Rosiglitazone RECORD study: glucose control outcomes at 18 months

AIMS: To compare glucose control over 18 months between rosiglitazone oral combination therapy and combination metformin and sulphonylurea in people with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: RECORD, a multicentre, parallel-group study of cardiovascular outcomes, enrolled people with an HbA(1c) of 7.1-9.0% on maximum doses of metformin or sulphonylurea. If on metformin they were randomized to add-on rosiglitazone or sulphonylurea (open label) and if on sulphonylurea to rosiglitazone or metformin. HbA(1c) was managed to < or = 7.0% by dose titration. A prospectively defined analysis of glycaemic control on the first 1122 participants is reported here, with a primary outcome assessed against a non-inferiority margin for HbA(1c) of 0.4%. RESULTS: At 18 months, HbA(1c) reduction on background metformin was similar with rosiglitazone and sulphonylurea [difference 0.07 (95% CI -0.09, 0.23)%], as was the change when rosiglitazone or metformin was added to sulphonylurea [0.06 (-0.09, 0.20)%]. At 6 months, the effect on HbA(1c) was greater with add-on sulphonylurea, but was similar whether sulphonylurea was added to rosiglitazone or metformin. Differences in fasting plasma glucose were not statistically significant at 18 months [rosiglitazone vs. sulphonylurea -0.36 (-0.74, 0.02) mmol/l, rosiglitazone vs. metformin -0.34 (-0.73, 0.05) mmol/l]. Increased homeostasis model assessment insulin sensitivity and reduced C-reactive protein were greater with rosiglitazone than metformin or sulphonylurea (all P < or = 0.001). Body weight was significantly increased with rosiglitazone compared with sulphonylurea [difference 1.2 (0.4, 2.0) kg, P = 0.003] and metformin [difference 4.3 (3.6, 5.1) kg, P < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: In people with diabetes, rosiglitazone in combination with metformin or sulphonylurea was demonstrated to be non-inferior to the standard combination of metformin + sulphonylurea in lowering HbA(1c) over 18 months, and produces greater improvements in C-reactive protein and basal insulin sensitivity but is also associated with greater weight gain

Alcohol dependence in public policy: towards its (re)inclusion

Public policy on alcohol in the UK relies on health promotion campaigns that encourage individuals who misuse alcohol to make healthier choices about their drinking. Individuals with alcohol-dependence syndrome have an impaired capacity to choose health. As a result, individuals with the worst alcohol misuse problems lie largely outside the reach of choice-based policy. However, such policy has been widely criticized and efforts to reform it are underway. This paper argues that the British Medical Association’s recent attempt to improve policy on alcohol in the UK by introducing strategies which have been shown to control drinking within populations still gives insufficient attention to alcohol dependence. This is because it fails accurately and consistently to characterize alcohol dependence and gives insufficient attention to the social challenges it presents

Physicians' migration in Europe: an overview of the current situation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The migration of medical professionals as a result of the expansion of the European Union is cause for concern. But there is a significant lack of information available about this phenomenon.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Search of secondary databases about the presence of european doctors working abroad, through two search engines in the Internet (Google and Pubmed) and a survey of professional organisations and regulators in countries of the European Union.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The United Kingdom has more foreign doctors than all other European countries for which figures are available (Ireland, France, Germany, Norway, Portugal, Italy, Austria and Poland). Some 74,031 foreign doctors are registered in the UK, 30.94% of the total. European countries with the highest percentage of doctors working abroad are Ireland (47.5%, or 10,065 doctors) and Malta (23.1%, 376 doctors). The data obtained from Norway, France and Germany do not indicate an increase in the migration of professionals from countries recently incorporated into the EU.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There is significant mobility and heterogeneous distribution of doctors within the EEA and it should be cause for concern among health care authorities. However, there is no evidence about a possible increase in this phenomenon after the recent expansion of the EU.</p

Collaborative working in health and social care: Lessons learned from post‐hoc preliminary findings of a young families’ pregnancy to age 2 project in South Wales, United Kingdom

