81 research outputs found

    Exploring individual experiences of preparedness for bariatic surgery

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Obesity is associated with an increase in morbidity and mortality. Over the past 30 years the rate of obesity has been rising in almost all countries. The number of weight loss surgery procedures has also increased in England in recent years. Research into the psychological impact of weight loss surgery has found positive outcomes (e.g. reduced emotional distress and depression) as well as tensions (e.g. loss of identity and feeling vulnerable). Despite research into preparation for generic surgery, there is a gap in the literature on preparation for weight loss surgery patients. The present study was designed firstly to examine what preparation a UK sample of weight loss surgery patients have received, and secondly to explore the individual experiences of the weight loss surgery journey. Method: A mixed methods approach was used. An online questionnaire developed for this study was completed by 148 participants who have had weight loss surgery. A sample of seven adults were recruited from a weight loss surgery support group and participants were interviewed using a semi-structured interview schedule. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Results: Participants reported receiving information on; the different parts of the weight loss surgery process, changes in diet, eating behaviour, and physical changes. Participants reported that information was lacking on relationship and psychological changes. Five master themes and 16 super-ordinate themes emerged following the group analysis of the interviews. Participants reflected on their lead up to surgery and their experience of preparing for surgery. Participants tried to make sense of their relationship with food and their emotional attachment to it. They reflected on their experience of changing relationships and identity post-surgery. Participants highlighted the value of support groups and the internet in preparing them for surgery, particularly communicating with individuals who have had weight loss surgery. Discussion: Preparation for weight loss surgery is an important part of the process. More preparation is needed for the psychological changes, emotional challenges, and adjustments experienced throughout the journey. A group intervention is recommended. This would be efficient and cost effective. It would provide opportunities for social inclusion and peer support

    Working to overcome anxiety - a self help pack (2nd edition)

    Get PDF

    Controlled Clinical Trial of a Self-Help for Anxiety Intervention for Patients Waiting for Psychological Therapy

    Get PDF
    This study was a controlled clinical trial in which patients were offered a brief low cost, low intensity self-help intervention while waiting for psychological therapy. A CBT based self-help pack was given to patients with significant anxiety problems and no attempt was made to exclude patients on the basis of severity or co-morbidity. The treatment group received the intervention immediately following assessment and the control group after a delay of 8 weeks so comparisons between the two groups were made over 8 weeks. Although there was some support for the effectiveness of the self help intervention, with a significant time x group interaction for CORE-OM scores, this was not significant with the intention to treat analysis, nor for HADS anxiety and depression scores and the effect size was low. A follow up evaluation suggested some patients attributed significant goal attainment to the intervention. The findings suggest the routine use of self-help interventions in psychological therapies services should be considered although further more adequately powered research is required to identify the type of patients and problems that most benefit, possible adverse effects and the effect on subsequent uptake of and engagement in therapy

    COVID-19 confessions: a qualitative exploration of healthcare workers experiences of working with COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Objectives To gain insight into the experiences and concerns of front-line National Health Service (NHS) workers while caring for patients with COVID-19. Design Qualitative analysis of data collected through an anonymous website (www.covidconfidential) provided a repository of uncensored COVID-19 experiences of front-line NHS workers, accessed via a link advertised on the Twitter feed of two high profile medical tweeters and their retweets. Setting Community of NHS workers who accessed this social media. Participants 54 healthcare workers, including doctors, nurses and physiotherapists, accessed the website and left a ‘story’. Results Stories ranged from 1 word to 10 min in length. Thematic analysis identified common themes, with a central aspect being the experience and psychological consequence of trauma. Specific themes were: (1) the shock of the virus, (2) staff sacrifice and dedication, (3) collateral damage ranging from personal health concerns to the long-term impact on, and care of, discharged patients and (4) a hierarchy of power and inequality within the healthcare system. Conclusions COVID-19 confidential gave an outlet for unprompted and uncensored stories of healthcare workers in the context of COVID-19. In addition to personal experiences of trauma, there were perceptions that many operational difficulties stemmed from inequalities of power between management and front-line workers. Learning from these experiences will reduce staff distress and improve patient care in the face of further waves of the pandemic

    Effect of local anaesthetic infiltration on chronic postsurgical pain after total hip and knee replacement:The APEX randomised controlled trials

