Diversity in patient and public involvement in healthcare research and education—Realising the potential

Background: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is an increasing priority in health‐related research and education. Attracting and supporting people from different demographic groups to give up their time and get involved is important to help ensure that all parts of society are empowered, represented and their voices heard in decisions that may affect their health and quality of life. Objectives: (1) To determine if a demographically diverse cross‐section of society would be interested in contributing to healthcare research and education. (2) To understand factors that can act as barriers and enablers to effective and diverse PPI. Method: PPI survey data was collected via engagement events, with the aim of scoping interest in PPI from a diverse public. A Focus Group study involving members of the public, academic and professional service staff, was then conducted to gain a deeper understanding around the barriers and enablers of diversity within PPI. Results: 71% of a diverse rich public indicated they would like to get involved in healthcare research and teaching. 76% of survey respondents indicated that they would be happy to share a personal or family experience of healthcare. The two biggest factors impacting on our cohort getting involved are’ availability of time’ and ‘being aware of PPI opportunities’. These factors may disproportionally affect specific groups. Shared and individual PPI enablers and barriers were identified across all stakeholder groups within the Focus Group Study, as well as generic and novel factors that would impact on an institutions’ ability to improve PPI diversity. Conclusion: These data points confirm a demographically diverse public's appetite to get involved in academic health research and teaching. This needs to be recognised and harnessed to ensure public contributor networks are representative of society. Equality Impact Assessments should be undertaken in relation to all PPI opportunities. There is a need to recognise the investment of time and resources required to build mutually beneficial relationships with diverse communities as well as the development of inclusive ‘fit for purpose’ PPI infrastructures to support the uptake of diverse PPI contributors. Public Contribution: This study involved members of the public responding to a short survey. Public contributors made up one of the three focus groups. The School of Medicine lead public contributor was also involved in the preparation of this manuscript

Coping and wellbeing in bereavement: two core outcomes for evaluating bereavement support in palliative care

Background Bereavement support is a core part of palliative care. However, the evidence base is limited by a lack of consistency in the outcomes used to evaluate services and models of support, which makes it difficult to compare approaches. Core Outcome Sets (COS) represent the minimum that should be measured in research into specific conditions or services. The aim of this study was to use a stakeholders’ perspective to develop a COS for evaluating bereavement support for adults in adult palliative care settings. Methods A list of outcomes relevant to bereavement support was created following a systematic review of the quantitative and qualitative literature. At an expert workshop 21 stakeholders discussed their views on the most important outcomes and compared these to and critiqued the lists constructed from the review. These lists and discussions informed a two round international DELPHI survey (n=240) designed to reach consensus on which outcomes/outcome dimensions should be included in the COS. To prioritise and validate the items emerging from the survey, participants at a subsequent consensus day ranked the relative importance of these items (n=23). A final feedback exercise with these consensus day participants was conducted to confirm the selection of outcomes and dimensions. Results ‘Ability to cope with grief’ and ‘Quality of life and Mental Wellbeing’ were selected as two core outcomes. 21 different dimensions to explore when assessing these outcomes were also identified. The coping related dimensions have been categorised as: Negative and overwhelming grief; Communication and connectedness; Understanding, accepting and finding meaning in grief; Finding balance between grief and life going forwards; Accessing appropriate support. Those relating to Quality of life and Wellbeing have been categorised as; Participation in work and/or regular activities; Relationships and social functioning; Positive mental wellbeing and Negative mental and emotional state. Conclusion This COS outlines a more consistent way forward for bereavement researchers and practitioners, whilst also orientating towards public health and resilience-based approaches to bereavement care. Further work is planned to identify and develop measures which are specific to this core outcome set, and which will facilitate the future comparability of bereavement services and interventions

The impacts and effectiveness of support for people bereaved through advanced illness: a systematic review and thematic synthesis

Background: Bereavement support is a key component of palliative care, with different types of support recommended according to need. Previous reviews have typically focused on specialised interventions and have not considered more generic forms of support, drawing on different research methodologies. Aim: To review the quantitative and qualitative evidence on the effectiveness and impact of interventions and services providing support for adults bereaved through advanced illness. Design: A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted, with narrative synthesis of quantitative results and thematic synthesis of qualitative results. The review protocol is published in PROSPERO (www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, CRD42016043530). Data sources: The databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Social Policy and Practice were searched from 1990 to March 2019. Studies were included which reported evaluation results of bereavement interventions, following screening by two independent researchers. Study quality was assessed using GATE checklists. Results: A total of 31 studies were included, reporting on bereavement support groups, psychological and counselling interventions and a mix of other forms of support. Improvements in study outcomes were commonly reported, but the quality of the quantitative evidence was generally poor or mixed. Three main impacts were identified in the qualitative evidence, which also varied in quality: ‘loss and grief resolution’, ‘sense of mastery and moving ahead’ and ‘social support’. Conclusion: Conclusions on effectiveness are limited by small sample sizes and heterogeneity in study populations, models of care and outcomes. The qualitative evidence suggests several cross-cutting benefits and helps explain the impact mechanisms and contextual factors that are integral to the support

