Children’s Compliance With Wrist-Worn Accelerometry Within a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial: Findings From the Healthy Lifestyles Programme

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Human Kinetics via the DOI in this recordPurpose: To assess children’s compliance with wrist worn accelerometry during a randomised control trial and to examine whether compliance differed by allocated condition or gender. Method: 886 children within the Healthy Lifestyles Programme (HeLP) trial were randomly allocated to wear a GENEActiv accelerometer at baseline and 18 month follow up. Compliance with minimum wear time criteria (≥10 hours for 3 week, 1 weekend day) was obtained for both time points. Chi- squared tests were used to determine associations between compliance, group allocation and gender. Results: At baseline, 851 children had useable data, 830 (97.5%) met the minimum wear time criteria, 631 (74.1%) had data for 7 days at 24 hours/day. At follow up, 789 children had useable data, 745 (94.4%) met the minimum wear time criteria, 528 (67%) children had complete data. Compliance did not differ by gender (baseline; X2 = 1.66, p = 0.2, follow up; X2 = 0.76, p = 0.4) or by group at follow up (X2 = 2.35, p = 0.13). Conclusion: The use of wrist worn accelerometers and robust trial procedures resulted in high compliance at two time points regardless of group allocation, demonstrating the feasibility of usingprecise physical activity monitors to measure intervention effectiveness.This research was supported by a grant PHR project 10/3010/01 from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public health research programme. In addition, this research was supported and funded by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula (PenCLAHRC)

Adapting to the digital age: a narrative approach

The article adopts a narrative inquiry approach to foreground informal learning and exposes a collection of stories from tutors about how they adapted comfortably to the digital age. We were concerned that despite substantial evidence that bringing about changes in pedagogic practices can be difficult, there is a gap in convincing approaches to help in this respect. In this context, this project takes a “bottom-up” approach and synthesises several life-stories into a single persuasive narrative to support the process of adapting to digital change. The project foregrounds the small, every-day motivating moments, cultural features and environmental factors in people's diverse lives which may have contributed to their positive dispositions towards change in relation to technology enhanced learning. We expect that such narrative approaches could serve to support colleagues in other institutions to warm up to ever-changing technological advances

PAin SoluTions In the Emergency Setting (PASTIES)--patient controlled analgesia versus routine care in emergency department patients with non-traumatic abdominal pain: randomised trial

© Smith et al 2015. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient controlled analgesia (PCA) is better than routine care in providing effective analgesia for patients presenting to emergency departments with moderate to severe non-traumatic abdominal pain.DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trialSETTING: Five English hospitals.PARTICIPANTS: 200 adults (66% (n=130) female), aged 18 to 75 years, who presented to the emergency department requiring intravenous opioid analgesia for the treatment of moderate to severe non-traumatic abdominal pain and were expected to be admitted to hospital for at least 12 hours.INTERVENTIONS: Patient controlled analgesia or nurse titrated analgesia (treatment as usual).MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total pain experienced over the 12 hour study period, derived by standardised area under the curve (scaled from 0 to 100) of each participant's hourly pain scores, captured using a visual analogue scale. Pre-specified secondary outcomes included total morphine use, percentage of study period in moderate or severe pain, percentage of study period asleep, length of hospital stay, and satisfaction with pain management.RESULTS: 196 participants were included in the primary analyses (99 allocated to PCA and 97 to treatment as usual). Mean total pain experienced was 35.3 (SD 25.8) in the PCA group compared with 47.3 (24.7) in the treatment as usual group. The adjusted between group difference was 6.3 (95% confidence interval 0.7 to 11.9). Participants in the PCA group received significantly more morphine (mean 36.1 (SD 22.4) v 23.6 (13.1) mg; mean difference 12.3 (95% confidence interval 7.2 to 17.4) mg), spent less of the study period in moderate or severe pain (32.6% v 46.9%; mean difference 14.5% (5.6% to 23.5%)), and were more likely to be perfectly or very satisfied with the management of their pain (83% (73/88) v 66% (57/87); adjusted odds ratio 2.56 (1.25 to 5.23)) in comparison with participants in the treatment as usual group.CONCLUSIONS: Significant reductions in pain can be achieved by PCA compared with treatment as usual in patients presenting to the emergency department with non-traumatic abdominal pain. Trial registration European Clinical Trials Database EudraCT2011-000194-31; Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25343280

Standing up in Multiple Sclerosis (SUMS): Protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of a home-based self-management standing frame programme in people with progressive multiple sclerosis.

