workers (HCWs) to understand their experiences and conduct clinical studies to address their concerns. The first study, HERO-HCQ, was a double-blind, multicenter, randomized, pragmatic trial to evaluate the superiority of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) vs placebo for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) of COVID-19 clinical infection in HCWs. Secondary objectives were to assess the efficacy of HCQ in preventing viral shedding of COVID-19 among HCWs and to assess the safety and tolerability of HCQ.MethodsHCWs joined the Registry and were pre-screened for trial interest and eligibility. Trial participants were randomized 1:1 to receive HCQ or placebo. On-site baseline assessment included a COVID-19 nasopharyngeal PCR and blood serology test. Weekly follow-up was done via an online portal and included screening for symptoms of COVID-19, self-reported testing, adverse events, and quality of life assessments. The on-site visit was repeated at Day 30.DiscussionThe HERO research platform offers an approach to rapidly engage, screen, invite and enroll into clinical studies using a novel participant-facing online portal interface and remote data collection, enabling limited onsite procedures for conduct of a pragmatic clinical trial. This platform may be an example for future clinical trials of common conditions to enable more rapid evidence generation.

Abstract Background Pragmatic trials, because they study widely used treatments in settings of routine practice, require intensive participation from clinicians who determine whether patients can be enrolled. Clinicians are often conflicted between their therapeutic obligation to patients and their willingness to enroll them in trials in which treatments are randomly determined and thus potentially suboptimal. Refusal to enroll eligible patients can hinder trial completion and damage generalizability. In order to help evaluate and mitigate clinician refusal, this qualitative study examined how clinicians reason about whether to randomize eligible patients. Methods We performed interviews with 29 anesthesiologists who participated in REGAIN, a multicenter pragmatic randomized trial comparing spinal and general anesthesia in hip fracture. Interviews included a chart-stimulated section in which physicians described their reasoning pertaining to specific eligible patients as well as a general semi-structured section about their views on clinical research. Guided by a constructivist grounded theory approach, we analyzed data via coding, synthesized thematic patterns using focused coding, and developed an explanation using abduction. Results Anesthesiologists perceived their main clinical function as preventing peri- and intraoperative complications. In some cases, they used prototype-based reasoning to determine whether patients with contraindications should be randomized; in others, they used probabilistic reasoning. These modes of reasoning involved different types of uncertainty. In contrast, anesthesiologists expressed confidence about anesthetic options when they accepted patients for randomization. Anesthesiologists saw themselves as having a fiduciary responsibility to patients and thus did not hesitate to communicate their inclinations, even when this complicated trial recruitment. Nevertheless, they voiced strong support for clinical research, stating that their involvement was mainly hindered by production pressure and workflow disruptions. Conclusions Our findings suggest that prominent ways of assessing clinician decisions about trial randomization are based on questionable assumptions about clinical reasoning. Close examination of routine clinical practice, attuned to the features of clinical reasoning we reveal here, will help both in evaluating clinicians’ enrollment determinations in specific trials and in anticipating and responding to them. Trial registration Regional Versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence After Hip Fracture (REGAIN). ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02507505. Prospectively registered on July 24, 2015.

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a hemoglobin disorder and the most common genetic disorder that affects 100,000 Americans and millions worldwide. Adults living with SCD have pain so severe that it often requires opioids to keep it in control. Depression is a major global public health concern associated with an increased risk in chronic medical disorders, including in adults living with sickle cell disease (SCD). A strong relationship exists between suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and depression. Researchers enrolling adults living with SCD in pragmatic clinical trials are obligated to design their methods to deliberately monitor and respond to symptoms related to depression and suicidal ideation. This will offer increased protection for their participants and help clinical investigators meet their fiduciary duties. This article presents a review of this sociotechnical milieu that highlights, analyzes, and offers recommendations to address ethical considerations in the development of protocols, procedures, and monitoring activities related to suicidality in depressed patients in a pragmatic clinical trial.

