Patients' experiences of screening for type 2 diabetes:prospective qualitative study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial

Objectives To provide insight into factors that contribute to the anxiety reported in a quantitative study of the psychological effect of screening for type 2 diabetes. To explore expectations of and reactions to the screening experience of patients with positive, negative, and intermediate results. Design Prospective qualitative interview study of patients attending a screening programme for type 2 diabetes. Setting Seven general practices in the ADDITION (Cambridge) trial in the east of England. Participants 23 participants (aged 50-69) attending different stages in the screening process. Results Participants' perceptions changed as they progressed through the screening programme; the stepwise process seemed to help them adjust psychologically. The first screening test was typically considered unimportant and was attended with no thought about its implications. By the final diagnostic test, type 2 diabetes was considered a strong possibility, albeit a “mild” form. After diagnosis, people with screen detected type 2 diabetes tended to downplay its importance and talked confidently about their plans to control it. Participants with intermediate results seemed uncertain about their diagnosis, and those who screened negative were largely unaware of their remaining high risk. Conclusions This study helps in understanding the limited psychological impact of screening for type 2 diabetes quantified previously, in particular by the quantitative substudy of ADDITION (Cambridge). The findings have implications for implementing such a screening programme in terms of timing and content

Early detection of influenza outbreaks using the DC Department of Health's syndromic surveillance system

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Since 2001, the District of Columbia Department of Health has been using an emergency room syndromic surveillance system to identify possible disease outbreaks. Data are received from a number of local hospital emergency rooms and analyzed daily using a variety of statistical detection algorithms. The aims of this paper are to characterize the performance of these statistical detection algorithms in rigorous yet practical terms in order to identify the optimal parameters for each and to compare the ability of two syndrome definition criteria and data from a children's hospital versus vs. other hospitals to determine the onset of seasonal influenza.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We first used a fine-tuning approach to improve the sensitivity of each algorithm to detecting simulated outbreaks and to identifying previously known outbreaks. Subsequently, using the fine-tuned algorithms, we examined (i) the ability of unspecified infection and respiratory syndrome categories to detect the start of the flu season and (ii) how well data from Children's National Medical Center (CNMC) did versus all the other hospitals when using unspecified infection, respiratory, and both categories together.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Simulation studies using the data showed that over a range of situations, the multivariate CUSUM algorithm performed more effectively than the other algorithms tested. In addition, the parameters that yielded optimal performance varied for each algorithm, especially with the number of cases in the data stream. In terms of detecting the onset of seasonal influenza, only "unspecified infection," especially the counts from CNMC, clearly delineated influenza outbreaks out of the eight available syndromic classifications. In three of five years, CNMC consistently flags earlier (from 2 days up to 2 weeks earlier) than a multivariate analysis of all other DC hospitals.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>When practitioners apply statistical detection algorithms to their own data, fine tuning of parameters is necessary to improve overall sensitivity. With fined tuned algorithms, our results suggest that emergency room based syndromic surveillance focusing on unspecified infection cases in children is an effective way to determine the beginning of the influenza outbreak and could serve as a trigger for more intensive surveillance efforts and initiate infection control measures in the community.</p

Protocol for a multi-centre, parallel-arm, 12-month, randomised controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery versus conservative care for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FASHIoN)

INTRODUCTION: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome is a recognised cause of young adult hip pain. There has been a large increase in the number of patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery for FAI; however, a recent Cochrane review highlighted that there are no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating treatment effectiveness. We aim to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic surgery versus best conservative care for patients with FAI syndrome. METHODS: We will conduct a multicentre, pragmatic, assessor-blinded, two parallel arm, RCT comparing arthroscopic surgery to physiotherapy-led best conservative care. 24 hospitals treating NHS patients will recruit 344 patients over a 26-month recruitment period. Symptomatic adults with radiographic signs of FAI morphology who are considered suitable for arthroscopic surgery by their surgeon will be eligible. Patients will be excluded if they have radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis, previous significant hip pathology or previous shape changing surgery. Participants will be allocated in a ratio of 1:1 to receive arthroscopic surgery or conservative care. Recruitment will be monitored and supported by qualitative intervention to optimise informed consent and recruitment. The primary outcome will be pain and function assessed by the international hip outcome tool 33 (iHOT-33) measured 1-year following randomisation. Secondary outcomes include general health (short form 12), quality of life (EQ5D-5L) and patient satisfaction. The primary analysis will compare change in pain and function (iHOT-33) at 12 months between the treatment groups, on an intention-to-treat basis, presented as the mean difference between the trial groups with 95% CIs. The study is funded by the Health Technology Assessment Programme (13/103/02). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is granted by the Edgbaston Research Ethics committee (14/WM/0124). The results will be disseminated through open access peer-reviewed publications, including Health Technology Assessment, and presented at relevant conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN64081839; Pre-results

Are people with negative diabetes screening tests falsely reassured? Parallel group cohort study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial

Objective To assess whether receiving a negative test result at primary care based stepwise diabetes screening results in false reassurance

Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): randomised trial

Objective To compare the effect of an invitation promoting informed choice for screening with a standard invitation on attendance and motivation to engage in preventive action

Mixed-methods feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of a paramedic-administered breathlessness management intervention for acute-on-chronic breathlessness (BREATHE): Study findings

Introduction: One-fifth of emergency department presentations by ambulance are due to acute-on-chronic breathlessness. We explored the feasibility of an evaluation-phase, cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a paramedic-administered, non-pharmacological breathlessness intervention for people with acute-on-chronic breathlessness at ambulance call-out (BREATHE) regarding breathlessness intensity and conveyance to hospital.Methods: This mixed-methods, feasibility cRCT (ISRCTN80330546), randomised paramedics to usual care or intervention plus usual care. Retrospective patient consent to use call-out data (primary endpoint) and prospective patient/carer consent for follow-up was sought. Potential primary outcomes included breathlessness intensity (numerical rating scale) and conveyance. Follow-up included: interviews with patients/carers and questionnaires at 14 days, 1 and 6 months; paramedic focus groups and surveys.Results: Recruitment was during COVID-19, with high demands on paramedics and fewer call-outs by eligible patients. We enrolled 29 paramedics; nine withdrew. Randomisation/trial procedures were acceptable. Paramedics recruited thirteen patients, not meeting recruitment target (n=36); eight patients and three carers were followed up. Data quality was good but insufficient for future sample size estimation.The intervention did not extend call-out time, was delivered with fidelity and was acceptable to patients, carers and paramedics. There were no repeat call-outs within 48 hours. All trained paramedics strongly recommended BREATHE as a highly relevant, simple intervention. Conclusion: Patient recruitment to target was not feasible during the pandemic. Training and intervention were acceptable and delivered with fidelity. Results include valuable information on recruitment, consent, attrition, and data collection that will inform the design and delivery of a definitive trial

Intracellular Proton Conductance of the Hepatitis C Virus p7 Protein and Its Contribution to Infectious Virus Production

The hepatitis C virus (HCV) p7 protein is critical for virus production and an attractive antiviral target. p7 is an ion channel when reconstituted in artificial lipid bilayers, but channel function has not been demonstrated in vivo and it is unknown whether p7 channel activity plays a critical role in virus production. To evaluate the contribution of p7 to organelle pH regulation and virus production, we incorporated a fluorescent pH sensor within native, intracellular vesicles in the presence or absence of p7 expression. p7 increased proton (H+) conductance in vesicles and was able to rapidly equilibrate H+ gradients. This conductance was blocked by the viroporin inhibitors amantadine, rimantadine and hexamethylene amiloride. Fluorescence microscopy using pH indicators in live cells showed that both HCV infection and expression of p7 from replicon RNAs reduced the number of highly acidic (pH<5) vesicles and increased lysosomal pH from 4.5 to 6.0. These effects were not present in uninfected cells, sub-genomic replicon cells not expressing p7, or cells electroporated with viral RNA containing a channel-inactive p7 point mutation. The acidification inhibitor, bafilomycin A1, partially restored virus production to cells electroporated with viral RNA containing the channel inactive mutation, yet did not in cells containing p7-deleted RNA. Expression of influenza M2 protein also complemented the p7 mutant, confirming a requirement for H+ channel activity in virus production. Accordingly, exposure to acid pH rendered intracellular HCV particles non-infectious, whereas the infectivity of extracellular virions was acid stable and unaffected by incubation at low pH, further demonstrating a key requirement for p7-induced loss of acidification. We conclude that p7 functions as a H+ permeation pathway, acting to prevent acidification in otherwise acidic intracellular compartments. This loss of acidification is required for productive HCV infection, possibly through protecting nascent virus particles during an as yet uncharacterized maturation process

Evaluation of a very brief pedometer-based physical activity intervention delivered in NHS Health Checks in England: The VBI randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND:The majority of people do not achieve recommended levels of physical activity. There is a need for effective, scalable interventions to promote activity. Self-monitoring by pedometer is a potentially suitable strategy. We assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a very brief (5-minute) pedometer-based intervention ('Step It Up') delivered as part of National Health Service (NHS) Health Checks in primary care. METHODS AND FINDINGS:The Very Brief Intervention (VBI) Trial was a two parallel-group, randomised controlled trial (RCT) with 3-month follow-up, conducted in 23 primary care practices in the East of England. Participants were 1,007 healthy adults aged 40 to 74 years eligible for an NHS Health Check. They were randomly allocated (1:1) using a web-based tool between October 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015, to either intervention (505) or control group (502), stratified by primary care practice. Participants were aware of study group allocation. Control participants received the NHS Health Check only. Intervention participants additionally received Step It Up: a 5-minute face-to-face discussion, written materials, pedometer, and step chart. The primary outcome was accelerometer-based physical activity volume at 3-month follow-up adjusted for sex, 5-year age group, and general practice. Secondary outcomes included time spent in different intensities of physical activity, self-reported physical activity, and economic measures. We conducted an in-depth fidelity assessment on a subsample of Health Check consultations. Participants' mean age was 56 years, two-thirds were female, they were predominantly white, and two-thirds were in paid employment. The primary outcome was available in 859 (85.3%) participants. There was no significant between-group difference in activity volume at 3 months (adjusted intervention effect 8.8 counts per minute [cpm]; 95% CI -18.7 to 36.3; p = 0.53). We found no significant between-group differences in the secondary outcomes of step counts per day, time spent in moderate or vigorous activity, time spent in vigorous activity, and time spent in moderate-intensity activity (accelerometer-derived variables); as well as in total physical activity, home-based activity, work-based activity, leisure-based activity, commuting physical activity, and screen or TV time (self-reported physical activity variables). Of the 505 intervention participants, 491 (97%) received the Step it Up intervention. Analysis of 37 intervention consultations showed that 60% of Step it Up components were delivered faithfully. The intervention cost £18.04 per participant. Incremental cost to the NHS per 1,000-step increase per day was £96 and to society was £239. Adverse events were reported by 5 intervention participants (of which 2 were serious) and 5 control participants (of which 2 were serious). The study's limitations include a participation rate of 16% and low return of audiotapes by practices for fidelity assessment. CONCLUSIONS:In this large well-conducted trial, we found no evidence of effect of a plausible very brief pedometer intervention embedded in NHS Health Checks on objectively measured activity at 3-month follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN72691150)

Oral steroids for the resolution of otitis media with effusion (OME) in children (OSTRICH): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background Otitis media with effusion (OME) is an accumulation of fluid in the middle ear affecting about 80% of children by the age of 4 years. While OME usually resolves spontaneously, it can affect speech, behaviour and development. Children with persistent hearing loss associated with OME are usually offered hearing aids or insertion of ventilation tubes through the tympanic membrane. Oral steroids may be a safe and effective treatment for OME, which could be delivered in primary care. It has the potential to benefit large numbers of children and reduce the burden of care on them and on health services. However, previous trials have either been too small with too short a follow up period, or of too poor quality to give a definite answer. The aim of the OSTRICH trial is to determine if a short course of oral steroids improves the hearing of children with OME in the short and longer term. Methods/Design 380 participants (children aged 2-8 years) are recruited from Hospital Ear, Nose and Throat departments in Wales and England. A trained clinician seeks informed consent from parents of children with symptoms attributable to OME for at least 3 months and with confirmed bilateral hearing loss at study entry. Participants are randomised to a course of oral steroid or a matched placebo for one week. Outcomes include audiometry, tympanometry and otoscopy assessments, symptoms, adverse effects, functional health status, quality of life, resource use and cost effectiveness. Participants are followed up at 5 weeks, and at 6 and 12 months after the day of randomisation. The primary outcome is audiometry-confirmed satisfactory hearing at 5 weeks. Discussion There is an important evidence gap regarding clinical and cost effectiveness of short courses of oral steroid treatment for OME. Identifying an effective, safe, non-surgical intervention for OME in children for use in primary care would be of great benefit to children, their families and the NHS

Mixed-methods feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of a paramedic-administered breathlessness management intervention for acute-on-chronic breathlessness (BREATHE) : study findings

INTRODUCTION: One-fifth of emergency department presentations by ambulance are due to acute-on-chronic breathlessness. We explored the feasibility of an evaluation-phase, cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a paramedic-administered, non-pharmacological breathlessness intervention for people with acute-on-chronic breathlessness at ambulance call-out (BREATHE) regarding breathlessness intensity and conveyance to hospital. METHODS: This mixed-methods, feasibility cRCT (ISRCTN80330546) randomised paramedics to usual care or intervention plus usual care. Retrospective patient consent to use call-out data (primary end-point) and prospective patient/carer consent for follow-up was sought. Potential primary outcomes included breathlessness intensity (numerical rating scale) and conveyance. Follow-up included: interviews with patients/carers and questionnaires at 14 days, 1 and 6 months; paramedic focus groups and surveys. RESULTS: Recruitment was during COVID-19, with high demands on paramedics and fewer call-outs by eligible patients. We enrolled 29 paramedics; nine withdrew. Randomisation/trial procedures were acceptable. Paramedics recruited 13 patients, not meeting recruitment target (n=36); eight patients and three carers were followed-up. Data quality was good but insufficient for future sample size estimation. The intervention did not extend call-out time, was delivered with fidelity and was acceptable to patients, carers and paramedics. There were no repeat call-outs within 48 h. All trained paramedics strongly recommended BREATHE as a highly relevant, simple intervention. CONCLUSION: Patient recruitment to target was not feasible during the pandemic. Training and intervention were acceptable and delivered with fidelity. Results include valuable information on recruitment, consent, attrition and data collection that will inform the design and delivery of a definitive trial