    Get PDF
    Total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) are usually effective at relieving pain; however, 7% to 23% of patients experience chronic postsurgical pain. These trials aimed to investigate the effect of local anaesthetic wound infiltration on pain severity at 12 months after primary THR or TKR for osteoarthritis. Between November 2009 and February 2012, 322 patients listed for THR and 316 listed for TKR were recruited into a single-centre double-blind randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive local anaesthetic infiltration and standard care or standard care alone. Participants and outcomes assessors were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was pain severity on the WOMAC Pain Scale at 12 months after surgery. Analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat and per-protocol approaches. In the hip trial, patients in the intervention group had significantly less pain at 12 months postoperative than patients in the standard care group (differences in means: 4.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-8.54; P = 0.015), although the difference was not clinically significant. Post hoc analysis found that patients in the intervention group were more likely to have none to moderate pain than severe pain at 12 months than those in the standard care group (odds ratio: 10.19; 95% CI: 2.10-49.55; P = 0.004). In the knee trial, there was no strong evidence that the intervention influenced pain severity at 12 months postoperative (difference in means: 3.83; 95% CI: −0.83 to 8.49; P = 0.107). In conclusion, routine use of infiltration could be beneficial in improving long-term pain relief for some patients after THR

    Nurse-led advance care planning with older people who have end-stage kidney disease: feasibility of a deferred entry randomised controlled trial incorporating an economic evaluation and mixed methods process evaluation (ACReDiT)

    Get PDF
    © 2020, The Author(s). Background: Advance Care Planning is recommended for people with end-stage kidney disease but evidence is limited. Robust clinical trials are needed to investigate the impact of advance care planning in this population. There is little available data on cost-effectiveness to guide decision makers in allocating resources for advance care planning. Therefore we sought to determine the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial and to test methods for assessing cost-effectiveness. Methods: A deferred entry, randomised controlled feasibility trial, incorporating economic and process evaluations, with people with end-stage kidney disease, aged 65 years or older, receiving haemodialysis, in two renal haemodialysis units in Northern Ireland, UK. A nurse facilitator helped the patient make an advance care plan identifying: a surrogate decision-maker; what the participant would like to happen in the future; any advance decision to refuse treatment; preferred place of care at end-of-life. Results: Recruitment lasted 189 days; intervention and data collection 443 days. Of the 67 patients invited to participate 30 (45%) declined and 36 were randomised to immediate or deferred advance care plan groups. Twenty-two (61%) made an advance care plan and completed data collection at 12 weeks; 17 (47.2%) were able to identify a surrogate willing to be named in the advance care plan document. The intervention was well-received and encouraged end-of-life conversations, but did not succeed in helping patients to fully clarify their values or consider specific treatment choices. There was no significant difference in health system costs between the immediate and deferred groups. Conclusions: A trial of advance care planning with participants receiving haemodialysis is feasible and acceptable to patients, but challenging. A full trial would require a pool of potential participants five times larger than the number required to complete data collection at 3 months. Widening eligibility criteria to include younger (under 65 years of age) and less frail patients, together with special efforts to engage and retain surrogates may improve recruitment and retention. Traditional advance care planning outcomes may need to be supplemented with those that are defined by patients, helping them to participate with clinicians in making medical decisions. Trial registration: Registered December 16, 2015. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02631200

    Recommendations to Optimize the Use of Volumetric MRI in Huntington's Disease Clinical Trials

    Get PDF
    Volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (vMRI) has been widely studied in Huntington's disease (HD) and is commonly used to assess treatment effects on brain atrophy in interventional trials. Global and regional trajectories of brain atrophy in HD, with early involvement of striatal regions, are becoming increasingly understood. However, there remains heterogeneity in the methods used and a lack of widely-accessible multisite, longitudinal, normative datasets in HD. Consensus for standardized practices for data acquisition, analysis, sharing, and reporting will strengthen the interpretation of vMRI results and facilitate their adoption as part of a pathobiological disease staging system. The Huntington's Disease Regulatory Science Consortium (HD-RSC) currently comprises 37 member organizations and is dedicated to building a regulatory science strategy to expedite the approval of HD therapeutics. Here, we propose four recommendations to address vMRI standardization in HD research: (1) a checklist of standardized practices for the use of vMRI in clinical research and for reporting results; (2) targeted research projects to evaluate advanced vMRI methodologies in HD; (3) the definition of standard MRI-based anatomical boundaries for key brain structures in HD, plus the creation of a standard reference dataset to benchmark vMRI data analysis methods; and (4) broad access to raw images and derived data from both observational studies and interventional trials, coded to protect participant identity. In concert, these recommendations will enable a better understanding of disease progression and increase confidence in the use of vMRI for drug development

