Factors associated with self-care activities among adults in the United Kingdom: a systematic review

Background: The Government has promoted self-care. Our aim was to review evidence about who uses self-tests and other self-care activities (over-the-counter medicine, private sector,complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), home blood pressure monitors). Methods: During April 2007, relevant bibliographic databases (Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, PsycINFO,British Nursing Index, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Sociological Abstracts, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Arthritis and Complementary Medicine Database, Complementary and Alternative Medicine and Pain Database) were searched, and potentially relevant studies were reviewed against eligibility criteria. Studies were included if they were published during the last 15 years and identified factors, reasons or characteristics associated with a relevant activity among UK adults. Two independent reviewers used proformas to assess the quality of eligible studies. Results: 206 potentially relevant papers were identified, 157 were excluded, and 49 papers related to 46 studies were included: 37 studies were, or used data from questionnaire surveys, 36 had quality scores of five or more out of 10, and 27 were about CAM. Available evidence suggests that users of CAM and over-the-counter medicine are female, middle-aged, affluent and/or educated with some measure of poor health, and that people who use the private sector are affluent and/or educated. Conclusion: People who engage in these activities are likely to be affluent. Targeted promotion may, therefore, be needed to ensure that use is equitable. People who use some activities also appear to have poorer measures of health than non-users or people attending conventional services. It is, therefore, also important to ensure that self-care is not used as a second choice for people who have not had their needs met by conventional service

EarLy Surveillance for Autoimmune diabetes - protocol for a qualitative study of general population and stakeholder perspectives on screening for type 1 diabetes in the UK [ELSA 1]

Objective Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is the most common form of diabetes in children, accounting for 96% of all diabetes, with 29,000 children affected in the UK. Studies have recently identified immunotherapies that safely delay the development of T1D for at least three years, and further therapies are in development. General population screening programmes in other countries can now accurately identify children with presymptomatic T1D who can be entered into prevention studies. The UK does not have such a system in place. We aim to explore whether parents and children in the UK would want to be part of such a programme of testing for T1D in the general population, how they would want to be informed and participate in such a programme, and how any barriers to recruitment and participation can be addressed. Additionally, the views of stakeholders who would be involved in the testing programme will be collected and analysed. Research Design and Methods We will interview parents/guardians and children aged 3-13 years about their views on screening for T1D. We will recruit purposefully to ensure representation across ethnicities and socioeconomic groups. Interviews will be transcribed, analysed, and used to inform iterative co-design work with additional families to address any issues raised. Similar qualitative work will be undertaken with professional stakeholders who would be involved in implementing any future screening programme. Where possible, all aspects of this study will be performed remotely by phone or online to minimise infection risk. Conclusions This qualitative study will provide the first insights into acceptability of testing and monitoring for T1D in the general population, from the perspective of families and stakeholders in the UK. Co-design work will help establish the barriers and identify strategies to mitigate and overcome these issues, as an important step towards consideration of national testing for T1D

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

General population screening for paediatric type 1 diabetes—a qualitative study of UK professional stakeholders

Aims Identifying children at risk of type 1 diabetes allows education for symptom recognition and monitoring to reduce the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis at presentation. We aimed to explore stakeholder views towards paediatric general population screening for type 1 diabetes in the United Kingdom (UK). Methods Qualitative interviews were undertaken with 25 stakeholders, including diabetes specialists, policymakers and community stakeholders who could be involved in a future type 1 diabetes screening programme in the UK. A thematic framework analysis was performed using the National Screening Committee's evaluative criteria as the overarching framework. Results Diabetic ketoacidosis prevention was felt to be a priority and proposed benefits of screening included education, monitoring and helping the family to better prepare for a future with type 1 diabetes. However, diabetes specialists were cautious about general population screening because of lack of evidence for public acceptability. Concerns were raised about the harms of living with risk, provoking health anxiety and threatening the child's right to an ‘open future’. Support systems that met the clinical and psychological needs of the family living with risk were considered essential. Stakeholders were supportive of research into general population screening and acknowledged this would be a priority if an immunoprevention agent were licensed in the UK. Conclusions Although stakeholders suggested the harms of UK paediatric general population screening currently outweigh the benefits, this view would potentially be altered if prevention therapies were licensed. In this case, an evidence-based screening strategy would need to be formulated and public acceptability explored

Excavation of an early Bronze Age Round Barrow at Emmets Post, Shaugh Prior, Dartmoor

Oxford Archaeology carried out an excavation of an early Bronze Age barrow at Emmets Post, Dartmoor. The barrow comprised a primary turf mound and a central cairn beneath a secondary turf mound with a stone kerb. No human remains were found. A radiocarbon dating programme yielded a wide range of dates. Some derived from older material incidentally incorporated within the turves during construction, but a date of 1750-1560 cal BC for the central area of the barrow may represent the true date of construction. The landscape had been largely destroyed by modern quarrying, but present-day Lidar data and contour data from historic maps were used to reconstruct the pre-quarry topography