Background: Increased breast density augments breast cancer risk and reduces mammography sensitivity. Supplemental breast MRI screening can significantly increase cancer detection among women with dense breasts. However, few women undergo this exam, and screening is consistently lower among racially minoritized populations. Implementation strategies informed by behavioral economics ("nudges") can promote evidence-based practices by improving clinician decision-making under conditions of uncertainty. Nudges directed toward clinicians and patients may facilitate the implementation of supplemental breast MRI. Methods: Approximately 1600 patients identified as having extremely dense breasts after non-actionable mammograms, along with about 1100 clinicians involved with their care at 32 primary care or OB/GYN clinics across a racially diverse academically based health system, will be enrolled. A 2 × 2 randomized pragmatic trial will test nudges to patients, clinicians, both, or neither to promote supplemental breast MRI screening. Before implementation, rapid cycle approaches informed by clinician and patient experiences and behavioral economics and health equity frameworks guided nudge design. Clinicians will be clustered into clinic groups based on existing administrative departments and care patterns, and these clinic groups will be randomized to have the nudge activated at different times per a stepped wedge design. Clinicians will receive nudges integrated into the routine mammographic report or sent through electronic health record (EHR) in-basket messaging once their clinic group (i.e., wedge) is randomized to receive the intervention. Independently, patients will be randomized to receive text message nudges or not. The primary outcome will be defined as ordering or scheduling supplemental breast MRI. Secondary outcomes include MRI completion, cancer detection rates, and false-positive rates. Patient sociodemographic information and clinic-level variables will be examined as moderators of nudge effectiveness. Qualitative interviews conducted at the trial's conclusion will examine barriers and facilitators to implementation. Discussion: This study will add to the growing literature on the effectiveness of behavioral economics-informed implementation strategies to promote evidence-based interventions. The design will facilitate testing the relative effects of nudges to patients and clinicians and the effects of moderators of nudge effectiveness, including key indicators of health disparities. The results may inform the introduction of low-cost, scalable implementation strategies to promote early breast cancer detection. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05787249. Registered on March 28, 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early conduct problems and school failure are prominent risk factors for several adverse outcomes in later life. With the potential of reaching many children at early stages of their life, school-based interventions constitute a valuable approach to universal prevention. Good behavior game (GBG) is a promising school-based behavior management program, having shown immediate reductions in conduct problems along with several long-term positive effects. Adapting interventions to new contexts may however affect their effectiveness. The current study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a Swedish adaption of GBG under pragmatic conditions. The intervention is hypothesized to reduce conduct problems in the classroom (primary outcome). Secondary analyses will investigate changes in conduct problems in common school areas, classroom climate, teacher collective efficacy, on-task behavior, as well as investigating behavioral management practices, implementation, and barriers to implementation. Methods: This is a cluster-randomized trial with two parallel groups. Schools will be randomized (1,1, stratified by their areas sociodemographic index score) to be provided training in GBG or perform business-as-usual. The intervention and data collection lasts for a school year. Data will be collected at three time points: at baseline in the beginning of the school year (prior to training in GBG), after three months, and after nine months (at the end of the school year; primary endpoint). Data consists of teacher-rated measures of conduct problems, classroom climate, teacher collective efficacy, behavior management practices, and implementation factors, along with demographic factors. In addition, data will be collected by independent and blinded observers using corresponding measures in a subset of randomly chosen classrooms. Procedural fidelity will be rated and collected by GBG-trainers during nine observations throughout the school year. Statistical analysis will include frequentist intention-to-treat analysis, and comparisons of estimates with a corresponding Bayesian model using weakly informative priors. The study has currently completed data collection. Discussion: This study will provide knowledge in universal prevention and schoolbased interventions with high reach, as well as specific knowledge concerning the effectiveness of an adapted version of GBG under real-world conditions, along with factors affecting its implementation and effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Patient-triggered adaptive pressure control (APC) continuous mandatory ventilation (CMV) (APC-CMV) has been widely adopted as an alternative ventilator mode to patient-triggered volume control (VC) CMV (VC-CMV). However, the comparative effectiveness of the 2 ventilator modes remains uncertain. We sought to explore clinical and implementation factors pertinent to a future definitive randomized controlled trial assessing APC-CMV versus VC-CMV as an initial ventilator mode strategy. The research objectives in our pilot trial tested clinician adherence and explored clinical outcomes. METHODS: In a single-center pragmatic sequential cluster crossover pilot trial, we enrolled all eligible adults with acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation admitted during a 9-week period to the medical ICU. Two-week time epochs were assigned a priori in which subjects received either APC-CMV or VC-CMV The primary outcome of the trial was feasibility, defined as 80% of subjects receiving the assigned mode within 1 h of initiation of ICU ventilation. The secondary outcome was proportion of the first 24 h on the assigned mode. Finally, we surveyed clinician stakeholders to understand potential facilitators and barriers to conducting a definitive randomized trial. RESULTS: We enrolled 137 subjects who received 152 discreet episodes of mechanical ventilation during time epochs assigned to APC-CMV (n 5 61) and VC-CMV (n 5 91). One hundred and thirty-one episodes were included in the prespecified primary outcome. One hundred and twenty-six (96%) received the assigned mode within the first hour of ICU admission (60 of 61 subjects assigned APC-CMV and 66 of 70 assigned VC-CMV). VC-CMV subjects spent a lower proportion of first 24 h (84% [95% CI 78--89]) on the assigned mode than APC-CMV recipients (95% [95% CI 91--100]). Mixed-methods analyses identified preconceived perceptions of subject comfort by clinicians and need for real-time education to address this concern. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot pragmatic, sequential crossover trial, unit-wide allocation to a ventilator mode was fea- sible and acceptable to clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The Nudge Study is a patient level–randomized trial testing different text message medication refill reminders sent to patients assigned to 4 arms: (1) usual care, (2) generic text, (3) optimized text, and (4) optimized text plus chatbot. This report describes the frequency and types of patient questions sent to clinical pharmacists (CPs) following text reminders. Methods Patients were enrolled from Denver Health and Hospital Authority (DHHA) and Veterans Affairs Eastern Colorado Health Care System (VA ECHCS) from October 1, 2019, through May 30, 2021. Included patients responded to at least 1 text or interactive voice response (IVR) message. Patients were dichotomized as those who posed at least 1 question to a CP and those who posed no questions. Results Of the 6,325 patients enrolled in an intervention arm, 3,323 (52.5%) responded to at least 1 text or IVR message, and among those responding, 305 (9.2%) responded with a pharmacist question. Patient factors associated with submitting a CP question included age (45-74 years), enrollment from DHHA, and receipt of the optimized text or optimized text plus chatbot message versus the generic text. Questions to CP were in the following categories: medication related (48.2%), refill logistics (38.4%), cost (9.2%), and other (17.7%). Conclusion In a text messaging intervention focused on medication refills, there were few questions directed to the CP. Patients assigned to receive optimized texts were more likely to have questions. We hypothesize that this may suggest greater patient engagement regarding their condition, resulting in more questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/objectivesEvaluations of complex models of care for older adults may benefit from simultaneous assessment of intervention implementation. The STRIDE (Strategies To Reduce Injuries and Develop confidence in Elders) pragmatic trial evaluated the effectiveness of a multifactorial intervention to reduce serious fall injuries in older adults. We conducted multi-level stakeholder interviews to identify barriers to STRIDE intervention implementation and understand efforts taken to mitigate these barriers.DesignQualitative interviews with key informants.SettingTen clinical trial sites affiliated with practices that provided primary care for persons at increased risk for fall injuries.ParticipantsSpecially trained registered nurses working as Falls Care Managers (FCMs) who delivered the intervention (n = 13 individual interviews), Research Staff who supervised trial implementation locally (n = 10 group interviews, 23 included individuals), and members of Central Project Management and the National Patient Stakeholder Council who oversaw national implementation (n = 2 group interviews, six included individuals).MeasurementsA semi-structured interview guide derived from the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR).ResultsWe identified eight key barriers to STRIDE intervention implementation. FCMs navigated complex relationships with patients and families while working with Research Staff to implement the intervention in primary care practices with limited clinical space, variable provider buy-in, and significant primary care practice staff and provider turnover. The costs of the intervention to individual patients and medical practices amplified these barriers. Efforts to mitigate these barriers varied depending on the needs and opportunities of each primary care setting.ConclusionThe many barriers to implementation and the variability in how stakeholders addressed these locally may have affected the overall STRIDE intervention's effectiveness. Future pragmatic trials should incorporate simultaneous implementation aims to better understand how research interventions translate into clinical care that improves the lives of older adults.