    The STAR care pathway for patients with pain at 3 months after total knee replacement:a multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of people experience chronic pain after total knee replacement, but effective treatments are not available. We aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a new care pathway for chronic pain after total knee replacement. METHODS: We did an unmasked, parallel group, pragmatic, superiority, randomised, controlled trial at eight UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals. People with chronic pain at 3 months after total knee replacement surgery were randomly assigned (2:1) to the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) care pathway plus usual care, or to usual care alone. The STAR intervention aimed to identify underlying causes of chronic pain and enable onward referrals for targeted treatment through a 3-month post-surgery assessment with an extended scope practitioner and telephone follow-up over 12 months. Co-primary outcomes were self-reported pain severity and pain interference in the replaced knee, assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity and interference scales at 12 months (scored 0–10, best to worst) and analysed on an as-randomised basis. Resource use, collected from electronic hospital records and participants, was valued with UK reference costs. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated from EQ-5D-5L responses. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN92545361. FINDINGS: Between Sept 6, 2016, and May 31, 2019, 363 participants were randomly assigned to receive the intervention plus usual care (n=242) or to receive usual care alone (n=121). Participants had a median age of 67 years (IQR 61 to 73), 217 (60%) of 363 were female, and 335 (92%) were White. 313 (86%) patients provided follow-up data at 12 months after randomisation (213 assigned to the intervention plus usual care and 100 assigned to usual care alone). At 12 months, the mean between-group difference in the BPI severity score was −0·65 (95% CI −1·17 to −0·13; p=0·014) and the mean between-group difference in the BPI interference score was −0·68 (−1·29 to −0·08; p=0·026), both favouring the intervention. From an NHS and personal social services perspective, the intervention was cost-effective (greater improvement with lower cost), with an incremental net monetary benefit of £1256 (95% CI 164 to 2348) at £20 000 per QALY threshold. One adverse reaction of participant distress was reported in the intervention group. INTERPRETATION: STAR is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention to improve pain outcomes over 1 year for people with chronic pain at 3 months after total knee replacement surgery. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research

    Clinical and cost effectiveness of single stage compared with two stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection (INFORM):pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patient reported outcomes improve after single stage versus two stage revision surgery for prosthetic joint infection of the hip, and to determine the cost effectiveness of these procedures. DESIGN: Pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: High volume tertiary referral centres or orthopaedic units in the UK (n=12) and in Sweden (n=3), recruiting from 1 March 2015 to 19 December 2018. PARTICIPANTS: 140 adults (aged ≥18 years) with a prosthetic joint infection of the hip who required revision (65 randomly assigned to single stage and 75 to two stage revision). INTERVENTIONS: A computer generated 1:1 randomisation list stratified by hospital was used to allocate participants with prosthetic joint infection of the hip to a single stage or a two stage revision procedure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary intention-to-treat outcome was pain, stiffness, and functional limitations 18 months after randomisation, measured by the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Secondary outcomes included surgical complications and joint infection. The economic evaluation (only assessed in UK participants) compared quality adjusted life years and costs between the randomised groups. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 71 years (standard deviation 9) and 51 (36%) were women. WOMAC scores did not differ between groups at 18 months (mean difference 0.13 (95% confidence interval -8.20 to 8.46), P=0.98); however, the single stage procedure was better at three months (11.53 (3.89 to 19.17), P=0.003), but not from six months onwards. Intraoperative events occurred in five (8%) participants in the single stage group and 20 (27%) in the two stage group (P=0.01). At 18 months, nine (14%) participants in the single stage group and eight (11%) in the two stage group had at least one marker of possible ongoing infection (P=0.62). From the perspective of healthcare providers and personal social services, single stage revision was cost effective with an incremental net monetary benefit of £11 167 (95% confidence interval £638 to £21 696) at a £20 000 per quality adjusted life years threshold (£1.0; $1.1; €1.4). CONCLUSIONS: At 18 months, single stage revision compared with two stage revision for prosthetic joint infection of the hip showed no superiority by patient reported outcome. Single stage revision had a better outcome at three months, fewer intraoperative complications, and was cost effective. Patients prefer early restoration of function, therefore, when deciding treatment, surgeons should consider patient preferences and the cost effectiveness of single stage surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN10956306.RD&E staff can access the full-text of this article by clicking on the 'Additional Link' above and logging in with NHS OpenAthens if prompted.Unknow
    • …
    corecore