This study is funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (14/176/12), United Kingdom.Background:  Impaired mobility is a cardinal feature of multiple sclerosis (MS) and is rated by people with MS as their highest priority. By the secondary progressive phase, balance, mobility and physical activity levels are significantly compromised; an estimated 70% of people with secondary progressive MS fall regularly. Our ongoing research has systematically developed ‘Balance Right in MS’ (BRiMS), an innovative, manualised 13-week guided self-management programme tailored to the needs of people with MS, designed to improve safe mobility and minimise falls. Our eventual aim is to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of BRiMS in people with secondary progressive MS by undertaking an appropriately statistically powered, multi-centre, assessor-blinded definitive, randomised controlled trial. This feasibility study will assess the acceptability of the intervention and test the achievability of running such a definitive trial. Methods/design:  This is a pragmatic multi-centre feasibility randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment. Sixty ambulant people with secondary progressive MS who self-report two or more falls in the previous 6 months will be randomly allocated (1:1) to either the BRiMS programme plus usual care or to usual care alone. All participants will be assessed at baseline and followed up at 15 weeks and 27 weeks post-randomisation. The outcomes of this feasibility trial include: • Feasibility outcomes, including trial recruitment, retention and completion • Assessment of the proposed outcome measures for the anticipated definitive trial (including measures of walking, quality of life, falls, balance and activity level) • Measures of adherence to the BRiMS programme • Data to inform the economic evaluation in a future trial • Process evaluation (assessment of treatment fidelity and qualitative evaluation of participant and treating therapist experience) Discussion:  The BRiMS intervention aims to address a key concern for MS service users and providers. However, there are several uncertainties which need to be addressed prior to progressing to a full-scale trial, including acceptability of the BRiMS intervention and practicality of the trial procedures. This feasibility trial will provide important insights to resolve these uncertainties and will enable a protocol to be finalised for use in the definitive trial.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Evaluation of Simvastatin as a Disease-Modifying Treatment for Patients With Parkinson Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial

\ua9 2022 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.Importance: Current treatments manage symptoms of Parkinson disease (PD), but no known treatment slows disease progression. Preclinical and epidemiological studies support the potential use of statins as disease-modifying therapy. Objective: To determine whether simvastatin has potential as a disease-modifying treatment for patients with moderate PD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial, a double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled futility trial, was conducted between March 2016 and May 2020 within 23 National Health Service Trusts in England. Participants aged 40 to 90 years with a diagnosis of idiopathic PD, with a modified Hoehn and Yahr stage of 3.0 or less while taking medication, and taking dopaminergic medication with wearing-off phenomenon were included. Data were analyzed from May 2020 to September 2020, with additional analysis in February 2021. Interventions: Participants were allocated 1:1 to simvastatin or matched placebo via a computer-generated random sequence, stratified by site and Hoehn and Yahr stage. In the simvastatin arm, participants entered a 1-month phase of simvastatin, 40 mg daily, followed by 23 months of simvastatin, 80 mg daily, before a 2-month washout period. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prespecified primary outcome was 24-month change in Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) part III score measured while not taking medication (high scores indicate worse outcome). The primary futility analysis included participants who commenced the 80-mg phase and had valid primary outcome data. The safety analysis included all participants who commenced trial treatment and is reported by dose at time of event. Results: Of 332 patients assessed for eligibility, 32 declined and 65 were ineligible. Of 235 recruited participants, 97 (41%) were female, 233 (99%) were White, and the mean (SD) age was 65.4 (9.4) years. A total of 216 patients progressed to the 80-mg dose. Primary outcome analysis (n = 178) indicated the simvastatin group had an additional deterioration in MDS-UPDRS III score while not taking medication at 24 months compared with the placebo group (1.52 points; 2-sided 80% CI, -0.77 to 3.80; 1-sided futility test P =.006). A total of 37 serious adverse events (AEs), including 3 deaths, and 171 AEs were reported for participants receiving 0-mg simvastatin; 37 serious AEs and 150 AEs were reported for participants taking 40 mg or 80 mg of simvastatin. Four participants withdrew from the trial because of an AE. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, simvastatin was futile as a disease-modifying therapy in patients with PD of moderate severity, providing no evidence to support proceeding to a phase 3 trial. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Identifier: 16108482

Health trainer-led motivational intervention plus usual care for people under community supervision compared with usual care alone: a study protocol for a parallel-group pilot randomised controlled trial (STRENGTHEN).