Abstract Background Cluster-C personality disorders (PDs), characterized by a high level of fear and anxiety, are related to high levels of distress, societal dysfunctioning and chronicity of various mental health disorders. Evidence for the optimal treatment is extremely scarce. Nevertheless, the need to treat these patients is eminent. In clinical practice, group therapy is one of the frequently offered approaches, with two important frameworks: schema therapy and psychodynamic therapy. These two frameworks suggest different mechanisms of change, but until now, this has not yet been explored. The purpose of the present G-FORCE trial is to find evidence on the differential (cost)effectiveness of two forms of schema group therapy and psychodynamic group therapy in the routine clinical setting of an outpatient clinic and to investigate the underlying working mechanisms and predictors of outcome of these therapies. Methods In this mono-centre pragmatic randomized clinical trial, 290 patients with Cluster-C PDs or other specified PD with predominantly Cluster-C traits, will be randomized to one of three treatment conditions: group schema therapy for Cluster-C (GST-C, 1 year), schema-focused group therapy (SFGT, 1.5 year) or psychodynamic group therapy (PG, 2 years). Randomization will be pre-stratified on the type of PD. Change in severity of PD (APD-IV) over 24 months will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures are personality functioning, psychiatric symptoms and quality of life. Potential predictors and mediators are selected and measured repeatedly. Also, a cost-effectiveness study will be performed, primarily based on a societal perspective, using both clinical effects and quality-adjusted life years. The time-points of assessment are at baseline, start of treatment and after 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months. Discussion This study is designed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three formats of group psychotherapy for Cluster-C PDs. Additionally, predictors, procedure and process variables are analysed to investigate the working mechanisms of the therapies. This is the first large RCT on group therapy for Cluster-C PDs and will contribute improving the care of this neglected patient group. The absence of a control group can be considered as a limitation. Trial registration CCMO, NL72826.029.20 . Registered on 31 August 2020, first participant included on 18 October 2020.

