Randomised evaluation of pre-notification of trial participants before self-report outcome data collection to improve retention: SWAT86

Background Retention is considered the second highest trial methods priority in the UK after recruitment. There is limited evidence on whether notifying trial participants that a follow-up questionnaire will be sent soon (‘pre-notification’) affects retention. Methods This Study Within a Trial (SWAT) evaluated whether sending a pre-notification letter or email around 2 weeks before sending a self-report questionnaire increased retention, in terms of provision of the host trial primary outcome. The SWAT was a randomised, two-arm, parallel-design (1:1 allocation ratio) trial, controlled by ‘no pre-notification letter’. It was embedded within the WORKWELL host trial, which evaluated the impact of job retention vocational rehabilitation on work-related and health-related outcomes of employed people with inflammatory arthritis. The SWAT primary outcome was a valid response for the WORKWELL primary outcome. Results Two hundred forty-four trial participants took part in the SWAT. All were included in the analysis. Among those sent a pre-reminder, 100/121 (83%) provided a valid response for the WORKWELL primary outcome, compared to 97/123 (79%) of those not sent a pre-reminder. The estimated adjusted odds ratio was 1.28 (95% confidence interval 0.67–2.42), with a risk difference of 3.8% (95% CI -6.1 to 13.6%), favouring the prereminder. The estimated intervention cost per additional participant retained was £53.42, and the total cost per additional participant retained was £46.52. Conclusion Researchers may have a small improvement in trial retention by using pre-notification. The cost per additional participant retained is relatively low. However, further evaluations are merited

Life and Leisure Activities following Stroke or Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA): An Observational, Multi-Centre, 6-Month Follow-Up Study

Objective: To examine changes in leisure participation following stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and explore its relationship to modifiable and non-modifiable participant characteristics. Design: An observational study design with self-report questionnaires collected at two time points (baseline and 6-months). Setting: The study was conducted across 21 hospital sites in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Participants: Participants were aged 18+ and had experienced a first or recurrent stroke or TIA and had a post-stroke/TIA modified Rankin score (mRS) of ≤3. Procedure: Research practitioners at each site approached potential participants. Individuals who agreed to participate completed a baseline questionnaire whilst an inpatient or at a first post-stroke/TIA clinic appointment. A follow-up questionnaire was posted to participants with a freepost return envelope. Two questionnaires were developed that collected demographic information, pre-stroke/TIA mRS, social circumstances (e.g., employment situation) and incorporated the shortened Nottingham Leisure Questionnaire (sNLQ). Results: The study recruited eligible participants (N = 3295); 2000 participants returned questionnaires at follow-up. Data showed three participant variables were significant predictors of engagement in leisure activities post-stroke/TIA: age, sex, and deprivation decile. There was an overall decline in the number and variety of leisure activities, with an average loss of 2.2 activities following stroke/TIA. Only one activity, “exercise/fitness” saw an increase in engagement from baseline to follow-up; watching TV remained stable, whilst participation in all other activities reduced between 10% and 40% with an average activity engagement reduction of 22%. Conclusions: Some groups experienced a greater reduction in activities than others—notably older participants, female participants, and those living in a low socioeconomic area. Registration: researchregistry4607. Strengths and limitations of this study: 1. This is the largest-ever study to survey life and leisure activity engagement following stroke/TIA. 2. Survey responses were self-reported retrospectively and, therefore, may have been misreported, or misremembered. 3. Despite the large cohort, there were few participants, and so respondents, from ethnic minority groups

