Dupuytren’s Interventions Surgery versus Collagenase (DISC) Trial : Study Protocol for a pragmatic, two arm parallel group, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

Background: Dupuytren’s contracture is a fibro-proliferative disease of the hands affecting over 2 million UK adults, particularly the white, male population. Surgery is the traditional treatment, however recent studies have indicated that an alternative to surgery - Collagenase Clostridium Histolyticum (Collagenase) - is better than placebo in the treatment of Dupuytren’s contracture. There is however no robust randomised controlled trial that provides a definitive answer on the clinical effectiveness of Collagenase compared with limited fasciectomy surgery. The Dupuytren’s Interventions Surgery vs Collagenase Trial (DISC) Trial was therefore designed to fill this evidence gap. Methods/Design: The DISC Trial is a multi-centre pragmatic two arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial. Participants will be assigned 1:1 to receive either Collagenase injection or surgery (limited fasciectomy). We aim to recruit 710 adult participants with Dupuytren’s contracture. Potential participants will be identified in primary and secondary care, screened by a delegated clinician and if eligible and consenting, baseline data will be collected and randomisation completed. The primary outcome will be the self-reported Patient Evaluation Measure assessed at 1 year after treatment. Secondary outcome measures include the Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main Scale, the Michigan Hand Questionnaire, EQ-5D-5L, resource use, further procedures, complications, recurrence, total active movement and extension deficit, and time to return to function. Given the limited evidence comparing recurrence rates following Collagenase injection and limited fasciectomy, and the importance of a return to function as soon as possible for patients, the associated measures for each will be prioritised to allow treatment effectiveness in the context of these key elements to be assessed. An economic evaluation will assess the cost effectiveness of treatments and a qualitative sub-study will assess participants experiences and preferences of the treatments. Discussion: The DISC trial is the first randomised controlled trial, to our knowledge, to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of Collagenase compared to limited fasciectomy surgery for patients with Dupuytren’s contracture. ISRCTN registry identifier: ISRCTN18254597. Prospectively registered on 11th April 2017. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18254597 Keywords: Dupuytren’s contracture, Collagenase clostridium histolyticum, limited fasciectomy, surgery, correction, randomised controlled tria

Community pharmacies mood intervention Study (CHEMIST) Feasibility and External Pilot randomised controlled trial protocol

Feasibility study: Objectives:Refine a bespoke enhanced support intervention (ESI) (including self-help materials, intervention manual and training) for implementation by community pharmacy (CP) staff to people with sub-threshold depression and long-term conditions (LTCs) based upon evidence-supported interventions in primary careDevelop and refine study procedures (recruitment strategies and set up, screening, participant recruitment, assessment, suitability of outcome measures and data collection procedures) for testing in the pilot study phaseDesign: A case series/qualitative studySetting: UK community pharmacyPopulation: Adults with long-term health conditions who screen-positive for depression but who do not reach the threshold for DSM IV Moderate Depressive disorderIntervention: Enhanced support intervention (ESI) delivered by an appropriately trained community pharmacy team member involving four to six sessions over four months. ESI is a modified form of an intervention within the collaborative care framework for sub-threshold depression validated in previous studies in UK primary care which appears suitable for implementation in community settings.Sample size: 20-30 participantsOutcomes: Study implementation (recruitment and attrition rates), quality of data collection at baseline and 4 months and ESI adherence (number of contacts, DNA and drop out) as per objectives 1a/bQualitative evaluation: Semi-structured interviews with up to 10 participants and ESI facilitators and focus group(s) (range of pharmacy staff n = 8-10) will be conducted to explore the acceptability of the intervention and feasibility of the study, training and study procedures. External pilot study: Objectives:Quantify the flow of participants (eligibility, recruitment and follow-up rate)Evaluate proposed recruitment, assessment and outcome measure collection methodsExamine the delivery of the enhanced support intervention in a community pharmacy setting (intervention uptake, retention and dose) to inform process evaluationProcess evaluation, using semi-structured interviews with participants across a range of socio-economic settings, and pharmacy staff to explore the acceptability of the ESI within community pharmacy, elements of the intervention that were considered useful (or not) and appropriateness of study proceduresDesign: Pilot randomised controlled trial, including a prospective economic and qualitative evaluationSetting: As abovePopulation: As aboveIntervention: As above with adaptations post feasibility studyComparator: Usual careSample size: 100 participantsOutcomes: Data will be used to estimate recruitment, intervention delivery and study completion rates as per objectives 2a-d. Definitive estimates of the effectiveness of ESI will not be made.Primary outcome: Depression severity (Patient Health Questionnaire 9) at four months.Secondary outcomes: Patient acceptance, uptake and attrition. ICD10 depression status, anxiety (GAD 7), health-related quality of life (SF-12v2) and health-state utility (EQ5D 3L) will be measured at four months.Economic evaluation: The incremental cost per QALY will be calculated from both the NHS and societal perspective.Process evaluation: Using mixed methods, potential mediators/moderators of the intervention, the acceptability (to participants and pharmacy staff), barriers and facilitators to the use of ESI in community pharmacy, and impact on usual practice will be examined. Semi-structured interviews with approximately 30 study participants, 20 pharmacy staff and eight GPs near participating pharmacies will be conducted. Trial registration: ISRCTN: ISRCTN11290592Protocol version number: Version 4.1 (dated 16th January 2018)Study Sponsor Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust

Pain Reduction with Oral Methotrexate in Knee Osteoarthritis; a Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Background: Treatments for osteoarthritis are limited. Previous small studies suggest the anti-rheumatic drug methotrexate may be a potential treatment for osteoarthritis pain. Objective: To assess symptomatic benefits of methotrexate in knee osteoarthritis. Design: A multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between 13 June 2014 and 8 September 2017. Setting: Fifteen United Kingdom secondary-care musculoskeletal clinics. Participants: 207 participants with symptomatic, radiographic knee osteoarthritis, knee pain (severity ≥4/10) on most days in the last 3-months, with inadequate response to current medication were approached for inclusion. Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1 to once-weekly oral methotrexate (6-week escalation 10mg-25mg) or matched placebo over 12-months and continued usual analgesia. Measurements: The primary endpoint was average knee pain (numerical rating scale (NRS) 0-10) at 6-months, with 12-month follow-up to assess longer-term response. Secondary endpoints included knee stiffness and function outcomes, and adverse events. Results: 155 participants (64% women, mean age 60.9 years, 50% Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 3-4) were randomized to methotrexate (n=77) or placebo (n=78). Follow-up was 86% (n=134; MTX 66, Placebo 68) at 6-months. Mean(SD) knee pain reduced from 6.4(1.80) at baseline to 5.1(2.32) at 6-months in the MTX group, and from 6.8(1.62) to 6.2(2.30) in the placebo group. The primary intention-to-treat analysis revealed a statistically significant pain reduction of 0.79 NRS points in favour of MTX (95%CI[0.08-1.51];p=0.030). There were also statistically significant treatment-group differences in favour of MTX at 6-months for WOMAC stiffness (0.60 points, 95%CI[0.01-1.18];p=0.045) and function (5.01 points, 95%CI[1.29-8.74],p=0.008). Treatment-compliance analysis supported a dose-response effect. Four unrelated serious adverse events were reported (methotrexate:2, placebo:2). Limitations: Not permitting oral methotrexate to be changed to subcutaneous delivery for intolerance. Conclusions: Oral methotrexate added to usual medications demonstrated statistically significant reduction in knee osteoarthritis pain, stiffness and function at 6-months. Funding Source: Versus Arthritis 20186. Trial registration number: ISRCTN77854383 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN77854383); EudraCT: 2013-001689-41 (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=eudract_number%3A2013-001689-41

The current role, and perceived benefits and barriers of secondary care pharmacists facilitating patient participation in Clinical Trials of Investigational Medicinal Products (CTIMPs) conducted within the NHS: A cross-sectional survey.

Rationale, aims and objectives: Secondary care pharmacists are well positioned within the healthcare system to communicate with patients, and provide guidance and advice regarding drug treatments. They are able to broaden the opportunities to raise the profile of CTIMPs, and positively influence research. This research aimed to investigate the perceived benefits and barriers of secondary care pharmacists being involved in Clinical Trials of Investigational Medicinal Products (CTIMPs), their current role, and the perceived benefits and barriers of developing their role in facilitating patient participation for CTIMPs (e.g. by identifying or recruiting potential participants). Methods: A cross-sectional quantitative online survey circulated to pharmacy professionals within the UK. Results: Involvement in CTIMPs and the facilitation of patient participation offered several benefits including improved communication and relationships with other healthcare professionals, developing the profession, developing training and knowledge, and exploring a personal interest. The main barriers to involvement included a lack of opportunities or awareness of opportunities, time, and funding or resources. Those employed at sites with a larger number of CTIMPs agreed more with the disadvantages, however they also showed greater agreeance towards the benefits of pharmacy being involved in facilitating patient participation. Conclusions: Most respondents do not currently have a role in identifying or recruiting potential participants. Despite this, being involved in CTIMPs and the facilitation of patient participation was suggested to offer several benefits. Given many participants agreed there are barriers to their involvement, future research should focus on exploring organisational and individual challenges with the aim of enabling pharmacists to support recruitment activities