Abstract Background Clinical trial implementation continues to shift toward pragmatic design, with the goal of increasing future adoption in clinical practice. Yet, few pragmatic trials within clinical settings have qualitatively assessed stakeholder input, especially from those most impacted by research implementation and outcomes, i.e., providers and staff. Within this context, we conducted a qualitative study of the implementation of a pragmatic digital health obesity trial with employees at a Federally qualified health center (FQHC) network in central North Carolina. Methods Participant recruitment was conducted through purposive sampling of FQHC employees from a variety of backgrounds. Two researchers conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews and collected demographic data. Interviews were digitally recorded, professionally transcribed and double-coded by two independent researchers using NVivo 12. Coding discrepancies were reviewed by a third researcher until intercoder consensus was reached. Responses were compared within and across participants to elucidate emergent themes. Results Eighteen qualitative interviews were conducted, of whom 39% provided direct medical care to patients and 44% worked at the FQHC for at least seven years. Results illuminated the challenges and successes of a pragmatically designed obesity treatment intervention within the community that serves medically vulnerable patients. Although limited time and staffing shortages may have challenged recruitment processes, respondents described early buy-in from leadership; an alignment of organizational and research goals; and consideration of patient needs as facilitators to implementation. Respondents also described the need for personnel power to sustain novel research interventions and considerations of health center resource constraints. Conclusions Results from this study contribute to the limited literature on pragmatic trials utilizing qualitative methods, particularly in community-based obesity treatment. To continue to merge the gaps between research implementation and clinical care, qualitative assessments that solicit stakeholder input are needed within pragmatic trial design. For maximum impact, researchers may wish to solicit input from a variety of professionals at trial onset and ensure that shared common goals and open collaboration between all partners is maintained throughout the trial. Trial Registration This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03003403) on December 28, 2016.

Abstract Background Cluster-C personality disorders (PDs) are highly prevalent in clinical practice and are associated with unfavourable outcome and chronicity of all common mental health disorders (e.g. depression and anxiety disorders). Although several forms of individual psychotherapy are commonly offered in clinical practice for this population, evidence for differential effectiveness of different forms of psychotherapy is lacking. Also, very little is known about the underlying working mechanisms of these psychotherapies. Finding evidence on the differential (cost)-effectiveness for this group of patients and the working mechanisms of change is important to improve the quality of care for this vulnerable group of patients. Objective In this study, we will compare the differential (cost)-effectiveness of three individual psychotherapies: short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP), affect phobia therapy (APT) and schema therapy (ST). Although these psychotherapies are commonly used in clinical practice, evidence for the Cluster-C PDs is limited. Additionally, we will investigate predictive factors, non-specific and therapy-specific mediators. Methods This is a mono-centre randomized clinical trial with three parallel groups: (1) SPSP, (2) APT, (3) ST. Randomization on patient level will be pre-stratified according to type of PD. The total study population to be included consists of 264 patients with Cluster-C PDs or other specified PD with mainly Cluster-C traits, aged 18–65 years, seeking treatment at NPI, a Dutch mental health care institute specialized in PDs. SPSP, APT and ST (50 sessions per treatment) are offered twice a week in sessions of 50 min for the first 4 to 5 months. After that, session frequency decreases to once a week. All treatments have a maximum duration of 1 year. Change in the severity of the PD (ADP-IV) will be the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures are personality functioning, psychiatric symptoms and quality of life. Several potential mediators, predictors and moderators of outcome are also assessed. The effectiveness study is complemented with a cost-effectiveness/utility study, using both clinical effects and quality-adjusted life-years, and primarily based on a societal approach. Assessments will take place at baseline, start of treatment and at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months. Discussion This is the first study comparing psychodynamic treatment to schema therapy for Cluster-C PDs. The naturalistic design enhances the clinical validity of the outcome. A limitation is the lack of a control group for ethical reasons. Trial registration NL72823.029.20 [Registry ID: CCMO]. Registered on 31 August 2020. First participant included on 23 October 2020.