Cluster-randomized, crossover trial of head positioning in acute stroke

The role of supine positioning after acute stroke in improving cerebral blood flow and the countervailing risk of aspiration pneumonia have led to variation in head positioning in clinical practice. We wanted to determine whether outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke could be improved by positioning the patient to be lying flat (i.e., fully supine with the back horizontal and the face upwards) during treatment to increase cerebral perfusion. METHODS In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, crossover trial conducted in nine countries, we assigned 11,093 patients with acute stroke (85% of the strokes were ischemic) to receive care in either a lying-flat position or a sitting-up position with the head elevated to at least 30 degrees, according to the randomization assignment of the hospital to which they were admitted; the designated position was initiated soon after hospital admission and was maintained for 24 hours. The primary outcome was degree of disability at 90 days, as assessed with the use of the modified Rankin scale (scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability and a score of 6 indicating death). RESULTS The median interval between the onset of stroke symptoms and the initiation of the assigned position was 14 hours (interquartile range, 5 to 35). Patients in the lying-flat group were less likely than patients in the sitting-up group to maintain the position for 24 hours (87% vs. 95%, P\u3c0.001). In a proportional-odds model, there was no significant shift in the distribution of 90-day disability outcomes on the global modified Rankin scale between patients in the lying-flat group and patients in the sitting-up group (unadjusted odds ratio for a difference in the distribution of scores on the modified Rankin scale in the lying-flat group, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.92 to 1.10; P = 0.84). Mortality within 90 days was 7.3% among the patients in the lying-flat group and 7.4% among the patients in the sitting-up group (P = 0.83). There were no significant betweengroup differences in the rates of serious adverse events, including pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS Disability outcomes after acute stroke did not differ significantly between patients assigned to a lying-flat position for 24 hours and patients assigned to a sitting-up position with the head elevated to at least 30 degrees for 24 hours

Job retention vocational rehabilitation for employed people with inflammatory arthritis: adaptations to the WORKWELL trial due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

There are high levels of work disability, absenteeism (sick leave) and presenteeism (reduced productivity) amongst people with inflammatory arthritis. WORKWELL is a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial of job retention vocational rehabilitation for employed people with inflammatory arthritis. The trial tested the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the WORKWELL programme compared to the receipt of written self-help information only. Both arms continued to receive usual care. In March 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the WORKWELL trial paused to recruitment and intervention delivery. To successfully re-start, protocol amendments were rapidly submitted and changes to existing trial procedures were made. The WORKWELL protocol was adapted in response to both the practical issues likely faced by many clinical research studies active across NHS sites during the pandemic and additional trial-specific challenges. A key eligibility criterion for the trial required participants to be in paid work for at least 15 h per week. However, UK national lockdowns led to a substantial proportion of the workforce suddenly being furloughed or unable to work, and many people with arthritis taking immunosuppressive medications were asked to shield themselves. Thus, the number of eligible participants was reduced. Those continuing to work were harder to identify, as hospital clinics moved to remote delivery, and also to then screen, consent and treat, as the hospital research staff and clinical therapists were re-deployed. New recruitment and consent strategies were applied, and where sites had reduced capacity, responsibilities were absorbed by the trial management team. Remote intervention delivery and electronic data capture were also implemented. By rapidly adapting the WORKWELL protocol and procedures, the trial successfully reopened to recruitment in July 2020, only 4 months after the trial pause. We were able to achieve recruitment figures above the pre-COVID target and maintain a high retention rate. In addition, we found many of the protocol changes beneficial, as these streamlined trial procedures, thus improving efficiency. It is likely that many strategies implemented in response to the pandemic may become standard practice in future research within trials of a similar design and methodology. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03942783. Retrospectively registered on 08 May 2019. ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN61762297. Retrospectively registered on 13 May 2019

Early, specialist vocational rehabilitation to facilitate return to work after traumatic brain injury: the FRESH feasibility RCT

Background Up to 160,000 people incur traumatic brain injury (TBI) each year in the UK. TBI can have profound effects on many areas of human functioning, including participation in work. There is limited evidence of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation (VR) after injury to promote early return to work (RTW) following TBI. Objective To assess the feasibility of a definitive, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early, specialist VR plus usual care (UC) compared with UC alone on work retention 12 months post TBI. Design A multicentre, feasibility, parallel-group RCT with a feasibility economic evaluation and an embedded mixed-methods process evaluation. Randomisation was by remote computer-generated allocation. Setting Three NHS major trauma centres (MTCs) in England. Participants Adults with TBI admitted for > 48 hours and working or studying prior to injury. Interventions Early specialist TBI VR delivered by occupational therapists (OTs) in the community using a case co-ordination model. Main outcome measures Self-reported RTW 12 months post randomisation, mood, functional ability, participation, work self-efficacy, quality of life and work ability. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment and retention rates. Follow-up was by postal questionnaires in two centres and face to face in one centre. Those collecting data were blind to treatment allocation. Results Out of 102 target participants, 78 were recruited (39 randomised to each arm), representing 39% of those eligible and 5% of those screened. Approximately 2.2 patients were recruited per site per month. Of those, 56% had mild injuries, 18% had moderate injuries and 26% had severe injuries. A total of 32 out of 45 nominated carers were recruited. A total of 52 out of 78 (67%) TBI participants responded at 12 months (UC, n = 23; intervention, n = 29), completing 90% of the work questions; 21 out of 23 (91%) UC respondents and 20 out of 29 (69%) intervention participants returned to work at 12 months. Two participants disengaged from the intervention. Face-to-face follow-up was no more effective than postal follow-up. RTW was most strongly related to social participation and work self-efficacy. It is feasible to assess the cost-effectiveness of VR. Intervention was delivered as intended and valued by participants. Factors likely to affect a definitive trial include deploying experienced OTs, no clear TBI definition or TBI registers, and repatriation of more severe TBI from MTCs, affecting recruitment of those most likely to benefit/least likely to drop out. Limitations Target recruitment was not reached, but mechanisms to achieve this in future studies were identified. Retention was lower than expected, particularly in UC, potentially biasing estimates of the 12-month RTW rate. Conclusions This study met most feasibility objectives. The intervention was delivered with high fidelity. When objectives were not met, strategies to ensure feasibility of a full trial were identified. Future work should test two-stage recruitment and include resources to recruit from ‘spokes’. A broader measure covering work ability, self-efficacy and participation may be a more sensitive outcome. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN38581822. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Assessing fidelity to complex interventions: the icons experience

Background Assessing fidelity to complex healthcare interventions in clinical trials is a challenging area. ‘ICONS' is a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial of a systematic voiding programme (SVP), incorporating bladder training and prompted voiding, to promote post-stroke continence. Here we describe feasibility of one aspect of fidelity assessment: the day-to-day implementation of the SVP through analysis of clinical logs. Methods Nurses completed clinical logs daily, which included documenting: the toileting interval, proposed toileting times and times toileted. Clinical logs were sampled across trial sites. The original intention was to assess fidelity by exploring the degree of concordance between proposed times and times toileted. Initial analysis revealed the unfeasibility of this method due to documentation errors in toileting intervals and proposed times. Consequently, the planned method was changed to identification of key ‘quality indicators' (QIs) for documentation of practice. Results The need to revise the method of measurement demonstrates the difficulty in assessing fidelity. Assessment of clinical logs revealed low levels of adherence to key quality indicators. However, it is unclear whether this indicates poor fidelity or an imprecise method of fidelity assessment. Conclusion This study highlights challenges of assessing fidelity to complex interventions. Lessons learned will inform the measurement of fidelity in a future trial. Researchers should be aware that the practical implementation of complex healthcare interventions may not be exactly as intended. For ICONS, clinical logs constituted a proxy measure of day-to-day fidelity to the intervention: identification of alternative methods could be considered

STIMULATE-ICP-Delphi (symptoms, trajectory, inequalities and management: understanding long-COVID to address and transform existing integrated care pathways Delphi): study protocol

