Localising the auditory N1m with event-related beamformers:localisation accuracy following bilateral and unilateral stimulation

The auditory evoked N1m-P2m response complex presents a challenging case for MEG source-modelling, because symmetrical, phase-locked activity occurs in the hemispheres both contralateral and ipsilateral to stimulation. Beamformer methods, in particular, can be susceptible to localisation bias and spurious sources under these conditions. This study explored the accuracy and efficiency of event-related beamformer source models for auditory MEG data under typical experimental conditions: monaural and diotic stimulation; and whole-head beamformer analysis compared to a half-head analysis using only sensors from the hemisphere contralateral to stimulation. Event-related beamformer localisations were also compared with more traditional single-dipole models. At the group level, the event-related beamformer performed equally well as the single-dipole models in terms of accuracy for both the N1m and the P2m, and in terms of efficiency (number of successful source models) for the N1m. The results yielded by the half-head analysis did not differ significantly from those produced by the traditional whole-head analysis. Any localisation bias caused by the presence of correlated sources is minimal in the context of the inter-individual variability in source localisations. In conclusion, event-related beamformers provide a useful alternative to equivalent-current dipole models in localisation of auditory evoked responses

How patient participation was used to develop a questionnaire that is fit for purpose for assessing quality of life in severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Previous research shows that existing asthma quality of life questionnaires fail to measure the burden of oral corticosteroids that can be used to treat severe asthma, and are therefore not fit for purpose for severe asthma according to the USA's Federal Drug Authority's (FDA) criteria for content validity. Patient input and documentation of that input is key to achieving content validity according to FDA guidelines. This paper describes the process of constructing a new questionnaire to measure the burden of asthma symptoms and burden of treatment in severe asthma, using criteria specified by the FDA. METHODS: A draft severe asthma questionnaire (SAQ) was constructed using qualitative input from severe asthma patients who took part in an earlier study. The aim of this study was to improve that draft questionnaire using a further group of patients. In four iterative focus groups, 16 people with severe asthma completed the draft questionnaire, discussed the wording and structure and suggested changes that were incorporated into the final version. RESULTS: The original intention to ask patients to identify whether problems were caused by asthma symptoms or side effects of medication was abandoned as the attribution of cause was found to be difficult and inconsistent. The recall period of 2 weeks was acceptable but fails to reflect the patients' desire to express the variability of severe asthma. Patients suggested improvements to the wording of the draft questionnaire, including splitting some items in two, combining two items in one, and changes to some of the words in individual items and the response scale. CONCLUSIONS: The final version of the questionnaire was substantially different from one constructed using only qualitative reports from patients about the quality of life deficits of severe asthma. Patients make a valuable contribution to the questionnaire if they are asked to comment and improve an initial draft and where patients are treated as partners in the process of questionnaire construction, rather than only as a source of information to experts who construct the questionnaire

A 2 × 2 factorial, randomised, open-label trial to determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of hypertonic saline (HTS 6%) and carbocisteine for airway clearance versus usual care over 52 weeks in adults with bronchiectasis:a protocol for the CLEAR clinical trial

Background: Current guidelines for the management of bronchiectasis (BE) highlight the lack of evidence to recommend mucoactive agents, such as hypertonic saline (HTS) and carbocisteine, to aid sputum removal as part of standard care. We hypothesise that mucoactive agents (HTS or carbocisteine, or a combination) are effective in reducing exacerbations over a 52-week period, compared to usual care. Methods: This is a 52-week, 2 × 2 factorial, randomized, open-label trial to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of HTS 6% and carbocisteine for airway clearance versus usual care-the Clinical and cost-effectiveness of hypertonic saline (HTS 6%) and carbocisteine for airway clearance versus usual care (CLEAR) trial. Patients will be randomised to (1) standard care and twice-daily nebulised HTS (6%), (2) standard care and carbocisteine (750 mg three times per day until visit 3, reducing to 750 mg twice per day), (3) standard care and combination of twice-daily nebulised HTS and carbocisteine, or (4) standard care. The primary outcome is the mean number of exacerbations over 52 weeks. Key inclusion criteria are as follows: Adults with a diagnosis of BE on computed tomography, BE as the primary respiratory diagnosis, and two or more pulmonary exacerbations in the last year requiring antibiotics and production of daily sputum. Discussion: This trial's pragmatic research design avoids the significant costs associated with double-blind trials whilst optimising rigour in other areas of trial delivery. The CLEAR trial will provide evidence as to whether HTS, carbocisteine or both are effective and cost effective for patients with BE. Trial registration: EudraCT number: 2017-000664-14 (first entered in the database on 20 October 2017). ISRCTN.com, ISRCTN89040295. Registered on 6 July/2018. Funder: National Institute for Health Research, Health Technology Assessment Programme (15/100/01). Sponsor: Belfast Health and Social Care Trust. Ethics Reference Number: 17/NE/0339. Protocol version: V3.0 Final_14052018

A comparison of the sensitivity of EQ-5D, SF-6D and TTO utility values to changes in vision and perceived visual function in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma

Background: Economic viability of treatments for primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) should be assessed objectively to prioritise health care interventions. This study aims to identify the methods for eliciting utility values (UVs) most sensitive to differences in visual field and visual functioning in patients with POAG. As a secondary objective, the dimensions of generic health-related and vision-related quality of life most affected by progressive vision loss will be identified. Methods: A total of 132 POAG patients were recruited. Three sets of utility values (EuroQoL EQ-5D, Short Form SF-6D, Time Trade Off) and a measure of perceived visual functioning from the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) were elicited during face-to-face interviews. The sensitivity of UVs to differences in the binocular visual field, visual acuity and visual functioning measures was analysed using non-parametric statistical methods. Results: Median utilities were similar across Integrated Visual Field score quartiles for EQ-5D (P = 0.08) whereas SF-6D and Time-Trade-Off UVs significantly decreased (p = 0.01 and p = 0.001, respectively). The VFQ-25 score varied across Integrated Visual Field and binocular visual acuity groups and was associated with all three UVs (P ≤ 0.001); most of its vision-specific sub-scales were associated with the vision markers. The most affected dimension was driving. A relationship with vision markers was found for the physical component of SF-36 and not for any dimension of EQ-5D. Conclusions: The Time-Trade-Off was more sensitive than EQ-5D and SF-6D to changes in vision and visual functioning associated with glaucoma progression but could not measure quality of life changes in the mildest disease stages

Behavioural activation by mental health nurses for late-life depression in primary care: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Depressive symptoms are common in older adults. The effectiveness of pharmacological treatments and the availability of psychological treatments in primary care are limited. A behavioural approach to depression treatment might be beneficial to many older adults but such care is still largely unavailable. Behavioural Activation (BA) protocols are less complicated and more easy to train than other psychological therapies, making them very suitable for delivery by less specialised therapists. The recent introduction of the mental health nurse in primary care centres in the Netherlands has created major opportunities for improving the accessibility of psychological treatments for late-life depression in primary care. BA may thus address the needs of older patients while improving treatment outcome and lowering costs.The primary objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of BA in comparison with treatment as usual (TAU) for late-life depression in Dutch primary care. A secondary goal is to explore several potential mechanisms of change, as well as predictors and moderators of treatment outcome of BA for late-life depression. Methods/design: Cluster-randomised controlled multicentre trial with two parallel groups: a) behavioural activation, and b) treatment as usual, conducted in primary care centres with a follow-up of 52 weeks. The main inclusion criterion is a PHQ-9 score > 9. Patients are excluded from the trial in case of severe mental illness that requires specialized treatment, high suicide risk, drug and/or alcohol abuse, prior psychotherapy, change in dosage or type of prescribed antidepressants in the previous 12 weeks, or moderate to severe cognitive impairment. The intervention consists of 8 weekly 30-min BA sessions delivered by a trained mental health nurse. Discussion: We expect BA to be an effective and cost-effective treatment for late-life depression compared to TAU. BA delivered by mental health nurses could increase the availability and accessibility of non-pharmacological treatments for late-life depression in primary care. Trial registration: This study is retrospectively registered in the Dutch Clinical Trial Register NTR6013on August 25th 2016. © 2017 The Author(s)