1,209 research outputs found
Forefoot pathology in rheumatoid arthritis identified with ultrasound may not localise to areas of highest pressure: cohort observations at baseline and twelve months
BackgroundPlantar pressures are commonly used as clinical measures, especially to determine optimum foot orthotic design. In rheumatoid arthritis (RA) high plantar foot pressures have been linked to metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint radiological erosion scores. However, the sensitivity of foot pressure measurement to soft tissue pathology within the foot is unknown. The aim of this study was to observe plantar foot pressures and forefoot soft tissue pathology in patients who have RA.Methods A total of 114 patients with established RA (1987 ACR criteria) and 50 healthy volunteers were assessed at baseline. All RA participants returned for reassessment at twelve months. Interface foot-shoe plantar pressures were recorded using an F-Scan® system. The presence of forefoot soft tissue pathology was assessed using a DIASUS musculoskeletal ultrasound (US) system. Chi-square analyses and independent t-tests were used to determine statistical differences between baseline and twelve months. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to determine interrelationships between soft tissue pathology and foot pressures.ResultsAt baseline, RA patients had a significantly higher peak foot pressures compared to healthy participants and peak pressures were located in the medial aspect of the forefoot in both groups. In contrast, RA participants had US detectable soft tissue pathology in the lateral aspect of the forefoot. Analysis of person specific data suggests that there are considerable variations over time with more than half the RA cohort having unstable presence of US detectable forefoot soft tissue pathology. Findings also indicated that, over time, changes in US detectable soft tissue pathology are out of phase with changes in foot-shoe interface pressures both temporally and spatially.Conclusions We found that US detectable forefoot soft tissue pathology may be unrelated to peak forefoot pressures and suggest that patients with RA may biomechanically adapt to soft tissue forefoot pathology. In addition, we have observed that, in patients with RA, interface foot-shoe pressures and the presence of US detectable forefoot pathology may vary substantially over time. This has implications for clinical strategies that aim to offload peak plantar pressures
Impact of 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine on Colonization and Invasive Disease in Cambodian Children
Background
Cambodia introduced the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) in January 2015 using a 3 + 0 dosing schedule and no catch-up campaign. We investigated the effects of this introduction on pneumococcal colonization and invasive disease in children aged <5 years.
Methods
There were 6 colonization surveys done between January 2014 and January 2018 in children attending the outpatient department of a nongovernmental pediatric hospital in Siem Reap. Nasopharyngeal swabs were analyzed by phenotypic and genotypic methods to detect pneumococcal serotypes and antimicrobial resistance. Invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) data for January 2012–December 2018 were retrieved from hospital databases. Pre-PCV IPD data and pre-/post-PCV colonization data were modelled to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE).
Results
Comparing 2014 with 2016–2018, and using adjusted prevalence ratios, VE estimates for colonization were 16.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.6–21.8) for all pneumococci and 39.2% (95% CI 26.7–46.1) for vaccine serotype (VT) pneumococci. There was a 26.0% (95% CI 17.7–33.0) decrease in multidrug-resistant pneumococcal colonization. The IPD incidence was estimated to have declined by 26.4% (95% CI 14.4–35.8) by 2018, with a decrease of 36.3% (95% CI 23.8–46.9) for VT IPD and an increase of 101.4% (95% CI 62.0–145.4) for non-VT IPD.
