{ "items": [ "\n\n
AbstractBackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate associations between self\u2010reported distress (anxiety/depression) and satisfaction with and desire for virtual follow\u2010up (VFU) care among cancer patients during and beyond the COVID\u201019 pandemic.MethodsBreast and prostate cancer patients receiving VFU at an urban cancer centre in Toronto, Canada completed an online survey on their sociodemographic, clinical, and technology, characteristics and experience with and views on VFU. EQ5D\u20105\u2009L was used to assess distress. Statistical models adjusted for age, gender, education, income and Internet confidence.ResultsOf 352 participants, average age was 65\u2009years, 48% were women,79% were within 5\u2009years of treatment completion, 84% had college/university education and 74% were confident Internet users. Nearly, all (98%) had a virtual visit via phone and 22% had a virtual visit via video. The majority of patients (86%) were satisfied with VFU and 70% agreed that they would like VFU options after the COVID\u201019 pandemic. Participants who reported distress and who were not confident using the Internet for health purposes were significantly less likely to be satisfied with VFU (OR\u2009=\u20090.4; 95% CI: 0.2\u20130.8 and OR\u2009=\u20090.19; 95% CI: 0.09\u20130.38, respectively) and were less likely to desire VFU option after the COVID\u201019 pandemic (OR\u2009=\u20090.49; 95% CI: 0.30\u20130.82 and OR\u2009=\u20090.41; 95% CI: 0.23\u20130.70, respectively).ConclusionsThe majority of respondents were satisfied with VFU and would like VFU options after the COVID\u201019 pandemic. Future research should determine how to optimize VFU options for cancer patients who are distressed and who are less confident using virtual care technology.
\n \n\n \n \nBackground: MYRIAD (My Resilience in Adolescence) is a superiority, parallel group, cluster randomised controlled trial designed to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a mindfulness training (MT) programme, compared with normal social and emotional learning (SEL) school provision to enhance mental health, social-emotional-behavioural functioning and well-being in adolescence. The original trial protocol was published in Trials (accessible at https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1917-4). This included recruitment in two cohorts, enabling the learning from the smaller first cohort to be incorporated in the second cohort. Here we describe final amendments to the study protocol and discuss their underlying rationale. Methods: Four major changes were introduced into the study protocol: (1) there were changes in eligibility criteria, including a clearer operational definition to assess the degree of SEL implementation in schools, and also new criteria to avoid experimental contamination; (2) the number of schools and pupils that had to be recruited was increased based on what we learned in the first cohort; (3) some changes were made to the secondary outcome measures to improve their validity and ability to measure constructs of interest and to reduce the burden on school staff; and (4) the current Coronavirus Disease 2019 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) pandemic both influences and makes it difficult to interpret the 2-year follow-up primary endpoint results, so we changed our primary endpoint to 1-year follow-up. Discussion: These changes to the study protocol were approved by the Trial Management Group, Trial Steering Committee and Data and Ethics Monitoring Committees and improved the enrolment of participants and quality of measures. Furthermore, the change in the primary endpoint will give a more reliable answer to our primary question because it was collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic in both cohort 1 and cohort 2. Nevertheless, the longer 2-year follow-up data will still be acquired, although this time-point will be now framed as a second major investigation to answer some new important questions presented by the combination of the pandemic and our study design. Trial registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials ISRCTN86619085. Registered on 3 June 2016.