Abstract Background Treatment fidelity (TF) refers to methodological strategies used to monitor and enhance the reliability and validity of interventions. We evaluated TF in a pragmatic RCT of music therapy (MT) for premature infants and their parents. Methods Two hundred thirteen families from seven neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) were randomized to receive standard care, or standard care plus MT during hospitalization, and/or during a 6-month period post-discharge. Eleven music therapists delivered the intervention. Audio and video recordings from sessions representing approximately 10% of each therapists’ participants were evaluated by two external raters and the corresponding therapist using TF questionnaires designed for the study (treatment delivery (TD)). Parents evaluated their experience with MT at the 6-month assessment with a corresponding questionnaire (treatment receipt (TR)). All items as well as composite scores (mean scores across items) were Likert scales from 0 (completely disagree) to 6 (completely agree). A threshold for satisfactory TF scores (≥4) was used in the additional analysis of dichotomized items. Results Internal consistency evaluated with Cronbach’s alpha was good for all TF questionnaires (α ≥ 0.70), except the external rater NICU questionnaire where it was slightly lower (α 0.66). Interrater reliability measured by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was moderate (NICU 0.43 (CI 0.27, 0.58), post-discharge 0.57 (CI 0.39, 0.73)). Gwet’s AC for the dichotomized items varied between 0.32 (CI 0.10, 0.54) and 0.72 (CI 0.55, 0.89). Seventy-two NICU and 40 follow-up sessions with 39 participants were evaluated. Therapists’ mean (SD) TD composite score was 4.88 (0.92) in the NICU phase and 4.95 (1.05) in the post-discharge phase. TR was evaluated by 138 parents. The mean (SD) score across intervention conditions was 5.66 (0.50). Conclusions TF questionnaires developed to assess MT in neonatal care showed good internal consistency and moderate interrater reliability. TF scores indicated that therapists across countries successfully implemented MT in accordance with the protocol. The high treatment receipt scores indicate that parents received the intervention as intended. Future research in this area should aim to improve the interrater reliability of TF measures by additional training of raters and improved operational definitions of items. Trial registration Longitudinal Study of music Therapy’s Effectiveness for Premature infants and their caregivers – “LongSTEP”. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03564184. Registered on June 20, 2018

Abstract Background Prehabilitation has been shown to have a positive effect on the postoperative recovery of functional capacity in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy. The optimal way to implement prehabilitation programs, such as the optimal forms of prehabilitation, duration, intensity, and methods to improve compliance, remained to be studied. This Prehabilitation for Thoracic Surgery Study will compare the effectiveness of multimodal and aerobic training-only programs in patients undergoing thoracoscopic lobectomy. Methods This randomized pragmatic trial will be conducted in Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) and include 100 patients who are eligible to undergo VATS lobectomy. Patients will be randomized to a multimodal or aerobic training group. Prehabilitation training guidance will be provided by a multidisciplinary care team. The patients in the multimodal group will perform aerobic exercises, resistance exercises, breathing exercises, psychological improvement strategies, and nutritional supplementation. Meanwhile, the patients in the aerobic group will conduct only aerobic exercises. The interventions will be home-based and supervised by medical providers. The patients will be followed up until 30 days after surgery to investigate whether the multimodal prehabilitation program differs from the aerobic training program in terms of the magnitude of improvement in functional capability pre- to postoperatively. The primary outcome will be the perioperative 6-min walk distance (6MWD). The secondary outcomes will include the postoperative pulmonary functional recovery status, health-related quality of life score, incidence of postoperative complications, and clinical outcomes. Discussion Prehabilitation remains a relatively new approach that is not widely performed by thoracic surgery patients. The existing studies mainly focus on unimodal interventions. While multimodal prehabilitation strategies have been shown to be preferable to unimodal strategies in a few studies, the evidence remains scarce for thoracic surgery patients. The results of this study will contribute to the understanding of methods for thoracoscopic lobectomy patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04049942 . Registered on August 8, 2019.

