Unravelling data for rapid evidence-based response to COVID-19: a summary of the unCoVer protocol

Introduction unCoVer - Unravelling data for rapid evidence-based response to COVID-19 - is a Horizon 2020-funded network of 29 partners from 18 countries capable of collecting and using real-world data (RWD) derived from the response and provision of care to patients with COVID-19 by health systems across Europe and elsewhere. unCoVer aims to exploit the full potential of this information to rapidly address clinical and epidemiological research questions arising from the evolving pandemic. Methods and analysis From the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, partners are gathering RWD from electronic health records currently including information from over 22 000 hospitalised patients with COVID-19, and national surveillance and screening data, and registries with over 1 900 000 COVID-19 cases across Europe, with continuous updates. These heterogeneous datasets will be described, harmonised and integrated into a multi-user data repository operated through Opal-DataSHIELD, an interoperable open-source server application. Federated data analyses, without sharing or disclosing any individual-level data, will be performed with the objective to reveal patients' baseline characteristics, biomarkers, determinants of COVID-19 prognosis, safety and effectiveness of treatments, and potential strategies against COVID-19, as well as epidemiological patterns. These analyses will complement evidence from efficacy/safety clinical trials, where vulnerable, more complex/heterogeneous populations and those most at risk of severe COVID-19 are often excluded. Ethics and dissemination After strict ethical considerations, databases will be available through a federated data analysis platform that allows processing of available COVID-19 RWD without disclosing identification information to analysts and limiting output to data aggregates. Dissemination of unCoVer's activities will be related to the access and use of dissimilar RWD, as well as the results generated by the pooled analyses. Dissemination will include training and educational activities, scientific publications and conference communications.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Rehabilitation versus surgical reconstruction for non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL SNNAP): a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

BackgroundAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common debilitating injury that can cause instability of the knee. We aimed to investigate the best management strategy between reconstructive surgery and non-surgical treatment for patients with a non-acute ACL injury and persistent symptoms of instability.MethodsWe did a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial in 29 secondary care National Health Service orthopaedic units in the UK. Patients with symptomatic knee problems (instability) consistent with an ACL injury were eligible. We excluded patients with meniscal pathology with characteristics that indicate immediate surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer to either surgery (reconstruction) or rehabilitation (physiotherapy but with subsequent reconstruction permitted if instability persisted after treatment), stratified by site and baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score—4 domain version (KOOS4). This management design represented normal practice. The primary outcome was KOOS4 at 18 months after randomisation. The principal analyses were intention-to-treat based, with KOOS4 results analysed using linear regression. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN10110685, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02980367.FindingsBetween Feb 1, 2017, and April 12, 2020, we recruited 316 patients. 156 (49%) participants were randomly assigned to the surgical reconstruction group and 160 (51%) to the rehabilitation group. Mean KOOS4 at 18 months was 73·0 (SD 18·3) in the surgical group and 64·6 (21·6) in the rehabilitation group. The adjusted mean difference was 7·9 (95% CI 2·5–13·2; p=0·0053) in favour of surgical management. 65 (41%) of 160 patients allocated to rehabilitation underwent subsequent surgery according to protocol within 18 months. 43 (28%) of 156 patients allocated to surgery did not receive their allocated treatment. We found no differences between groups in the proportion of intervention-related complications.InterpretationSurgical reconstruction as a management strategy for patients with non-acute ACL injury with persistent symptoms of instability was clinically superior and more cost-effective in comparison with rehabilitation management