A comparison of the illness beliefs of people with angina and their peers: a questionnaire study

BACKGROUND: What people believe about their illness may affect how they cope with it. It has been suggested that such beliefs stem from those commonly held within society . This study compared the beliefs held by people with angina, regarding causation and coping in angina, with the beliefs of their friends who do not suffer from angina. METHODS: Postal survey using the York Angina Beliefs Questionnaire (version 1), which elicits stress attributions and misconceived beliefs about causation and coping. This was administered to 164 people with angina and their non-cohabiting friends matched for age and sex. 132 people with angina and 94 friends completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: Peers are more likely than people with angina to believe that angina is caused by a worn out heart (p <0.01), angina is a small heart attack (p = 0.02), and that it causes permanent damage to the heart (p <0.001). Peers were also more likely to believe that people with angina should take life easy (p <0.01) and avoid exercise (p = 0.04) and excitement (p <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The beliefs of the peer group about causation and coping in angina run counter to professional advice. Over time this may contribute to a reduction in patient concordance with risk factor reduction, and may help to create cardiac invalids

Attitudes of parents towards the ‘Fit Together’ childhood obesity prevention programme: a qualitative study

Background: The latest available data for England show that childhood obesity continues to be a major public health concern with 9.3% of 4–5 years old and 18.9% of 10–11 years old children found to be obese (1). The aim of the study was to explore attitudes towards a community based childhood obesity prevention project among parents participating in the programme. Methods: The ‘Fit Together’ programme was provided in socio-economically deprived areas of Leeds which, at the time of the research study, was in its final year of running. The programme was delivered for 2 hours each week over a six week period by community health educators, and involved health education and cooking sessions. A convenience sample of parents who had attended at least one session of the Fit Together programme, delivered between November-December 2014, were recruited from a children’s centre (where families access health advice and related activities with their children aged 0– 5yr) and a primary school. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using a topic schedule with prompts, and were digitally recorded. A short screening questionnaire was completed to obtain demographic information. Three parents were present in each of the two Fit Together sessions allocated for recruitment. These six parents were recruited to the study and were interviewed. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, transcripts manually coded and thematic analysis conducted using a framework approach. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences Local Research Ethics Coordinator, Leeds Beckett University. Results: Participants were all mothers with 1–3 children, and mean age was 27 years. Four participants self-defined their ethnicity as White British and the remaining two as Pakistani. Themes emerging from the interview data suggested that participants’ appraisal of the programme was positive and they reported benefits in behaviour change relevant to addressing childhood obesity. Parents felt the programme was logistically suitable, and had appropriate content and leaders. All participants would recommend the programme and highlighted the development of their cooking skills, which related to an increase in home cooking and in fruit and vegetable consumption. The opportunity to involve their children and spend time with them learning skills was a strongly held view among respondents. Parents felt the programme had also increased their awareness of nutrition content and children’s dietary habits. However, the view that an extended programme and subsequent follow-up were needed was commonly held. Additional benefits beyond behaviour change were also expressed. For example, the importance of social interaction was clear, with respondents reporting the alleviation of boredom and isolation while attending the programme, as this participant states: “Something to do ain’t it? Gets you out. There’s nothing else to go to” (White British, 23yr, 2 children). Participants also reported exchanging cultural beliefs and learning new styles of cooking from people from different backgrounds. Discussion: The findings of this first exploration of parents’ attitudes to Fit Together supports existing literature on the value of community educators in delivering health interventions (2). Beneficial behaviour change such as increased homecooking was consistent with previous programmes (3). Conclusion: Attitudes towards Fit Together were positive, with mothers viewing the programme as acceptable and bene- ficial. References 1. Stevens. L., & Nelson, M. The contribution of school meals and packed lunch to food consumption and nutrient intakes in UK primary school children from a low income population. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 24; 223–232. 2011. 2. Evans, C., & Harper, C. A History and Review of school meals standards in the UK. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 89–99. 2009. 3. Lop ez Nomdedeu, C. Agencia Espanola de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricion. Ministerio de Sanidad y Consum. La alimentacion de tus ni nos. Nutrici ~ on Saludable de la Infan- cia a la Adolescencia. Madrid: Fiselgraf, S.L. 2002

Health, not weight loss, focused programmes versus conventional weight loss programmes for cardiovascular risk factors

© 2014 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. For re-use please see the publisher's terms and conditions.This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: The aim of this review is to compare the effects of HNWL programmes with those of CWL programmes on cardiovascular risk factors in adults with a BMI greater than 25 kg/m2.Published versio

Arctic sea-ice proxies: Comparisons between biogeochemical and micropalaeontological reconstructions in a sediment archive from Arctic Canada