Introduction As mortality rates from COVID-19 disease fall, the high prevalence of long-term sequelae (Long COVID) is becoming increasingly widespread, challenging healthcare systems globally. Traditional pathways of care for Long Term Conditions (LTCs) have tended to be managed by disease-specific specialties, an approach that has been ineffective in delivering care for patients with multi-morbidity. The multi-system nature of Long COVID and its impact on physical and psychological health demands a more effective model of holistic, integrated care. The evolution of integrated care systems (ICSs) in the UK presents an important opportunity to explore areas of mutual benefit to LTC, multi-morbidity and Long COVID care. There may be benefits in comparing and contrasting ICPs for Long COVID with ICPs for other LTCs. Methods and analysis This study aims to evaluate health services requirements for ICPs for Long COVID and their applicability to other LTCs including multi-morbidity and the overlap with medically not yet explained symptoms (MNYES). The study will follow a Delphi design and involve an expert panel of stakeholders including people with lived experience, as well as clinicians with expertise in Long COVID and other LTCs. Study processes will include expert panel and moderator panel meetings, surveys, and interviews. The Delphi process is part of the overall STIMULATE-ICP programme, aimed at improving integrated care for people with Long COVID. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this Delphi study has been obtained (Research Governance Board of the University of York) as have approvals for the other STIMULATE-ICP studies. Study outcomes are likely to inform policy for ICPs across LTCs. Results will be disseminated through scientific publication, conference presentation and communications with patients and stakeholders involved in care of other LTCs and Long COVID

Systematic voiding programme in adults with urinary incontinence following acute stroke: the ICONS-II RCT

Background: Urinary incontinence affects around half of stroke survivors in the acute phase, and it often presents as a new problem after stroke or, if pre-existing, worsens significantly, adding to the disability and helplessness caused by neurological deficits. New management programmes after stroke are needed to address urinary incontinence early and effectively. Objective: The Identifying Continence OptioNs after Stroke (ICONS)-II trial aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a systematic voiding programme for urinary incontinence after stroke in hospital. Design: This was a pragmatic, multicentre, individual-patient-randomised (1 : 1), parallel-group trial with an internal pilot. Setting: Eighteen NHS stroke services with stroke units took part. Participants: Participants were adult men and women with acute stroke and urinary incontinence, including those with cognitive impairment. Intervention: Participants were randomised to the intervention, a systematic voiding programme, or to usual care. The systematic voiding programme comprised assessment, behavioural interventions (bladder training or prompted voiding) and review. The assessment included evaluation of the need for and possible removal of an indwelling urinary catheter. The intervention began within 24 hours of recruitment and continued until discharge from the stroke unit. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was severity of urinary incontinence (measured using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire) at 3 months post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures were taken at 3 and 6 months after randomisation and on discharge from the stroke unit. They included severity of urinary incontinence (at discharge and at 6 months), urinary symptoms, number of urinary tract infections, number of days indwelling urinary catheter was in situ, functional independence, quality of life, falls, mortality rate and costs. The trial statistician remained blinded until clinical effectiveness analysis was complete. Results: The planned sample size was 1024 participants, with 512 allocated to each of the intervention and the usual-care groups. The internal pilot did not meet the target for recruitment and was extended to March 2020, with changes made to address low recruitment. The trial was paused in March 2020 because of COVID-19, and was later stopped, at which point 157 participants had been randomised (intervention, n = 79; usual care, n = 78). There were major issues with attrition, with 45% of the primary outcome data missing: 56% of the intervention group data and 35% of the usual-care group data. In terms of the primary outcome, patients allocated to the intervention group had a lower score for severity of urinary incontinence (higher scores indicate greater severity in urinary incontinence) than those allocated to the usual-care group, with means (standard deviations) of 8.1 (7.4) and 9.1 (7.8), respectively. Limitations: The trial was unable to recruit sufficient participants and had very high attrition, which resulted in seriously underpowered results. Conclusions: The internal pilot did not meet its target for recruitment and, despite recruitment subsequently being more promising, it was concluded that the trial was not feasible owing to the combined problems of poor recruitment, poor retention and COVID-19. The intervention group had a slightly lower score for severity of urinary incontinence at 3 months post randomisation, but this result should be interpreted with caution. Future work: Further studies to assess the effectiveness of an intervention starting in or continuing into the community are required