What should good bereavement service support look like? Findings from pre-pandemic workshop discussions interpreted in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic

Introduction: There is a lack of consistency in approaches to bereavement support provision and evaluation. This study identified outcomes for adult bereavement support in palliative care, involving a workshop with people from professional and lived experience backgrounds, providing a view on what support interventions should look like. Aims: The aims of the workshop were to gather stakeholder views on the purpose and impacts of bereavement support and what outcomes should be used in the design and evaluation of bereavement interventions and services. Methods: Stakeholders were divided into three groups and asked to identify and discuss how support services should help bereaved service users and what good bereavement support looks like. Key themes were identified from the written and verbal content of the consensus day. Findings: Three main themes emerged from the data; informal support and self-management; the aims and purpose of formal bereavement service support and the timing, accessibility and quality of support. Conclusion: Workshop findings align with public health models of bereavement care and recent service standards, identifying core support functions and aspirations for bereavement services. Finding the best mechanisms and modalities for meeting these, in the context of the late/post-pandemic period, presents both challenges and opportunities

Palliative radiotherapy after oesophageal cancer stenting (ROCS): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial

Background: patients with advanced oesophageal cancer have a median survival of 3-6 months, and most require intervention for dysphagia. Self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) insertion is the most typical form of palliation in these patients, but dysphagia deterioration and re-intervention are common. This study examined the efficacy of adjuvant external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) compared with usual care alone in preventing dysphagia deterioration and reducing service use after SEMS insertion.Methods: this was a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial based at cancer centres and acute care hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales. Patients (aged ≥16 years) with incurable oesophageal carcinoma receiving stent insertion for primary management of dysphagia were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive usual care alone or EBRT (20 Gy in five fractions or 30 Gy in ten fractions) plus usual care after stent insertion. Usual care was implemented according to need as identified by the local multidisciplinary team (MDT). Randomisation was via the method of minimisation stratified by treating centre, stage at diagnosis (I-III vs IV), histology (squamous or non-squamous), and MDT intent to give chemotherapy (yes vs no). The primary outcome was difference in proportions of participants with dysphagia deterioration (&gt;11 point decrease on patient-reported European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire-oesophagogastric module [QLQ-OG25], or a dysphagia-related event consistent with such a deterioration) or death by 12 weeks in a modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population, which excluded patients who did not have a stent inserted and those without a baseline QLQ-OG25 assessment. Secondary outcomes included survival, quality of life (QoL), morbidities (including time to first bleeding event or hospital admission for bleeding event and first dysphagia-related stent complications or re-intervention), and cost-effectiveness. Safety analysis was undertaken in the modified ITT population. The study is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN12376468, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01915693, and is completed.Findings: 220 patients were randomly assigned between Dec 16, 2013, and Aug 24, 2018, from 23 UK centres. The modified ITT population (n=199) comprised 102 patients in the usual care group and 97 patients in the EBRT group. Radiotherapy did not reduce dysphagia deterioration, which was reported in 36 (49%) of 74 patients receiving usual care versus 34 (45%) of 75 receiving EBRT (adjusted odds ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·40-1·68], p=0·59) in those with complete data for the primary endpoint. No significant difference was observed in overall survival: median overall survival was 19·7 weeks (95% CI 14·4-27·7) with usual care and 18·9 weeks (14·7-25·6) with EBRT (adjusted hazard ratio 1·06 [95% CI 0·78-1·45], p=0·70; n=199). Median time to first bleeding event or hospital admission for a bleeding event was 49·0 weeks (95% CI 33·3-not reached) with EBRT versus 65·9 weeks (52·7-not reached) with usual care (adjusted subhazard ratio 0·52 [95% CI 0·28-0·97], p=0·038; n=199). No time versus treatment interaction was observed for prespecified QoL outcomes. We found no evidence of differences between trial group in time to first stent complication or re-intervention event. The most common (grade 3-4) adverse event was fatigue, reported in 19 (19%) of 102 patients receiving usual care alone and 22 (23%) of 97 receiving EBRT. On cost-utility analysis, EBRT was more expensive and less efficacious than usual care.Interpretation: patients with advanced oesophageal cancer having SEMS insertion for the primary management of their dysphagia did not gain additional benefit from concurrent palliative radiotherapy and it should not be routinely offered. For a minority of patients clinically considered to be at high risk of tumour bleeding, concurrent palliative radiotherapy might reduce bleeding risk and the need for associated interventions.Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.</p

