HOPON (Hyperbaric Oxygen for the Prevention of Osteoradionecrosis): a randomised controlled trial of hyperbaric oxygen to prevent osteoradionecrosis of the irradiated mandible: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Osteoradionecrosis of the mandible is the most common serious complication of radiotherapy for head and neck malignancy. For decades, hyperbaric oxygen has been employed in efforts to prevent those cases of osteoradionecrosis that are precipitated by dental extractions or implant placement. The evidence for using hyperbaric oxygen remains poor and current clinical practice varies greatly. We describe a protocol for a clinical trial to assess the benefit of hyperbaric oxygen in the prevention of osteoradionecrosis during surgery on the irradiated mandible. Methods/design: The HOPON trial is a phase III, randomised controlled, multi-centre trial. It employs an unblinded trial design, but the assessment of the primary endpoint, i.e. the diagnosis of osteoradionecrosis, is assessed on anonymised clinical photographs and radiographs by a blinded expert panel. Eligibility is through the need for a high-risk dental procedure in the mandible where at least 50-Gy radiotherapy has been received. Patients are randomised 1:1 to hyperbaric oxygen arm (Marx protocol) : control arm, but both groups receive antibiotics and chlorhexidine mouthwash. The primary endpoint is the presence of osteoradionecrosis at 6 months following surgery, but secondary endpoints include other time points, acute symptoms and pain, quality of life, and where implants are placed, their successful retention. Discussion: The protocol presented has evolved through feasibility stages and through analysis of interim data. The classification of osteoradionecrosis has undergone technical refinement to ensure that robust definitions are employed. The HOPON trial is the only multi-centre RCT conducted in this clinical setting despite decades of use of hyperbaric oxygen for the prevention of osteoradionecrosis. Trial registration: European Clinical Trials Database, ID: EudraCT200700622527. First registered on 5 November 2007

Taxonomy based on science is necessary for global conservation

Peer reviewe

Identification of drug combinations administered by continuous subcutaneous infusion that require analysis for compatibility and stability

Background: A continuous subcutaneous infusion (CSCI) delivered via syringe pump is a method of drug administration used to maintain symptom control when a patient is no longer able to tolerate oral medication. Several classes of drugs, such as opioids, antiemetics, anticholinergics, antipsychotics and benzodiazepines are routinely administered by CSCI alone or in combinations. Previous studies attempting to identify the most-common CSCI combinations are now several years old and no longer reflect current clinical practice. The aim of this work was to review current clinical practice and identify CSCI drug combinations requiring analysis for chemical compatibility and stability. Methods: UK pharmacy professionals involved in the delivery of care to palliative patients in hospitals and hospices were invited to enter CSCI combinations comprised of two or more drugs onto an electronic database over a 12-month period. In addition, a separate Delphi study with a panel of 15 expert healthcare professionals was completed to identify a maximum of five combinations of drugs used to treat more complex, but less commonly encountered symptoms unlikely to be identified by the national survey. Results: A total of 57 individuals representing 33 separate palliative care services entered 1,945 drug combinations suitable for analysis, with 278 discrete combinations identified. The top 40 drug combinations represented nearly two-thirds of combinations recorded. A total of 23 different drugs were administered in combination and the median number of drugs in a combination was three. The Delphi study identified five combinations for the relief of complex or refractory symptoms. Conclusion: This study represents the first step towards developing authoritative national guidance on the administration of drugs by CSCI. Further work will ensure healthcare practitioners have the knowledge and confidence that a prescribed combination will be both safe and efficacious

The readability of parent information leaflets in paediatric studies.

BackgroundPoor literacy can impact achieving optimal health outcomes. The aim of this project was to assess the readability of parent information leaflets (PILs).MethodsA single-centre study using paediatric PILs. Five readability tests were applied (Gunning Fog Index (GFI), Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Flesch Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI) and Automated Readability Index (ARI)). Results were compared to standards and by subtype.ResultsA total of 109 PILs were obtained; mean (±SD) number of characters was 14,365 (±12,055), total words 3066 (±2541), number of sentences 153 (±112), lexical density 49 (±3), number of characters per word 4.7 (±0.1), number of syllables per word 1.6 (±0.1) and number of words per sentence 19.1 (±2.5). The Flesch reading ease score was 51.1 (±5.6), equating to reading age 16-17 years. The mean PIL readability scores were GFI (12.18), SMOG (11.94), FKGL (10.89), CLI (10.08) and ARI (10.1). There were 0 (0%) PILs classed as easy (score 10). They were significantly above the recommended reading age (p ConclusionExisting PILs are above the national reading level. Researchers should use readability tools to ensure that they are accessible.ImpactPoor literacy is a barrier to accessing research and achieving good health outcomes. Current parent information leaflets are pitched far higher than the national reading age. This study provides data to demonstrate the reading age of a large portfolio of research studies. This work raises awareness of literacy as a barrier to research participation and provides tips on how to improve the readability of patient information leaflets to guide investigators