Conclusions
Following PCV13 introduction into the Cambodian immunization schedule, there have been declines in VT pneumococcal colonization and disease in children aged <5 years. Modelling of dominant serotype colonization data produced plausible VE estimates
Об одном из возможных путей создания свободновихревых насосов типа "TURO" малой быстроходности
BACKGROUND: Interventions promoting physical activity by General Practitioners (GPs) lack a strong evidence base. Recruiting participants to trials in primary care is challenging. We investigated the feasibility of (i) delivering three interventions to promote physical activity in inactive participants and (ii) different methods of participant recruitment and randomised allocation. METHODS: We recruited general practices from Devon, Bristol and Coventry. We used a 2-by-2 factorial design for participant recruitment and randomisation. Recruitment strategies were either opportunistic (approaching patients attending their GP surgery) or systematic (selecting patients from practice lists and approaching them by letter). Randomisation strategies were either individual or by practice cluster. Feasibility outcomes included time taken to recruit the target number of participants within each practice. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three interventions: (i) written advice (control); (ii) brief GP advice (written advice plus GP advice on physical activity), and (iii) brief GP advice plus a pedometer to self-monitor physical activity during the trial. Participants allocated to written advice or brief advice each received a sealed pedometer to record their physical activity, and were instructed not to unseal the pedometer before the scheduled day of data collection. Participant level outcomes were reported descriptively and included the mean number of pedometer steps over a 7-day period, and European Quality of Life (EuroQoL)-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) scores, recorded at 12 weeks' follow-up. RESULTS: We recruited 24 practices (12 using each recruitment method; 18 randomising by cluster, 6 randomising by individual participant), encompassing 131 participants. Opportunistic recruitment was associated with less time to target recruitment compared with systematic (mean difference (days) -54.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) -103.6; -6.2) but with greater loss to follow up (28.8% versus. 6.9%; mean difference 21.9% (95% CI 9.6%; 34.1%)). There were differences in the socio-demographic characteristics of participants according to recruitment method. There was no clear pattern of change in participant level outcomes from baseline to 12 weeks across the three arms. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering and trialling GP-led interventions to promote physical activity is feasible, but trial design influences time to participant recruitment, participant withdrawal, and possibly, the socio-demographic characteristics of participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN73725618
Evaluation of different recruitment and randomisation methods in a trial of general practitioner-led interventions to increase physical activity: a randomised controlled feasibility study with factorial design
Comparative StudyJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialThis is a freely-available open access publication. Please cite the published version which is available via the DOI link in this record.There is another ORE record for this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/10871/39760BACKGROUND: Interventions promoting physical activity by General Practitioners (GPs) lack a strong evidence base. Recruiting participants to trials in primary care is challenging. We investigated the feasibility of (i) delivering three interventions to promote physical activity in inactive participants and (ii) different methods of participant recruitment and randomised allocation. METHODS: We recruited general practices from Devon, Bristol and Coventry. We used a 2-by-2 factorial design for participant recruitment and randomisation. Recruitment strategies were either opportunistic (approaching patients attending their GP surgery) or systematic (selecting patients from practice lists and approaching them by letter). Randomisation strategies were either individual or by practice cluster. Feasibility outcomes included time taken to recruit the target number of participants within each practice. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three interventions: (i) written advice (control); (ii) brief GP advice (written advice plus GP advice on physical activity), and (iii) brief GP advice plus a pedometer to self-monitor physical activity during the trial. Participants allocated to written advice or brief advice each received a sealed pedometer to record their physical activity, and were instructed not to unseal the pedometer before the scheduled day of data collection. Participant level outcomes were reported descriptively and included the mean number of pedometer steps over a 7-day period, and European Quality of Life (EuroQoL)-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) scores, recorded at 12 weeks' follow-up. RESULTS: We recruited 24 practices (12 using each recruitment method; 18 randomising by cluster, 6 randomising by individual participant), encompassing 131 participants. Opportunistic recruitment was associated with less time to target recruitment compared with systematic (mean difference (days) -54.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) -103.6; -6.2) but with greater loss to follow up (28.8% versus. 6.9%; mean difference 21.9% (95% CI 9.6%; 34.1%)). There were differences in the socio-demographic characteristics of participants according to recruitment method. There was no clear pattern of change in participant level outcomes from baseline to 12 weeks across the three arms. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering and trialling GP-led interventions to promote physical activity is feasible, but trial design influences time to participant recruitment, participant withdrawal, and possibly, the socio-demographic characteristics of participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN73725618.Medical Research Counci
Evaluation of different recruitment and randomisation methods in a trial of general practitioner-led interventions to increase physical activity: a randomised controlled feasibility study with factorial design
This is the final version. Available on open access from BMC via the DOI in this recordThere is another ORE record for this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/10871/17367BACKGROUND: Interventions promoting physical activity by General Practitioners (GPs) lack a strong evidence base. Recruiting participants to trials in primary care is challenging. We investigated the feasibility of (i) delivering three interventions to promote physical activity in inactive participants and (ii) different methods of participant recruitment and randomised allocation. METHODS: We recruited general practices from Devon, Bristol and Coventry. We used a 2-by-2 factorial design for participant recruitment and randomisation. Recruitment strategies were either opportunistic (approaching patients attending their GP surgery) or systematic (selecting patients from practice lists and approaching them by letter). Randomisation strategies were either individual or by practice cluster. Feasibility outcomes included time taken to recruit the target number of participants within each practice. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three interventions: (i) written advice (control); (ii) brief GP advice (written advice plus GP advice on physical activity), and (iii) brief GP advice plus a pedometer to self-monitor physical activity during the trial. Participants allocated to written advice or brief advice each received a sealed pedometer to record their physical activity, and were instructed not to unseal the pedometer before the scheduled day of data collection. Participant level outcomes were reported descriptively and included the mean number of pedometer steps over a 7-day period, and European Quality of Life (EuroQoL)-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) scores, recorded at 12 weeks' follow-up. RESULTS: We recruited 24 practices (12 using each recruitment method; 18 randomising by cluster, 6 randomising by individual participant), encompassing 131 participants. Opportunistic recruitment was associated with less time to target recruitment compared with systematic (mean difference (days) -54.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) -103.6; -6.2) but with greater loss to follow up (28.8% versus. 6.9%; mean difference 21.9% (95% CI 9.6%; 34.1%)). There were differences in the socio-demographic characteristics of participants according to recruitment method. There was no clear pattern of change in participant level outcomes from baseline to 12 weeks across the three arms. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering and trialling GP-led interventions to promote physical activity is feasible, but trial design influences time to participant recruitment, participant withdrawal, and possibly, the socio-demographic characteristics of participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN73725618.Medical Research Counci
Recommended from our members
Modelling the lifetime cost-effectiveness of radical prostatectomy, radiotherapy and active monitoring for men with clinically localised prostate cancer from median 10-year outcomes in the ProtecT randomised trial.
BACKGROUND: Optimal management strategies for clinically localised prostate cancer are debated. Using median 10-year data from the largest randomised controlled trial to date (ProtecT), the lifetime cost-effectiveness of three major treatments (radical radiotherapy, radical prostatectomy and active monitoring) was explored according to age and risk subgroups. METHODS: A decision-analytic (Markov) model was developed and informed by clinical input. The economic evaluation adopted a UK NHS perspective and the outcome was cost per Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained (reported in UK£), estimated using EQ-5D-3L. RESULTS: Costs and QALYs extrapolated over the lifetime were mostly similar between the three randomised strategies and their subgroups, but with some important differences. Across all analyses, active monitoring was associated with higher costs, probably associated with higher rates of metastatic disease and changes to radical treatments. When comparing the value of the strategies (QALY gains and costs) in monetary terms, for both low-risk prostate cancer subgroups, radiotherapy generated the greatest net monetary benefit (£293,446 [95% CI £282,811 to £299,451] by D'Amico and £292,736 [95% CI £284,074 to £297,719] by Grade group 1). However, the sensitivity analysis highlighted uncertainty in the finding when stratified by Grade group, as radiotherapy had 53% probability of cost-effectiveness and prostatectomy had 43%. In intermediate/high risk groups, using D'Amico and Grade group > = 2, prostatectomy generated the greatest net monetary benefit (£275,977 [95% CI £258,630 to £285,474] by D'Amico and £271,933 [95% CI £237,864 to £287,784] by Grade group). This finding was supported by the sensitivity analysis. Prostatectomy had the greatest net benefit (£290,487 [95% CI £280,781 to £296,281]) for men younger than 65 and radical radiotherapy (£201,311 [95% CI £195,161 to £205,049]) for men older than 65, but sensitivity analysis showed considerable uncertainty in both findings. CONCLUSION: Over the lifetime, extrapolating from the ProtecT trial, radical radiotherapy and prostatectomy appeared to be cost-effective for low risk prostate cancer, and radical prostatectomy for intermediate/high risk prostate cancer, but there was uncertainty in some estimates. Longer ProtecT trial follow-up is required to reduce uncertainty in the model. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN20141297: http://isrctn.org (14/10/2002); ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02044172: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (23/01/2014)
'Choosing shoes': a preliminary study into the challenges facing clinicians in assessing footwear for rheumatoid patients
Background: Footwear has been accepted as a therapeutic intervention for the foot affected
by rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Evidence relating to the objective assessment of footwear in
patients with RA is limited. The aims of this study were to identify current footwear styles,
footwear characteristics, and factors that influence footwear choice experienced by patients
with RA.