\n \n\n \n \nObjective: We explored what predicts secondary school students\u2019 mindfulness practice and responsiveness to universal school-based mindfulness training (SBMT), and how students experience SBMT. Method: A mixed-methods design was used. Participants were 4,232 students (11-13 years of age), in 43 UK secondary schools, who received universal SBMT (ie, \u201c.b\u201d program), within the MYRIAD trial (ISRCTN86619085). Following previous research, student, teacher, school, and implementation factors were evaluated as potential predictors of students\u2019 out-of-school mindfulness practice and responsiveness (ie, interest in and attitudes toward SBMT), using mixed-effects linear regression. We explored pupils\u2019 SBMT experiences using thematic content analysis of their answers to 2 free-response questions, 1 question focused on positive experiences and 1 question on difficulties/challenges. Results: Students reported practicing out-of-school mindfulness exercises on average once during the intervention (mean [SD] = 1.16 [1.07]; range, 0-5). Students\u2019 average ratings of responsiveness were intermediate (mean [SD] = 4.72 [2.88]; range, 0-10). Girls reported more responsiveness. High risk of mental health problems was associated with lower responsiveness. Asian ethnicity and higher school-level economic deprivation were related to greater responsiveness. More SBMT sessions and better quality of delivery were associated with both greater mindfulness practice and responsiveness. In terms of students\u2019 experiences of SBMT, the most frequent themes (60% of the minimally elaborated responses) were an increased awareness of bodily feelings/sensations and increased ability to regulate emotions. Conclusion: Most students did not engage with mindfulness practice. Although responsiveness to the SMBT was intermediate on average, there was substantial variation, with some youth rating it negatively and others rating it positively. Future SBMT developers should consider co-designing curricula with students, carefully assessing the student characteristics, aspects of the school environment, and implementation factors associated with mindfulness practice and responsiveness. SBMT teacher training is key, as more observed proficiency in SBMT teaching is associated with greater student mindfulness practice and responsiveness to SBMT.
\n \n\n \n \nObjective: Offering advice and support for smoking, obesity, excess alcohol, and physical inactivity is an evidence-based component of primary care. The objective was to quantify the impact of the pandemic on the rate of advice or referral for these four risk factors. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using primary care data from 1847 practices in England and 21,191,389 patients contributing to the Oxford Clinical Informatics Digital Hub. An interrupted time series analysis was undertaken with a single change point (March 2020). Monthly trends were modelled from 1st January 2018 \u2013 30th June 2022 using segmented linear regression. Results: There was an initial step reduction in advice and referrals for smoking, obesity, excess alcohol, and physical inactivity in March 2020. By June 2022, advice on smoking (slope change \u22120.02 events per hundred patient years/month (EPH/month); 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17, 0.21), obesity (0.06 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.01, 0.12), alcohol (0.02 EPH/month; 95% CI -0.01, 0.05) and physical inactivity (0.05 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.01, 0.09) had not returned to pre-pandemic levels. Similarly, smoking cessation referral remained lower (0.01 EPH/month; 95% CI -0.01, 0.09), excess alcohol referral returned to similar levels (0.0005 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.0002, 0.0008), while referral for obesity (0.14 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.10, 0.19) and physical inactivity (0.01 EPH/month; 95% CI 0.01, 0.02) increased relative to pre-pandemic rates. Conclusion: Advice and support for smoking, and advice for weight, excess alcohol and physical inactivity have not returned to pre-pandemic levels. Clinicians and policy makers should prioritise preventive care in COVID-19 recovery plans.
\n \n\n \n \nBackground: Older people with intellectual disabilities and their families report a lack of support for planning for parental death and transitions in care. This article aims to demonstrate the process of co-designing resources to support older people with intellectual disabilities and their families to plan for the future. Methods: Following interviews and focus groups with older people with intellectual disabilities and their families, we used an adapted experience-based co-design process to develop planning ahead resources. This included a \u2018trigger film\u2019 summarising findings from the earlier interview study, 12 co-design workshops and a user feedback phase. Results: The co-design group developed a set of 102 \u2018Planning Ahead Cards\u2019 to help families to talk about the future and prepare for meetings with social care professionals. The group made decisions about the content, format and design of resources, and how co-design workshops would run. The user feedback phase led to changes to the cards, and families and stakeholder groups suggested that they would be useful for planning ahead. Conclusion: The Planning Ahead Cards may facilitate planning for parental death and transitions in care for older people with intellectual disabilities and their families. The co-design approach was key to ensuring that the resources were useful and accessible for families. Patient or Public Contribution: People with intellectual disabilities and their families contributed to the design of the resources through the co-design workshops and feedback phase. The research team includes a research assistant with intellectual disabilities who co-facilitated co-design workshops and co-authored this article.
