Hand Written Notes of Thomas Stanton, from Interview of Margot Saunders and Diane Thompson

Linked is the audiotape to this intervie

Improving digital partner notification for sexually transmitted infections and HIV through a systematic review and application of the Behaviour Change Wheel approach

Background Partner notification (PN) is key to controlling sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Digital PN options (e.g. social media, short message service (SMS), emails) are promising in increasing PN behaviour. However, their implementation is often challenging and studies report varied levels of acceptability and uptake of PN, highlighting the need to optimise digital PN interventions. Methods A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to digital PN interventions for STIs, including HIV, across eight research databases (from 2010 to 2023) identified eight relevant studies, two of which addressed HIV. Data extraction identified 98 barriers and 54 facilitators to the use of digital PN interventions. These were synthesised into 18 key barriers and 17 key facilitators that were each deemed amenable to change. We then used the Behaviour Change Wheel approach, the Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects and Equity criteria, and multidisciplinary expert input, to systematically develop practical recommendations to optimise digital PN. Results Thirty-two specific recommendations clustered around three themes. Digital PN interventions should: (1) empower and support the index patient by providing a range of notification options, accompanied by clear instructions; (2) integrate into users’ existing habits and the digital landscape, meeting contemporary standards and expectations of usability; and (3) address the social context of PN both online and offline through normalising the act of PN, combating STI-related stigma and stressing the altruistic aspects of PN through consistent messaging to service users and the public. Conclusions Our evidence-based recommendations should be used to optimise existing digital PN interventions and inform the co-production of new ones

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