Methods: Eighty patients with RA were recruited from rheumatology clinics during the
summer months. Clinical characteristics, global function, and foot impairment and disability
measures were recorded. Current footwear, footwear characteristics and the factors
associated with choice of footwear were identified. Suitability of footwear was recorded using
pre-determined criteria for assessing footwear type, based on a previous study of foot pain.
Results: The patients had longstanding RA with moderate-to severe disability and
impairment. The foot and ankle assessment demonstrated a low-arch profile with both
forefoot and rearfoot structural deformities. Over 50% of shoes worn by patients were opentype
footwear. More than 70% of patients’ footwear was defined as being poor. Poor
footwear characteristics such as heel rigidity and sole hardness were observed. Patients
reported comfort (17%) and fit (14%) as important factors in choosing their own footwear.
Only five percent (5%) of patients wore therapeutic footwear.
Conclusions: The majority of patients with RA wear footwear that has been previously
described as poor. Future work needs to aim to define and justify the specific features of
footwear that may be of benefit to foot health for people with RA
Characteristics of men responding to an invitation to undergo testing for prostate cancer as part of a randomised trial
Background:
Sociodemographic characteristics are associated with participating in cancer screening and trials. We compared the characteristics of those responding with those not responding to a single invitation for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer as part of the Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP).
/
Methods:
Age, rurality and deprivation among 197,763 men from 271 cluster-randomised primary care centres in the UK were compared between those responding (n = 90,300) and those not responding (n = 100,953) to a prostate cancer testing invitation.
/
Results:
There was little difference in age between responders and nonresponders. Responders were slightly more likely to come from urban rather than rural areas and were slightly less deprived than those who did not respond.
/
Conclusion:
These data indicate similarities in age and only minor differences in deprivation and urban location between responders and nonresponders. These differences were smaller, but in the same direction as those observed in other screening trials.
/
Trial registration:
ISRCTN92187251. Registered on 29 November 2004
Models of Star-Planet Magnetic Interaction
Magnetic interactions between a planet and its environment are known to lead
to phenomena such as aurorae and shocks in the solar system. The large number
of close-in exoplanets that were discovered triggered a renewed interest in
magnetic interactions in star-planet systems. Multiple other magnetic effects
were then unveiled, such as planet inflation or heating, planet migration,
planetary material escape, and even modification of the host star properties.
We review here the recent efforts in modelling and understanding magnetic
interactions between stars and planets in the context of compact systems. We
first provide simple estimates of the effects of magnetic interactions and then
detail analytical and numerical models for different representative scenarii.
We finally lay out a series of future developments that are needed today to
better understand and constrain these fascinating interactions.Comment: 23 pages, 10 figures, accepted as a chapter in the Handbook of
Exoplanet
A Standardised Procedure for Evaluating Creative Systems: Computational Creativity Evaluation Based on What it is to be Creative
Computational creativity is a flourishing research area, with a variety of creative systems being produced and developed. Creativity evaluation has not kept pace with system development with an evident lack of systematic evaluation of the creativity of these systems in the literature. This is partially due to difficulties in defining what it means for a computer to be creative; indeed, there is no consensus on this for human creativity, let alone its computational equivalent. This paper proposes a Standardised Procedure for Evaluating Creative Systems (SPECS). SPECS is a three-step process: stating what it means for a particular computational system to be creative, deriving and performing tests based on these statements. To assist this process, the paper offers a collection of key components of creativity, identified empirically from discussions of human and computational creativity. Using this approach, the SPECS methodology is demonstrated through a comparative case study evaluating computational creativity systems that improvise music
- …