ELCID: early lung cancer identification and diagnosis - an embedded interview study to explore patient participation and recruitment

Background The ELCID Trial is a feasibility randomised controlled trial examining the effect on lung cancer diagnosis of giving an urgent chest x-ray to smokers, and recent exsmokers, aged over 60 with new chest symptoms. Aims The qualitative component explores the feasibility of individually randomising patients to an urgent CXR or not and investigates any barriers to patient participation. Methods To date we have conducted semi-structured interviews with six primary care staff (practice managers, research nurses), ten patients randomised to ‘extra-NICE’ guidelines for referral for urgent chest x-ray, and six patients randomised to ‘usual care’ (NICE guidelines)). We hope to also interview patients who decline randomisation. Interviews were analysed using a Framework approach. Results Initial analysis indicated that practices have struggled to recruit patients, partly due to the eligibility criteria that requires ex-smokers to have stopped smoking within the last five years. Practices with a research nurse have recruited the most patients. Patients indicated that they are happy to take part in the trial and their anxiety levels were not raised. Most patients hoped to be randomised to urgent chest x-ray, although those who were not did not go back to their GP to request one. Conclusions Eligibility criteria needed revision to include ex-smokers of any duration. These preliminary findings suggest that the trial appears to be feasible and patients are happy to accept randomisation. The findings will inform the design of the main trial in the future

Evaluating the application of Pareto navigation guided automated radiotherapy treatment planning to prostate cancer

Background and purpose Current automated planning methods do not allow for the intuitive exploration of clinical trade-offs during calibration. Recently a novel automated planning solution, which is calibrated using Pareto navigation principles, has been developed to address this issue. The purpose of this work was to clinically validate the solution for prostate cancer patients with and without elective nodal irradiation. Materials and methods For 40 randomly selected patients (20 prostate and seminal vesicles (PSV) and 20 prostate and pelvic nodes (PPN)) automatically generated volumetric modulated arc therapy plans (VMATAuto) were compared against plans created by expert dosimetrists under clinical conditions (VMATClinical) and no time pressures (VMATIdeal). Plans were compared through quantitative comparison of dosimetric parameters and blind review by an oncologist. Results Upon blind review 39/40 and 33/40 VMATAuto plans were considered preferable or equal to VMATClinical and VMATIdeal respectively, with all deemed clinically acceptable. Dosimetrically, VMATAuto, VMATClinical and VMATIdeal were similar, with observed differences generally of low clinical significance. Compared to VMATClinical, VMATAuto reduced hands-on planning time by 94% and 79% for PSV and PPN respectively. Total planning time was significantly reduced from 22.2 mins to 14.0 mins for PSV, with no significant reduction observed for PPN. Conclusions A novel automated planning solution has been evaluated, whose Pareto navigation based calibration enabled clinical decision-making on trade-off balancing to be intuitively incorporated into automated protocols. It was successfully applied to two sites of differing complexity and robustly generated high quality plans in an efficient manner

Palliative radiotherapy in addition to self-expanding metal stent for improving dysphagia and survival in advanced oesophageal cancer (ROCS: Radiotherapy after Oesophageal Cancer Stenting):study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: The single most distressing symptom for patients with advanced esophageal cancer is dysphagia. Amongst the more effective treatments for relief of dysphagia is insertion of a self-expanding metal stent (SEMS). It is possible that the addition of a palliative dose of external beam radiotherapy may prolong the relief of dysphagia and provide additional survival benefit. The ROCS trial will assess the effect of adding palliative radiotherapy after esophageal stent insertion. Methods/Design: The study is a randomized multicenter phase III trial, with an internal pilot phase, comparing stent alone versus stent plus palliative radiotherapy in patients with incurable esophageal cancer. Eligible participants are those with advanced esophageal cancer who are in need of stent insertion for primary management of dysphagia. Radiotherapy will be administered as 20 Gray (Gy) in five fractions over one week or 30 Gy in 10 fractions over two weeks, within four weeks of stent insertion. The internal pilot will assess rates and methods of recruitment; pre-agreed criteria will determine progression to the main trial. In total, 496 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio with follow up until death. The primary outcome is time to progression of patient-reported dysphagia. Secondary outcomes include survival, toxicity, health resource utilization, and quality of life. An embedded qualitative study will explore the feasibility of patient recruitment by examining patients’ motivations for involvement and their experiences of consent and recruitment, including reasons for not consenting. It will also explore patients’ experiences of each trial arm. Discussion: The ROCS study will be a challenging trial studying palliation in patients with a poor prognosis. The internal pilot design will optimize methods for recruitment and data collection to ensure that the main trial is completed on time. As a pragmatic trial, study strengths include collection of all follow-up data in the usual place of care, and a focus on patient-reported, rather than disease-orientated, outcomes. Exploration of patient experience and health economic analyses will be integral to the assessment of benefit for patients and the NHS