Researchers’ experiences of pharmacy involvement : a UK cross-sectional survey

Objectives We aimed to explore the experiences and opinions of researchers who have involved pharmacy professionals in research studies. Pharmacy teams are valued healthcare professionals, with a wide knowledge base and skill set. They have regular contact with service users who may be interested in research, placing them in a good position for collaboration with researchers. Methods Cross-sectional survey circulated to researchers in the UK; analysed using descriptive, quantitative methods. Key findings A total of 238 responses were received from researchers, mainly within hospitals and universities. Most had more than 10 years of experience (45%) and had worked on 2–10 studies involving pharmacies (54%), frequently requiring hospital services (74%). Two-thirds of researchers had worked on clinical trials of investigational medicinal products. Most researchers worked with pharmacy teams that all had previous research experience (78%) yet did not involve them in participant recruitment (85%). Pharmacy staff frequently managed or dispensed medication (43%), however also engaged with other research-related tasks. Their previous experience and keenness were desirable qualities for researchers. Many respondents had a positive experience of collaboration and acknowledged various advantages (e.g. developing training/knowledge) and disadvantages (e.g. staffing issues). Conclusions Researchers’ positive impression of working with the pharmacy sector bodes well for future collaborations. Many had experience with pharmacy, however, those more unfamiliar should consider the roles staff could perform; and pharmacy teams and professional bodies should advocate their involvement. For collaboration to prosper, we should promote the benefits of research engagement and consider how to overcome known challenges

Reporting of placebo medication descriptors in randomised controlled trials : a review of three medical journals

Clinical trials involving a placebo enable researchers to determine the effectiveness of a product; however, ensuring a placebo matches an active treatment takes great consideration, time and costs. We aimed to assess the reporting quality of blinding descriptions for placebo medication treatments and consider this in relation to funding support (commercial or non-commercial). The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA); the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) were searched for randomised clinical trials, and 117 papers involving a placebo medication, published between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017, were extracted. The data were analysed for the number of publications reporting characteristics of placebo treatments, frequency of the characteristics and source of funding. Three quarters of the articles reported at least one characteristic of the placebo. The Lancet and JAMA consistently had this information present; however, this was observed less in the NEJM. The most common characteristic was ‘matching placebo’, followed by contents of the placebo, packaging and appearance. Texture, taste and smell were least reported. Within those supported by commercial funding, two-thirds reported at least one characteristic of the placebo treatment, whilst almost all of the articles without commercial funding reported at least one characteristic. Efforts are being made to include descriptions of blinded medication; however, inconsistencies suggest that guidelines are not always being followed, and more can be done to improve reporting. Future research should focus on the reasons for inadequate recording and aim to reduce the inconsistencies observed

Ventilatory settings in the initial 72 h and their association with outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: a preplanned secondary analysis of the targeted hypothermia versus targeted normothermia after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (TTM2) trial

International audienc

Oxygen targets and 6-month outcome after out of hospital cardiac arrest: a pre-planned sub-analysis of the targeted hypothermia versus targeted normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trial

International audienceAbstract Background Optimal oxygen targets in patients resuscitated after cardiac arrest are uncertain. The primary aim of this study was to describe the values of partial pressure of oxygen values (PaO 2 ) and the episodes of hypoxemia and hyperoxemia occurring within the first 72 h of mechanical ventilation in out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. The secondary aim was to evaluate the association of PaO 2 with patients’ outcome. Methods Preplanned secondary analysis of the targeted hypothermia versus targeted normothermia after OHCA (TTM2) trial. Arterial blood gases values were collected from randomization every 4 h for the first 32 h, and then, every 8 h until day 3. Hypoxemia was defined as PaO 2  300 mmHg. Mortality and poor neurological outcome (defined according to modified Rankin scale) were collected at 6 months. Results 1418 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 64 ± 14 years, and 292 patients (20.6%) were female. 24.9% of patients had at least one episode of hypoxemia, and 7.6% of patients had at least one episode of severe hyperoxemia. Both hypoxemia and hyperoxemia were independently associated with 6-month mortality, but not with poor neurological outcome. The best cutoff point associated with 6-month mortality for hypoxemia was 69 mmHg (Risk Ratio, RR = 1.009, 95% CI 0.93–1.09), and for hyperoxemia was 195 mmHg (RR = 1.006, 95% CI 0.95–1.06). The time exposure, i.e., the area under the curve (PaO 2 -AUC), for hyperoxemia was significantly associated with mortality ( p = 0.003). Conclusions In OHCA patients, both hypoxemia and hyperoxemia are associated with 6-months mortality, with an effect mediated by the timing exposure to high values of oxygen. Precise titration of oxygen levels should be considered in this group of patients. Trial registration : clinicaltrials.gov NCT02908308 , Registered September 20, 2016