\n \n\n \n \nBACKGROUND: Simple blood tests can play an important role in identifying patients for cancer investigation. The current evidence base is limited almost entirely to tests used in isolation. However, recent evidence suggests combining multiple types of blood tests and investigating trends in blood test results over time could be more useful to select patients for further cancer investigation. Such trends could increase cancer yield and reduce unnecessary referrals. We aim to explore whether trends in blood test results are more useful than symptoms or single blood test results in selecting primary care patients for cancer investigation. We aim to develop clinical prediction models that incorporate trends in blood tests to identify the risk of cancer. METHODS: Primary care electronic health record data from the English Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum primary care database will be accessed and linked to cancer registrations and secondary care datasets. Using a cohort study design, we will describe patterns in blood testing (aim 1) and explore associations between covariates and trends in blood tests with cancer using mixed-effects, Cox, and dynamic models (aim 2). To build the predictive models for the risk of cancer, we will use dynamic risk modelling (such as multivariate joint modelling) and machine learning, incorporating simultaneous trends in multiple blood tests, together with other covariates (aim 3). Model performance will be assessed using various performance measures, including c-statistic and calibration plots. DISCUSSION: These models will form decision rules to help general practitioners find patients who need a referral for further investigation of cancer. This could increase cancer yield, reduce unnecessary referrals, and give more patients the opportunity for treatment and improved outcomes.
\n \n\n \n \nBACKGROUND: Multiplex polymerase chain reaction assays have the potential to reduce antibiotic use and shorten length of inpatient stay in children with suspected central nervous system infection by obtaining an early microbiological diagnosis. The clinical impact of the implementation of the BioFire FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis Panel on the management of childhood meningitis was evaluated at the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford and Children's Health Ireland at Temple Street in Dublin. METHODS: Children who had lumbar punctures performed as part of a septic screen were identified retrospectively through clinical discharge coding and microbiology databases from April 2017 to December 2018. Anonymized clinical and laboratory data were collected. Comparison of antibiotic use, length of stay and outcome at discharge was made with a historical cohort in Oxford (2012-2016), presenting before implementation of the FilmArray. RESULTS: The study included 460 children who had a lumbar puncture as part of an evaluation for suspected central nervous system infection. Twelve bacterial cases were identified on the FilmArray that were not detected by conventional bacterial culture. Bacterial culture identified one additional case of bacterial meningitis, caused by Escherichia coli, which had not been identified on the FilmArray. Duration of antibiotics was shorter in children when FilmArray was used than before its implementation; enterovirus meningitis (median: 4 vs. 5 days), human parechovirus meningitis (median: 4 vs. 4.5 days) and culture/FilmArray-negative cerebrospinal fluid (median: 4 vs. 6 days). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a FilmArray can identify additional bacterial cases of meningitis in children that had been negative by traditional culture methods. Children with viral meningitis and culture-negative meningitis received shorter courses of antibiotics and had shorter hospital stays when FilmArray was used. Large studies to evaluate the clinical impact and cost effectiveness of incorporating the FilmArray into routine testing are warranted.
\n \n\n \n \nBackground: The use of economic evaluation to determine the cost-effectiveness of health interventions is recommended by decision-making bodies internationally. Understanding factors that explain variations in costs and benefits is important for policy makers. Objective: This work aimed to test a priori hypotheses defining the relationship between benefits of using self-management equipment (measured using the willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach) and a number of demographic and other patient factors. Methods: Data for this study were collected as part of the first major randomised controlled trial of self-monitoring combined with self-titration in hypertension (TASMINH2). A contingent valuation framework was used with patients asked to indicate how much they were willing to pay for equipment used for self-managing hypertension. Descriptive statistics, simple statistical tests of differences and multivariate regression were used to test six a priori hypotheses. Results: 393 hypertensive patients (204 in the intervention and 189 in the control) were willing to pay for self-management equipment and 85% of these (335) provided positive WTP values. Three hypotheses were accepted: higher WTP values were associated with being male, higher household incomes and satisfaction with the equipment. Prior experiences of using this equipment, age and changes in blood pressure were not significantly related to WTP. Conclusion: The majority of hypertensive patients who had taken part in a self-management study were prepared to purchase the self-monitoring equipment using their own funds, more so for men, those with higher incomes and those with greater satisfaction. Further research based on bigger and more diverse populations is recommended.