Abstract Background Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) is an effective but underused treatment for high-impact chronic pain. Increased access to CBT-CP services for pain is of critical public health importance, particularly for rural and medically underserved populations who have limited access due to these services being concentrated in urban and high income areas. Making CBT-CP widely available and more affordable could reduce barriers to CBT-CP use. Methods As part of the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term® (NIH HEAL) initiative, we designed and implemented a comparative effectiveness, 3-arm randomized control trial comparing remotely delivered telephonic/video and online CBT-CP-based services to usual care for patients with high-impact chronic pain. The RESOLVE trial is being conducted in 4 large integrated healthcare systems located in Minnesota, Georgia, Oregon, and Washington state and includes demographically diverse populations residing in urban and rural areas. The trial compares (1) an 8-session, one-on-one, professionally delivered telephonic/video CBT-CP program; and (2) a previously developed and tested 8-session online CBT-CP-based program (painTRAINER) to (3) usual care augmented by a written guide for chronic pain management. Participants are followed for 1 year post-allocation and are assessed at baseline, and 3, 6, and 12 months post-allocation. The primary outcome is minimal clinically important difference (MCID; ≥ 30% reduction) in pain severity (composite of pain intensity and pain-related interference) assessed by a modified 11-item version of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include pain severity, pain intensity, and pain-related interference scores, quality of life measures, and patient global impression of change at 3, 6, and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness is assessed by incremental cost per additional patient with MCID in primary outcome and by cost per quality-adjusted life year achieved. Outcome assessment is blinded to group assignment. Discussion This large-scale trial provides a unique opportunity to rigorously evaluate and compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 2 relatively low-cost and scalable modalities for providing CBT-CP-based treatments to persons with high-impact chronic pain, including those residing in rural and other medically underserved areas with limited access to these services. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04523714. This trial was registered on 24 August 2020.

Rationale & objectiveObservational studies have reported a U-shaped association between blood pressure (BP) before a hemodialysis session and death. In contrast, because a linear association between out-of-dialysis-unit BP and death has been reported, home BP may be a better target for treatment. To test the feasibility of this approach, we conducted a pilot trial of treating home versus predialysis BP in hemodialysis patients.Study designA 4-month, parallel, randomized, controlled trial.Settings & participants50 prevalent hemodialysis patients in San Francisco and Seattle. Participants were randomly assigned using 1:1 block randomization, stratified by site.InterventionsTo target home systolic BP (SBP) of 100-200mm Hg; 0.2% vs 0%) or low (defined as

BackgroundThe Whole Health model of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) emphasizes holistic self-care and multimodal approaches to improve pain, functioning, and quality of life. wHOPE (Whole Health Options and Pain Education) seeks to be the first multisite pragmatic trial to establish evidence for the VA Whole Health model for chronic pain care.DesignwHOPE is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial comparing a Whole Health Team (WHT) approach to Primary Care Group Education (PC-GE); both will be compared to Usual VA Primary Care (UPC). The WHT consists of a medical provider, a complementary and integrative health (CIH) provider, and a Whole Health coach, who collaborate with VA patients to create a Personalized Health Plan emphasizing CIH approaches to chronic pain management. The active comparator, PC-GE, is adapted group cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain. The first aim is to test whether the WHT approach is superior to PC-GE and whether both are superior to UPC in decreasing pain interference in functioning in 750 veterans with moderate to severe chronic pain (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes include changes in pain severity, quality of life, mental health symptoms, and use of nonpharmacological and pharmacological therapies for pain. Outcomes will be collected from the VA electronic health record and patient-reported data over 12 months of follow-up. Aim 2 consists of an implementation-focused process evaluation and budget impact analysis.SummaryThis trial is part of the Pain Management Collaboratory, which seeks to create national-level infrastructure to support evidence-based nonpharmacological pain management approaches for veterans and military service personnel.