INTRODUCTION: People with experience of the criminal justice system typically have worse physical and mental health, lower levels of mental well-being and have less healthy lifestyles than the general population. Health trainers have worked with offenders in the community to provide support for lifestyle change, enhance mental well-being and signpost to appropriate services. There has been no rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of providing such community support. This study aims to determine the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a randomised trial and delivering a health trainer intervention to people receiving community supervision in the UK. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, parallel, two-group randomised controlled trial recruiting 120 participants with 1:1 individual allocation to receive support from a health trainer and usual care or usual care alone, with mixed methods process evaluation. Participants receive community supervision from an offender manager in either a Community Rehabilitation Company or the National Probation Service. If they have served a custodial sentence, then they have to have been released for at least 2 months. The supervision period must have at least 7 months left at recruitment. Participants are interested in receiving support to change diet, physical activity, alcohol use and smoking and/or improve mental well-being. The primary outcome is mental well-being with secondary outcomes related to smoking, physical activity, alcohol consumption and diet. The primary outcome will inform sample size calculations for a definitive trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Health and Care Research Wales Ethics Committee (REC reference 16/WA/0171). Dissemination will include publication of the intervention development process and findings for the stated outcomes, parallel process evaluation and economic evaluation in peer-reviewed journals. Results will also be disseminated to stakeholders and trial participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN80475744; Pre-results

“I’m in a very good frame of mind”: A qualitative exploration of the experience of standing frame use in people with progressive multiple sclerosis

This is the final version. Available on open access from BMJ Publishing Group via the DOI in this recordData sharing: The SUMS study protocol and statistical analysis plan are publicly available at https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/sums. Individual participant data that underlie the results will be made available (after de-identification) on a controlled access basis, subject to suitable data sharing agreements. Requests for data sharing should be made to the Chief Investigator (CI; J Freeman) in the first instance.The study aim was to explore the experiences of people with progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) and their standing assistants during their participation in SUMS, a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a home-based, self-managed standing frame programme. Design A qualitative approach, using audio diary methodology was used to collect data contemporaneously. Diary data were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Setting Participants were recruited from eight health-care organisations in two regions of the United Kingdom. The intervention was home-based. Participants As part of the RCT, 140 participants were randomly allocated to either usual care or usual care plus a standing frame programme. Using a sampling matrix 12 people with progressive MS (six female, aged 35–71 years, Expanded Disability Status Scale 6.5-8.0) and eight standing assistants (four female) kept audio diaries of their experiences. Intervention The standing frame programme involved two face-to-face home-based physiotherapy sessions to set up the standing frame programme, supplemented by educational material designed to optimise self-efficacy. Participants were encouraged to stand for at least 30 minutes, three times a week for the 36 week study period. Results Four main themes were identified: “Feeling like the old me”; “Noticing a difference”; “I want to do it right” and “You have a good day, you have a bad day”. Conclusions Supported standing helped people with progressive MS feel more like their old selves and provided a sense of normality and enjoyment. People noticed improvements in physical and psychological symptoms, which were often associated with increased participation in activities they valued. Provision of support from a physiotherapist and recognition of the variable nature of the condition were highlighted as factors to consider when establishing a standing programme.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