Children of young and socially disadvantaged parents are more likely to experience adverse outcomes. In response to this, a unique young families’ project in Swansea, UK, was created, which drew together a team of multi-agency professionals, to support people aged 16–24 from 17 weeks of pregnancy throughout 1,001 days of the child's life. The aim of the JIGSO (the Welsh word for Jigsaw) project is for young people to reach their potential as parents and to break the cycle of health and social inequality. This evaluation analysed routinely collected data held by the project from January 2017 to December 2018 exploring health and social outcomes, including smoking and alcohol use in pregnancy, breastfeeding, maternal diet and social services outcomes. Outcomes were compared to local and national averages, where available. Data relating to parenting knowledge and skills were available via records of 10-point Likert scales, one collected at the start of the JIGSO involvement and one around 4–6 months later. Findings showed higher than average levels of breastfeeding initiation and lower smoking and alcohol use in pregnancy. Parents also reported enhanced knowledge and confidence in their child care skills, as well as improved family relationships. Parents with high levels of engagement with JIGSO also appeared to have positive outcomes with Social Services (their child's name was removed from child protection register or their case was closed to social services). This was a post-hoc evaluation, not an intervention study or trial, and thus findings must be interpreted with caution. Despite this, the findings are promising and more prospective research exploring similar services is required

A cluster randomised trial, cost-effectiveness analysis and psychosocial evaluation of insulin pump therapy compared with multiple injections during flexible intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes: the REPOSE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Insulin is generally administered to people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) using multiple daily injections (MDIs), but can also be delivered using infusion pumps. In the UK, pumps are recommended for patients with the greatest need and adult use is less than in comparable countries. Previous trials have been small, of short duration and have failed to control for training in insulin adjustment. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pump therapy compared with MDI for adults with T1DM, with both groups receiving equivalent structured training in flexible insulin therapy. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group cluster randomised controlled trial, including economic and psychosocial evaluations. After participants were assigned a group training course, courses were randomly allocated in pairs to either pump or MDI. SETTING: Eight secondary care diabetes centres in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with T1DM for > 12 months, willing to undertake intensive insulin therapy, with no preference for pump or MDI, or a clinical indication for pumps. INTERVENTIONS: Pump or MDI structured training in flexible insulin therapy, followed up for 2 years. MDI participants used insulin analogues. Pump participants used a Medtronic Paradigm(®) Veo(TM) (Medtronic, Watford, UK) with insulin aspart (NovoRapid, Novo Nordisk, Gatwick, UK). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome - change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at 2 years in participants whose baseline HbA1c was ≥ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol). Key secondary outcome - proportion of participants with HbA1c ≤ 7.5% at 2 years. Other outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months - moderate and severe hypoglycaemia; insulin dose; body weight; proteinuria; diabetic ketoacidosis; quality of life (QoL); fear of hypoglycaemia; treatment satisfaction; emotional well-being; qualitative interviews with participants and staff (2 weeks), and participants (6 months); and ICERs in trial and modelled estimates of cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: We randomised 46 courses comprising 317 participants: 267 attended a Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating course (132 pump; 135 MDI); 260 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, of which 235 (119 pump; 116 MDI) had baseline HbA1c of ≥ 7.5%. HbA1c and severe hypoglycaemia improved in both groups. The drop in HbA1c% at 2 years was 0.85 on pump and 0.42 on MDI. The mean difference (MD) in HbA1c change at 2 years, at which the baseline HbA1c was ≥ 7.5%, was -0.24% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.53% to 0.05%] in favour of the pump (p = 0.098). The per-protocol analysis showed a MD in change of -0.36% (95% CI -0.64% to -0.07%) favouring pumps (p = 0.015). Pumps were not cost-effective in the base case and all of the sensitivity analyses. The pump group had greater improvement in diabetes-specific QoL diet restrictions, daily hassle plus treatment satisfaction, statistically significant at 12 and 24 months and supported by qualitative interviews. LIMITATION: Blinding of pump therapy was not possible, although an objective primary outcome was used. CONCLUSION: Adding pump therapy to structured training in flexible insulin therapy did not significantly enhance glycaemic control or psychosocial outcomes in adults with T1DM. RESEARCH PRIORITY: To understand why few patients achieve a HbA1c of < 7.5%, particularly as glycaemic control is worse in the UK than in other European countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN61215213. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 20. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

A pilot randomised controlled trial of a programme of psychosocial interventions (resettle) for high risk personality disordered offenders

Background Offenders with personality disorder experience significant co-morbid mental health problems and present with an increased risk of offending. The evidence for the effectiveness of interventions for personality disordered offenders in the community is limited. This study was a pilot study to determine the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention known as Resettle for personality disordered offenders and to explore the possible effects of this intervention. Methods Potential participants were recruited from referrals of male prisoners to Resettle. Those consenting underwent baseline assessments before being randomised to Resettle or treatment as usual. Officially recorded and self-report offending was assessed over two years following release from custody. Of the 110 eligible participants, 72 (65%) participated in the study of whom 38 were randomised to Resettle and 34 to treatment as usual. The two groups had a similar psychiatric and offending profile. Results Analysis of officially recorded offences at two years found mixed results, but whether adopting an intent-to-treat approach or including only those who received the intervention there was no clear evidence of an effect of the intervention. A comparison of self-report offending found no effect of Resettle in an intent-to-treat analysis, but there was an effect when the analysis involved only those participating in the intervention. Conclusions This study demonstrated that with some adjustments it was possible to carry out an RCT of a complex intervention for personality disordered offenders in a criminal justice setting. Some, but not conclusive, evidence was found in favour of the intervention

Research utilisation and knowledge mobilisation in the commissioning and joint planning of public health interventions to reduce alcohol-related harms: a qualitative case design using a cocreation approach

Background: Considerable resources are spent on research to establish what works to improve the nation’s health. If the findings from this research are used, better health outcomes can follow, but we know that these findings are not always used. In public health, evidence of what works may not ‘fit’ everywhere, making it difficult to know what to do locally. Research suggests that evidence use is a social and dynamic process, not a simple application of research findings. It is unclear whether it is easier to get evidence used via a legal contracting process or within unified organisational arrangements with shared responsibilities. Objective: To work in cocreation with research participants to investigate how research is utilised and knowledge mobilised in the commissioning and planning of public health services to reduce alcohol-related harms. Design, setting and participants: Two in-depth, largely qualitative, cross-comparison case studies were undertaken to compare real-time research utilisation in commissioning across a purchaser–provider split (England) and in joint planning under unified organisational arrangements (Scotland) to reduce alcohol-related harms. Using an overarching realist approach and working in cocreation, case study partners (stakeholders in the process) picked the topic and helped to interpret the findings. In Scotland, the topic picked was licensing; in England, it was reducing maternal alcohol consumption. Methods: Sixty-nine interviews, two focus groups, 14 observations of decision-making meetings, two local feedback workshops (n = 23 and n = 15) and one national workshop (n = 10) were undertaken. A questionnaire (n = 73) using a Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale was issued to test the transferability of the 10 main findings. Given the small numbers, care must be taken in interpreting the findings. Findings: Not all practitioners have the time, skills or interest to work in cocreation, but when there was collaboration, much was learned. Evidence included professional and tacit knowledge, and anecdotes, as well as findings from rigorous research designs. It was difficult to identify evidence in use and decisions were sometimes progressed in informal ways and in places we did not get to see. There are few formal evidence entry points. Evidence (prevalence and trends in public health issues) enters the process and is embedded in strategic documents to set priorities, but local data were collected in both sites to provide actionable messages (sometimes replicating the evidence base). Conclusions: Two mid-range theories explain the findings. If evidence has saliency (relates to ‘here and now’ as opposed to ‘there and then’) and immediacy (short, presented verbally or visually and with emotional appeal) it is more likely to be used in both settings. A second mid-range theory explains how differing tensions pull and compete as feasible and acceptable local solutions are pursued across stakeholders. Answering what works depends on answering for whom and where simultaneously to find workable (if temporary) ‘blends’. Gaining this agreement across stakeholders appeared more difficult across the purchaser–provider split, because opportunities to interact were curtailed; however, more research is needed. Funding: This study was funded by the Health Services and Delivery Research programme of the National Institute for Health Research