\n \n\n \n \nBackground Few data are available regarding the use of antithrombotic strategies in coronary artery disease patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in everyday practice. We sought to describe the prevalence of AF and its antithrombotic management in a contemporary population of patients with stable coronary artery disease. Methods and Findings CLARIFY is an international, prospective, longitudinal registry of outpatients with stable coronary artery disease, defined as prior (\u226512 months) myocardial infarction, revascularization procedure, coronary stenosis >50%, or chest pain associated with evidence of myocardial ischemia. Overall, 33,428 patients were screened, of whom 32,954 had data available for analysis at baseline; of these 2,229 (6.7%) had a history of AF. Median (interquartile range) CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4 (3, 5). Oral anticoagulation alone was used in 25.7%, antiplatelet therapy alone in 52.8% (single 41.8%, dual 11.0%), and both in 21.5%. OAC use was independently associated with permanent AF (p<0.001), CHA2DS2-VASc score (p=0.006), pacemaker (p<0.001), stroke (p=0.04), absence of angina (p=0.004), decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (p<0.001), increased waist circumference (p=0.005), and longer history of coronary artery disease (p=0.008). History of percutaneous coronary intervention (p=0.004) and no/partial reimbursement for cardiovascular medication (p=0.01, p<0.001, respectively) were associated with reduced oral anticoagulant use. Conclusions In this contemporary cohort of patients with stable coronary artery disease and AF, most of whom are theoretical candidates for anticoagulation, oral anticoagulants were used in only 47.2%. Half of the patients received antiplatelet therapy alone and one-fifth received both antiplatelets and oral anticoagulants. Efforts are needed to improve adherence to guidelines in these patients.
\n \n\n \n \nIntroductionA trauma-informed approach (TIA) means working with awareness that people\u2019s histories of trauma may shape the way they engage with services, organisations or institutions. Young people with adverse childhood experiences may be at risk of retraumatisation by organisational practices in schools and universities and by employers and health agencies when they seek support. There are limited evidence-based resources to help people working in the public sector to work with adolescents in trauma-informed ways and the needs of adolescents have not been central in resource development. This study contributes to public sector capacity to work in trauma-informed ways with adolescents by codesigning and evaluating the implementation of a youth-informed organisational resource.Methods and analysisThis is an Accelerated Experience-based Co-design (AEBCD) Study followed by pre\u2013post evaluation. Public sector organisations or services, and adolescents connected with them, will collaboratively reflect on lived experience data assembled through creative arts practice, alongside data from epidemiological national data sets. These will present knowledge about the impact of adverse childhood experiences on adolescents\u2019 mental health (stage 1). Collaboratively, priorities (touch points) for organisational responses will be identified (stage 2), and a low-burden resource will be codesigned (stage 3) and offered for implementation (stage 4) and evaluation (stage 5) in diverse settings. The study will provide insights into what adolescents and public sector organisations in the UK want from a TIA resource, the experience of services/organisations in implementing this and recommendations for resource development and implementation.Ethics and disseminationThe UK National Health Service Health Research Authority approved this study (23/WM/0105). Learning will be shared across study participants in a workshop at the end of the study. Knowledge products will include a website detailing the created resource and a youth-created film documenting the study process, the elements of the codesigned resource and experiences of implementation. Dissemination will target academic, healthcare, education, social care, third sector and local government settings via knowledge exchange events, social media, accessible briefings, conference presentations and publications.
\n \n\n \n \n