Boxcore 99LSSL-001 from the southwest Canadian Arctic Archipelago (68.095°N, 114.186°W), studied by multiproxy approaches (sea-ice diatom biomarker IP25, phytoplankton-based biomarker brassicasterol, biogenic silica, total organic carbon, dinoflagellate cysts = dinocysts, diatoms) and their applications (sea-ice index PBIP25, modern analogue technique (MAT) transfer functions), provides a chronologically constrained (210Pb, 137Cs, two 14C dates) palaeoenvironmental archive spanning AD 1625–1999 with which to compare and evaluate proxies frequently used in sea-ice reconstructions. Whereas diatoms are rare, PBIP25, biogenic silica and qualitative dinocyst approaches show good agreement, suggesting that palaeo sea-ice histories based on biomarker and microfossil techniques are robust in this region. These combined approaches show fluctuating long open water to marginal ice zone conditions (AD 1625–1740), followed by high-amplitude oscillations between long open water and extended spring/summer sea ice (AD 1740–1870). Greater ice cover (AD 1870–1970) precedes recent reductions in seasonal sea ice (AD 1970–1999). Dinocyst-based MAT, however, produces a low-amplitude signal lacking the nuances of other proxies, with most probable sea-ice reconstructions poorly correlating with biomarker-based histories. Explanations for this disagreement may include limited spatial coverage in the modern dinocyst distribution database for MAT and the broad environmental tolerances of polar dinocysts. Overall, PBIP25 provides the most detailed palaeo sea-ice signal, although its use in a shallow polar archipelago downcore setting poses methodological challenges. This proxy comparison demonstrates the limitations of palaeo sea-ice reconstructions and emphasizes the need for calibration studies tying modern microfossil and biogeochemical proxies to directly measured oceanographic parameters, as a springboard for robust quantitative palaeo studies. </jats:p

An intervention to reassure patients about test results in rapid access chest pain clinic: a pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Most people referred to rapid access chest pain clinics have non-cardiac chest pain, and in those diagnosed with stable coronary heart disease, guidance recommends that first-line treatment is usually medication rather than revascularisation. Consequently, many patients are not reassured they have the correct diagnosis or treatment. A previous trial reported that, in people with non-cardiac chest pain, a brief discussion with a health psychologist before the tests about the meaning of potential results led to people being significantly more reassured. The aim of this pilot was to test study procedures and inform sample size for a future multi-centre trial and to gain initial estimates of effectiveness of the discussion intervention. METHODS: This was a two-arm pilot randomised controlled trial in outpatient rapid access chest pain clinic in 120 people undergoing investigation for new onset, non-urgent chest pain. Eligible participants were randomised to receive either: a discussion about the meaning and implication of test results, delivered by a nurse before tests in clinic, plus a pre-test pamphlet covering the same information (Discussion arm) or the pre-test pamphlet alone (Pamphlet arm). Main outcome measures were recruitment rate and feasibility for a future multi-centre trial, with an estimate of reassurance in the groups at month 1 and 6 using a 5-item patient-reported scale. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy people attended rapid access chest pain clinic during recruitment and 120/270 participants (44%) were randomised, 60 to each arm. There was no evidence of a difference between the Discussion and Pamphlet arms in the mean reassurance score at month 1 (34.2 vs 33.7) or at month 6 (35.3 vs 35.9). Patient-reported chest pain and use of heart medications were also similar between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: A larger trial of the discussion intervention in the UK would not be warranted. Patients reported high levels of reassurance which were similar in patients receiving the discussion with a nurse and in those receiving a pamphlet alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60618114 (assigned 27.05.2011). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2261-14-138) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Surface integrity in metal machining - Part II: Functional performance

Material removal operations play a pivotal role in the manufacture of key components, required for engineering systems to operate safely and efficiently under ever more advanced functional requirements and over extended life cycles. To further step up the loading capability of machined parts, fundamental understanding of how of machining-induced features can influence the performance of advanced materials under complex service conditions is necessary over finer temporal and spatial scales. As discussed in Part I of this review, when engineering surfaces are generated by material removal processes, a wide range of physical mechanisms (e.g. mechanical, thermal, chemical and their combinations) drive the characteristics of workpiece surface integrity. In Part II of this review, the interplay between the metallurgical and micro-mechanical condition induced by material removal processes and their in-service response will be thoroughly explored, by a critical analysis of the state-of-the-art in the field. Specifically, attention is focused on recent advances made towards the understanding of the mechanisms determining the resistance of machined surface to fatigue crack nucleation (Section 2), corrosion and stress-corrosion cracking (Section 3), and wear (Section 4). Furthermore, the impact of relevant post-machining treatments on the in-service behaviour of machined surfaces is analysed, and the possible strategies for the enhancement of the functional performance of machined surfaces are presented (Section 5). Finally, the current research gaps and the prospective challenges in understanding the in-service behaviour of machined surfaces are critically discussed, providing an interpretation of the possible directions of future scientific development of this field

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca