Changes in body weight and food choice in those attempting smoking cessation: a cluster randomised controlled trial

<p><b>Background:</b> Fear of weight gain is a barrier to smoking cessation and significant cause of relapse for many people. The provision of nutritional advice as part of a smoking cessation programme may assist some in smoking cessation and perhaps limit weight gain. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a structured programme of dietary advice on weight change and food choice, in adults attempting smoking cessation.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> Cluster randomised controlled design. Classes randomised to intervention commenced a 24-week intervention, focussed on improving food choice and minimising weight gain. Classes randomised to control received "usual care".</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Twenty-seven classes in Greater Glasgow were randomised between January and August 2008. Analysis, including those who continued to smoke, showed that actual weight gain and percentage weight gain was similar in both groups. Examination of data for those successful at giving up smoking showed greater mean weight gain in intervention subjects (3.9 (SD 3.1) vs. 2.7 (SD 3.7) kg). Between group differences were not significant (p=0.23, 95% CI -0.9 to 3.5). In comparison to baseline improved consumption of fruit and vegetables and breakfast cereal were reported in the intervention group. A higher percentage of control participants continued smoking (74% vs. 66%).</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> The intervention was not successful at minimising weight gain in comparison to control but was successful in facilitating some sustained improvements in the dietary habits of intervention participants. Improved quit rates in the intervention group suggest that continued contact with advisors may have reduced anxieties regarding weight gain and encouraged cessation despite weight gain. Research should continue in this area as evidence suggests that the negative effects of obesity could outweigh the health benefits achieved through reductions in smoking prevalence.</p&gt

The ADAMTS (A Disintegrin and Metalloproteinase with Thrombospondin motifs) family

The ADAMTS (A Disintegrin and Metalloproteinase with Thrombospondin motifs) enzymes are secreted, multi-domain matrix-associated zinc metalloendopeptidases that have diverse roles in tissue morphogenesis and patho-physiological remodeling, in inflammation and in vascular biology. The human family includes 19 members that can be sub-grouped on the basis of their known substrates, namely the aggrecanases or proteoglycanases (ADAMTS1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 15 and 20), the procollagen N-propeptidases (ADAMTS2, 3 and 14), the cartilage oligomeric matrix protein-cleaving enzymes (ADAMTS7 and 12), the von-Willebrand Factor proteinase (ADAMTS13) and a group of orphan enzymes (ADAMTS6, 10, 16, 17, 18 and 19). Control of the structure and function of the extracellular matrix (ECM) is a central theme of the biology of the ADAMTS, as exemplified by the actions of the procollagen-N-propeptidases in collagen fibril assembly and of the aggrecanases in the cleavage or modification of ECM proteoglycans. Defects in certain family members give rise to inherited genetic disorders, while the aberrant expression or function of others is associated with arthritis, cancer and cardiovascular disease. In particular, ADAMTS4 and 5 have emerged as therapeutic targets in arthritis. Multiple ADAMTSs from different sub-groupings exert either positive or negative effects on tumorigenesis and metastasis, with both metalloproteinase-dependent and -independent actions known to occur. The basic ADAMTS structure comprises a metalloproteinase catalytic domain and a carboxy-terminal ancillary domain, the latter determining substrate specificity and the localization of the protease and its interaction partners; ancillary domains probably also have independent biological functions. Focusing primarily on the aggrecanases and proteoglycanases, this review provides a perspective on the evolution of the ADAMTS family, their links with developmental and disease mechanisms, and key questions for the future

An evaluation of classification systems for stillbirth

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Audit and classification of stillbirths is an essential part of clinical practice and a crucial step towards stillbirth prevention. Due to the limitations of the ICD system and lack of an international approach to an acceptable solution, numerous disparate classification systems have emerged. We assessed the performance of six contemporary systems to inform the development of an internationally accepted approach.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluated the following systems: Amended Aberdeen, Extended Wigglesworth; PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe, Tulip and CODAC. Nine teams from 7 countries applied the classification systems to cohorts of stillbirths from their regions using 857 stillbirth cases. The main outcome measures were: the ability to retain the important information about the death using the <it>InfoKeep </it>rating; the ease of use according to the <it>Ease </it>rating (both measures used a five-point scale with a score <2 considered unsatisfactory); inter-observer agreement and the proportion of unexplained stillbirths. A randomly selected subset of 100 stillbirths was used to assess inter-observer agreement.</p> <p>Results</p> <p><it>InfoKeep </it>scores were significantly different across the classifications (<it>p </it>≤ 0.01) due to low scores for Wigglesworth and Aberdeen. CODAC received the highest mean (SD) score of 3.40 (0.73) followed by PSANZ-PDC, ReCoDe and Tulip [2.77 (1.00), 2.36 (1.21), 1.92 (1.24) respectively]. Wigglesworth and Aberdeen resulted in a high proportion of unexplained stillbirths and CODAC and Tulip the lowest. While <it>Ease </it>scores were different (<it>p </it>≤ 0.01), all systems received satisfactory scores; CODAC received the highest score. Aberdeen and Wigglesworth showed poor agreement with kappas of 0.35 and 0.25 respectively. Tulip performed best with a kappa of 0.74. The remainder had good to fair agreement.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The Extended Wigglesworth and Amended Aberdeen systems cannot be recommended for classification of stillbirths. Overall, CODAC performed best with PSANZ-PDC and ReCoDe performing well. Tulip was shown to have the best agreement and a low proportion of unexplained stillbirths. The virtues of these systems need to be considered in the development of an international solution to classification of stillbirths. Further studies are required on the performance of classification systems in the context of developing countries. Suboptimal agreement highlights the importance of instituting measures to ensure consistency for any classification system.</p

Importance of patient bed pathways and length of stay differences in predicting COVID-19 hospital bed occupancy in England.

Background: Predicting bed occupancy for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 requires understanding of length of stay (LoS) in particular bed types. LoS can vary depending on the patient’s “bed pathway” - the sequence of transfers of individual patients between bed types during a hospital stay. In this study, we characterise these pathways, and their impact on predicted hospital bed occupancy. Methods: We obtained data from University College Hospital (UCH) and the ISARIC4C COVID-19 Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN) on hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who required care in general ward or critical care (CC) beds to determine possible bed pathways and LoS. We developed a discrete-time model to examine the implications of using either bed pathways or only average LoS by bed type to forecast bed occupancy. We compared model-predicted bed occupancy to publicly available bed occupancy data on COVID-19 in England between March and August 2020. Results: In both the UCH and CO-CIN datasets, 82% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 only received care in general ward beds. We identified four other bed pathways, present in both datasets: “Ward, CC, Ward”, “Ward, CC”, “CC” and “CC, Ward”. Mean LoS varied by bed type, pathway, and dataset, between 1.78 and 13.53 days. For UCH, we found that using bed pathways improved the accuracy of bed occupancy predictions, while only using an average LoS for each bed type underestimated true bed occupancy. However, using the CO-CIN LoS dataset we were not able to replicate past data on bed occupancy in England, suggesting regional LoS heterogeneities. Conclusions: We identified five bed pathways, with substantial variation in LoS by bed type, pathway, and geography. This might be caused by local differences in patient characteristics, clinical care strategies, or resource availability, and suggests that national LoS averages may not be appropriate for local forecasts of bed occupancy for COVID-19. Trial registration: The ISARIC WHO CCP-UK study ISRCTN66726260 was retrospectively registered on 21/04/2020 and designated an Urgent Public Health Research Study by NIHR.</p