Evaluation of Simvastatin as a Disease-Modifying Treatment for Patients With Parkinson Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Current treatments manage symptoms of Parkinson disease (PD), but no known treatment slows disease progression. Preclinical and epidemiological studies support the potential use of statins as disease-modifying therapy. Objective: To determine whether simvastatin has potential as a disease-modifying treatment for patients with moderate PD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial, a double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled futility trial, was conducted between March 2016 and May 2020 within 23 National Health Service Trusts in England. Participants aged 40 to 90 years with a diagnosis of idiopathic PD, with a modified Hoehn and Yahr stage of 3.0 or less while taking medication, and taking dopaminergic medication with wearing-off phenomenon were included. Data were analyzed from May 2020 to September 2020, with additional analysis in February 2021. Interventions: Participants were allocated 1:1 to simvastatin or matched placebo via a computer-generated random sequence, stratified by site and Hoehn and Yahr stage. In the simvastatin arm, participants entered a 1-month phase of simvastatin, 40 mg daily, followed by 23 months of simvastatin, 80 mg daily, before a 2-month washout period. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prespecified primary outcome was 24-month change in Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) part III score measured while not taking medication (high scores indicate worse outcome). The primary futility analysis included participants who commenced the 80-mg phase and had valid primary outcome data. The safety analysis included all participants who commenced trial treatment and is reported by dose at time of event. Results: Of 332 patients assessed for eligibility, 32 declined and 65 were ineligible. Of 235 recruited participants, 97 (41%) were female, 233 (99%) were White, and the mean (SD) age was 65.4 (9.4) years. A total of 216 patients progressed to the 80-mg dose. Primary outcome analysis (n = 178) indicated the simvastatin group had an additional deterioration in MDS-UPDRS III score while not taking medication at 24 months compared with the placebo group (1.52 points; 2-sided 80% CI, -0.77 to 3.80; 1-sided futility test P = .006). A total of 37 serious adverse events (AEs), including 3 deaths, and 171 AEs were reported for participants receiving 0-mg simvastatin; 37 serious AEs and 150 AEs were reported for participants taking 40 mg or 80 mg of simvastatin. Four participants withdrew from the trial because of an AE. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, simvastatin was futile as a disease-modifying therapy in patients with PD of moderate severity, providing no evidence to support proceeding to a phase 3 trial. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Identifier: 16108482

Vestibular rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis comparing customised with booklet based vestibular rehabilitation for vestibulopathy and a 12 month observational cohort study of the symptom reduction and recurrence rate following treatment for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo

BACKGROUND: Symptoms arising from vestibular system dysfunction are observed in 49-59% of people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Symptoms may include vertigo, dizziness and/or imbalance. These impact on functional ability, contribute to falls and significant health and social care costs. In people with MS, vestibular dysfunction can be due to peripheral pathology that may include Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (BPPV), as well as central or combined pathology. Vestibular symptoms may be treated with vestibular rehabilitation (VR), and with repositioning manoeuvres in the case of BPPV. However, there is a paucity of evidence about the rate and degree of symptom recovery with VR for people with MS and vestibulopathy. In addition, given the multiplicity of symptoms and underpinning vestibular pathologies often seen in people with MS, a customised VR approach may be more clinically appropriate and cost effective than generic booklet-based approaches. Likewise, BPPV should be identified and treated appropriately. METHODS/ DESIGN: People with MS and symptoms of vertigo, dizziness and/or imbalance will be screened for central and/or peripheral vestibulopathy and/or BPPV. Following consent, people with BPPV will be treated with re-positioning manoeuvres over 1-3 sessions and followed up at 6 and 12 months to assess for any re-occurrence of BPPV. People with central and/or peripheral vestibulopathy will be entered into a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Trial participants will be randomly allocated (1:1) to either a 12-week generic booklet-based home programme with telephone support or a 12-week VR programme consisting of customised treatment including 12 face-to-face sessions and a home exercise programme. Customised or booklet-based interventions will start 2 weeks after randomisation and all trial participants will be followed up 14 and 26 weeks from randomisation. The primary clinical outcome is the Dizziness Handicap Inventory at 26 weeks and the primary economic endpoint is quality-adjusted life-years. A range of secondary outcomes associated with vestibular function will be used. DISCUSSION: If customised VR is demonstrated to be clinically and cost-effective compared to generic booklet-based VR this will inform practice guidelines and the development of training packages for therapists in the diagnosis and treatment of vestibulopathy in people with MS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Number: 27374299 Date of Registration 24/09/2018 Protocol Version 15 25/09/2019

Assessment of a home-based standing frame programme in people with progressive multiple sclerosis (SUMS): a pragmatic, multi-centre, randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis

People severely impaired with progressive multiple sclerosis spend much of their day sitting, with very few options to improve motor function. As a result, secondary physical and psychosocial complications can occur. Effective and feasible self-management strategies are needed to reduce sedentary behaviour and enhance motor function. In this study, we aimed to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of a home-based, self-managed, standing frame programme.31301748This article is freely available via Open Access. Click on the Publisher URL to access the full-text.Publishe