Immediate chest X-ray for patients at risk of lung cancer presenting in primary care: randomised controlled feasibility trial

Background: Achieving earlier stage diagnosis is one option for improving lung cancer outcomes in the United Kingdom. Patients with lung cancer typically present with symptoms to general practitioners several times before referral or investigation. Methods: We undertook a mixed methods feasibility individually randomised controlled trial (the ELCID trial) to assess the feasibility and inform the design of a definitive, fully powered, UK-wide, Phase III trial of lowering the threshold for urgent investigation of suspected lung cancer. Patients over 60, with a smoking history, presenting with new chest symptoms to primary care, were eligible to be randomised to intervention (urgent chest X-ray) or usual care. Results: The trial design and materials were acceptable to GPs and patients. We randomised 255 patients from 22 practices, although the proportion of eligible patients who participated was lower than expected. Survey responses (89%), and the fidelity of the intervention (82% patients X-rayed within 3 weeks) were good. There was slightly higher anxiety and depression in the control arm in participants aged >75. Three patients (1.2%) were diagnosed with lung cancer. Conclusions: We have demonstrated the feasibility of individually randomising patients at higher risk of lung cancer, to a trial offering urgent investigation or usual care

The 2021 WHO catalogue of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex mutations associated with drug resistance: a genotypic analysis.

Background: Molecular diagnostics are considered the most promising route to achievement of rapid, universal drug susceptibility testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC). We aimed to generate a WHO-endorsed catalogue of mutations to serve as a global standard for interpreting molecular information for drug resistance prediction. Methods: In this systematic analysis, we used a candidate gene approach to identify mutations associated with resistance or consistent with susceptibility for 13 WHO-endorsed antituberculosis drugs. We collected existing worldwide MTBC whole-genome sequencing data and phenotypic data from academic groups and consortia, reference laboratories, public health organisations, and published literature. We categorised phenotypes as follows: methods and critical concentrations currently endorsed by WHO (category 1); critical concentrations previously endorsed by WHO for those methods (category 2); methods or critical concentrations not currently endorsed by WHO (category 3). For each mutation, we used a contingency table of binary phenotypes and presence or absence of the mutation to compute positive predictive value, and we used Fisher's exact tests to generate odds ratios and Benjamini-Hochberg corrected p values. Mutations were graded as associated with resistance if present in at least five isolates, if the odds ratio was more than 1 with a statistically significant corrected p value, and if the lower bound of the 95% CI on the positive predictive value for phenotypic resistance was greater than 25%. A series of expert rules were applied for final confidence grading of each mutation. Findings: We analysed 41 137 MTBC isolates with phenotypic and whole-genome sequencing data from 45 countries. 38 215 MTBC isolates passed quality control steps and were included in the final analysis. 15 667 associations were computed for 13 211 unique mutations linked to one or more drugs. 1149 (7·3%) of 15 667 mutations were classified as associated with phenotypic resistance and 107 (0·7%) were deemed consistent with susceptibility. For rifampicin, isoniazid, ethambutol, fluoroquinolones, and streptomycin, the mutations' pooled sensitivity was more than 80%. Specificity was over 95% for all drugs except ethionamide (91·4%), moxifloxacin (91·6%) and ethambutol (93·3%). Only two resistance mutations were identified for bedaquiline, delamanid, clofazimine, and linezolid as prevalence of phenotypic resistance was low for these drugs. Interpretation: We present the first WHO-endorsed catalogue of molecular targets for MTBC drug susceptibility testing, which is intended to provide a global standard for resistance interpretation. The existence of this catalogue should encourage the implementation of molecular diagnostics by national tuberculosis programmes. Funding: Unitaid, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation