Workplace complementary and alternative therapies for hospital‐site staff

Purpose – Workplace wellness schemes are emerging in NHS settings, including complementary and alternative therapy services aimed at improving employee wellbeing. The aim of this study is to explore the impact of one such therapy service on service users based at a large UK teaching hospital.Design/methodology/approach – In-depth semi-structured interviews were undertaken with seven staff members who participated in at least one workplace complementary or alternative therapy. An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis approach was taken in the design of interviews and the analysis of interview data.Findings – The following themes were elucidated: having positive but tentative expectations of therapies; enhancing health and wellbeing through therapy; appreciation for the “Q-active” therapy service as part of a workplace wellness programme; and work influencing therapy use and vice versa.Originality/value – The study adds to the limited research literature evaluating workplace health interventions by using an interview-based qualitative approach to access employees’ experiences of this type of workplace complementary and alternative therapies. Valuable insights were gained about the significance of this particular aspect of a larger workplace health programme. The emergent themes build on the existing literature on individuals’ expectations and experiences of complementary and alternative therapies and also on the potential benefits of such a service for workplace health promotion

The relationship between social support and health-related quality of life in patients with antiphospholipid (hughes) syndrome

Objective: Antiphospholipid (Hughes) syndrome (APS) is recognised as a systemic autoimmune disease defined by recurrent thromboembolic events and/or pregnancy morbidity. Little is known about the psychological burden of this long-term condition. This study aims to explore the relationship between social support and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with APS. Methods: A total of 270 patients with a clinical diagnosis of APS participated in a cross-sectional online questionnaire survey. Data included demographics, disease-related information, social support and HRQoL. Results: Both perceived and ideal social support were associated with HRQoL in APS. Patients reported receiving insufficient social support. Perceived emotional support was related to physical functioning (B = 7.77, p = .006, 95% CI: 2.25, 13.29); perceived instrumental support was associated with bodily pain (B = 17.52, p <  .001, 95% CI: 11.15, 23.90) and perceived informational support with physical and social functioning (B = −6.30, p = .05, 95% CI: −12.52, −0.08; B = 8.06, p = .02, 95% CI: 1.17, 14.94). Ideal emotional support was related to physical and social functioning (B = 5.80, p = .04, 95% CI: 0.26, 11.34; B = 7.53, p = .04, 95% CI: 0.55, 14.51); ideal instrumental support was associated with mental health (B = 4.73, p = .03, 95% CI: 0.38, 9.07) and ideal informational support with vitality (B = 5.85, p = .01, 95% CI: 1.23, 10.46). Conclusion: Social support was linked to HRQoL in patients with APS. Insufficient social support was associated with limitations in various HRQoL domains. Increasing social support especially through provision of disease-specific education might contribute to improving HRQoL in patients with APS. Patient-tailored interventions addressing psychosocial aspects of living with APS are needed to improve patients’ psychological and physical status

The Key Role of Patient Involvement in the Development of Core Outcome Sets in Prostate Cancer

Funding/Support and role of the sponsor: This research was supported by funding under the PIONERR Consortium. The Consortium played a role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Urological cancer care pathways: development and use in the context of systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines

Background: Making healthcare treatment decisions is a complex process involving a broad stakeholder base including patients, their families, health professionals, clinical practice guideline developers and funders of healthcare. Methods: This paper presents a review of a methodology for the development of urological cancer care pathways (UCAN care pathways), which reflects an appreciation of this broad stakeholder base. The methods section includes an overview of the steps in the development of the UCAN care pathways and engagement with clinical content experts and patient groups. Results: The development process is outlined, the uses of the urological cancer care pathways discussed and the implications for clinical practice highlighted. The full set of UCAN care pathways is published in this paper. These include care pathways on localised prostate cancer, locally advanced prostate cancer, metastatic prostate cancer, hormone-resistant prostate cancer, localised renal cell cancer, advanced renal cell cancer, testicular cancer, penile cancer, muscle invasive and metastatic bladder cancer and non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Conclusion: The process provides a useful framework for improving urological cancer care through evidence synthesis, research prioritisation, stakeholder involvement and international collaboration. Although the focus of this work is urological cancers, the methodology can be applied to all aspects of urology and is transferable to other clinical specialties.11 page(s

MRI-derived g-ratio and lesion severity in newly diagnosed multiple sclerosis

Myelin loss is associated with axonal damage in established multiple sclerosis. This relationship is challenging to study in vivo in early disease. Here, we ask whether myelin loss is associated with axonal damage at diagnosis, by combining non-invasive neuroimaging and blood biomarkers. We performed quantitative microstructural MRI and single molecule ELISA plasma neurofilament measurement in 73 patients with newly diagnosed, immunotherapy naïve relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Myelin integrity was evaluated using aggregate g-ratios, derived from magnetization transfer saturation (MTsat) and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) diffusion data. We found significantly higher g-ratios within cerebral white matter lesions (suggesting myelin loss) compared with normal-appearing white matter (0.61 vs 0.57, difference 0.036, 95% CI 0.029 to 0.043, p &amp;lt; 0.001). Lesion volume (Spearman’s rho rs= 0.38, p &amp;lt; 0.001) and g-ratio (rs= 0.24 p &amp;lt; 0.05) correlated independently with plasma neurofilament. In patients with substantial lesion load (n = 38), those with higher g-ratio (defined as greater than median) were more likely to have abnormally elevated plasma neurofilament than those with normal g-ratio (defined as less than median) (11/23 [48%] versus 2/15 [13%] p &amp;lt; 0.05). These data suggest that, even at multiple sclerosis diagnosis, reduced myelin integrity is associated with axonal damage. MRI-derived g-ratio may provide useful additional information regarding lesion severity, and help to identify individuals with a high degree of axonal damage at disease onset. York, Martin et al. simultaneously measured g-ratio and plasma neurofilament in 73 relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients at diagnosis using advanced MRI and single molecule ELISA. They demonstrate that g-ratio of cerebral white matter lesions varies at diagnosis, and show that high g-ratio of lesions is associated with elevated plasma neurofilament

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the time to delivery of adjuvant therapy: the iBRA-2 study

Background: Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is routinely offered to improve quality-of-life for women requiring mastectomy, but there are concerns that more complex surgery may delay adjuvant oncological treatments and compromise long-term outcomes. High-quality evidence is lacking. The iBRA-2 study aimed to investigate the impact of IBR on time to adjuvant therapy. Methods: Consecutive women undergoing mastectomy ± IBR for breast cancer July–December, 2016 were included. Patient demographics, operative, oncological and complication data were collected. Time from last definitive cancer surgery to first adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing mastectomy ± IBR were compared and risk factors associated with delays explored. Results: A total of 2540 patients were recruited from 76 centres; 1008 (39.7%) underwent IBR (implant-only [n = 675, 26.6%]; pedicled flaps [n = 105,4.1%] and free-flaps [n = 228, 8.9%]). Complications requiring re-admission or re-operation were significantly more common in patients undergoing IBR than those receiving mastectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy was required by 1235 (48.6%) patients. No clinically significant differences were seen in time to adjuvant therapy between patient groups but major complications irrespective of surgery received were significantly associated with treatment delays. Conclusions: IBR does not result in clinically significant delays to adjuvant therapy, but post-operative complications are associated with treatment delays. Strategies to minimise complications, including careful patient selection, are required to improve outcomes for patients

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Providing a Framework for Meaningful Patient Involvement in Clinical Practice Guideline Development and Implementation

Acknowledgments: The EVOLVE research team acknowledges the valuable support and participation of Guideline Office staff and Guideline Panel members at the European Association of Urology (EAU). We would like to thank all study participants and patient and medical organisations who promoted the EVOLVE study. We also thank the following organisations for their help in study recruitment: Action Bladder Cancer; Cancer Research UK; Europa Uomo; EAU; European Association of Urology Nurses; European Cancer Patient Coalition; Fight Bladder Cancer; International Kidney Cancer Coalition; Kidney Cancer Support Network; UCAN Urological CANcer Charity; Prostate Cancer UK; and World Bladder Cancer Patient Coalition. The EVOLVE study is funded by the NHS Grampian Endowment Fund via the urological cancer charity UCAN.Peer reviewedPostprin