BackgroundDelays in diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis (TB) remain common in high-burden countries. To improve case detection, substantial investments have been made to scale-up Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), a cartridge-based nucleic acid amplification test that can detect TB within 2 hours, as a replacement for sputum smear microscopy. However, the optimal strategy for implementation of Xpert testing remains unclear.MethodsThe Xpert Performance Evaluation for Linkage to Tuberculosis Care (XPEL-TB) trial uses an ultra-pragmatic, hybrid type II effectiveness-implementation design to assess the effectiveness and implementation of a streamlined strategy for delivery of Xpert testing in real-world settings. Twenty health centers with TB microscopy units were selected to participate in the trial, with ten health centers randomized to the intervention strategy (onsite molecular testing using GeneXpert Edge, process redesign to facilitate same-day TB diagnosis and treatment, and performance feedback) or routine care (onsite sputum smear microscopy plus referral of sputum samples to Xpert testing sites). The primary outcome is the number of patients with microbiologically confirmed TB who were initiated on treatment within 14 days of presentation to the health center, which reflects successful completion of the TB diagnostic evaluation process. Secondary outcomes include health outcomes (6-month vital status), as well as measures of the reach, adoption, and implementation of the intervention strategy.DiscussionThe design elements and implementation approach for the XPEL-TB trial were intentionally selected to minimize disruptions to routine care procedures, with the goal of limiting their influence on key primary and secondary outcomes. Trial findings may result in increased support and funding for rapid, onsite molecular testing as the standard-of-care for all patients being evaluated for TB.Trial registrationUS National Institutes of Health's ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03044158. Registered 06 February 2017. Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR201610001763265. Registered 03 September 2016.

Background: Physical activity is an effective management strategy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, but patients' compliance is challenging. Walking is a suitable form of physical activity due to its convenience and sustainability, and it can potentially improve functional capacity in heart failure patients. Objectives: The WATCHFUL trial aims to determine whether a pedometer-based walking intervention combined with face-to-face sessions and regular telephone contact improves functional capacity in heart failure patients. Methods: The WATCHFUL trial is a 6-month multicenter, parallel-group, randomized, controlled, superiority trial with a 6-month follow-up. A total of 202 patients were recruited for the trial. The primary analysis will evaluate the change in distance walked during the 6-min walk test from baseline to 6 months based on the intention-to-treat population; the analysis will be performed using a linear mixed-effect model adjusted for baseline values. Missing data will be imputed using multiple imputations, and the impact of missing data will be assessed using a sensitivity analysis. Adverse events are monitored and recorded throughout the trial period. Discussion: The trial has been designed as a pragmatic trial with a scalable intervention that could be easily translated into routine clinical care. The trial has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which slowed patients' recruitment and impacted their physical activity patterns. Conclusions: The present publication provides details of the planned statistical analyses for the WATCHFUL trial to reduce the risks of reporting bias and erroneous data-driven results. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT03041610, registered: 3/2/2017). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advance care planning (ACP) pragmatic trials are needed. We determined key system-level activities to implement ACP interventions for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial. We identified patients with serious illness from 50 primary care clinics across three University of California health systems using a validated algorithm. If patients lacked documented ACP within the last 3 years, they were eligible for an intervention: (Arm 1) an advance directive (AD); (Arm 2) AD + PREPAREforYourCare.org; (Arm 3) AD + PREPARE + lay health navigator outreach. Triggered by an appointment, we mailed and sent interventions through automated electronic health record (EHR) messaging. We collaborated with patients/caregivers, clinicians, payors, and national/health system leader advisors. We are currently finalizing 24 months follow-up data. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) frameworks to track secular trends and implementation efforts. Required multisite, system-level activities: 1) obtaining leadership, legal/privacy, and EHR approvals; 2) standardizing ACP documentation; 3) providing clinician education; 3) validating an automated serious illness identification algorithm; 4) standardizing ACP messaging with input from over 100 key advisors; 5) monitoring secular trends (e.g., COVID); and 6) standardizing ACP workflows (e.g., scanned ADs). Of 8707 patients with serious illness, 6883 were eligible for an intervention. Across all arms, 99% received the mailed intervention, 78.3% had an active patient portal (64.2% opened intervention), and 90.5% of arm three patients (n = 2243) received navigator outreach. Implementing a multisite health system-wide ACP program and pragmatic trial, with automated EHR-based cohort identification and intervention delivery, requires a high level of multidisciplinary key advisor engagement, standardization, and monitoring. These activities provide guidance for the implementation of other large-scale, population-based ACP efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]