Evaluation of problem-solving skills: what we really do

Abstract no. 1394published_or_final_versio

Strengthening Families Through a Re-envisioned Approach to Fatherhood Education

Fatherhood education has the potential to affect not only fathers\u27 nurturant behaviors but also multiple dimensions of family life. The weGrill program blends fatherhood, youth development, and nutrition education, with food grilling as the focal activity. Grounded in multiple learning theories, the program helps fathers and their adolescent children learn broadly about family life topics, planning for the future, and nutrition and healthful food behaviors. The program represents a re-envisioned approach to fatherhood education

MRI findings in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: does dutasteride make MRI visible lesions less conspicuous? Results from a placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial

Objectives To investigate changes in the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer taking dutasteride 0.5 mg or placebo. Methods We analysed 37 men, randomised to 6 months of daily dutasteride (n = 18) or placebo (n = 19), undergoing 3T multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) scans at baseline and 6 months. Images were reviewed blind to treatment allocation and clinical information. Mean ADC of peripheral (PZ) and transition (TZ) zones, and MR-suspicious lesions were compared between groups over 6 months. Conspicuity was defined as the PZ divided by tumour ADC, and its change over 6 months was assessed. Results A decrease in mean conspicuity in the dutasteride group (but not the controls) was seen over 6 months (1.54 vs 1.38; p = 0.025). Absolute changes in ADC and conspicuity were significantly different between placebo and dutasteride groups at 6 months: (-0.03 vs 0.08, p = 0.033) and (0.11 vs –0.16, p = 0.012), as were percentage changes in the same parameters: (-2.27% vs 8.56% p = 0.048) and (9.25% vs -9.89% p = 0.013). Conclusions Dutasteride was associated with increased tumour ADC and reduced conspicuity. A lower threshold for triggering biopsy might be considered in men on dutasteride undergoing mpMRI for prostate cancer

Prostate Radiofrequency Focal Ablation (ProRAFT) Trial: A Prospective Development Study Evaluating a Bipolar Radiofrequency Device to Treat Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE: To determine early efficacy of bipolar radiofrequency ablation with a coil design (bRFA) for focal ablation of clinically significant localised prostate cancer (sPCa)visible at mpMRI. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective IDEAL phase 2 development study (NCT02294903) recruited treatment naive patients with a single focus of localised sPCa (Gleason 7 or 4 mm or more of Gleason 6) concordant with a lesion visible on multi-parametric MRI. Intervention was a focal ablation with a bRFA system (Encage®, Trod Medical) encompassing the lesion and a predefined margin using nonrigid MRI-ultrasound fusion. Primary outcome was the proportion of men with absence of sPCa on biopsy at 6 months. Trial follow up comprised serum PSA, mpMRI at 1 week, 6 and 12 months post ablation. Validated patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for urinary, erectile and bowel functions and adverse events monitoring system were used. Analyses were done on a per-protocol basis. RESULTS: 20 of 21 patients recruited received the intervention. Baseline characteristics were a median age of 66 years (IQR 63-69), pre-operative median PSA of 7.9 ng/ml (5.3-9.6), 18 (90%) had Gleason 7 with median maximum cancer of 7 mm (IQR 5-10) for a median 2.8 cc mpMRI lesions (IQR 1.4-4.8). Targeted biopsy of the treated area (median number of cores=6, IQR 5-8) showed absence of sPCa in 16/20 men (80%), concordant with mpMRI. There was a low profile of side effects at PROMs analysis and no serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Focal therapy of sPCa associated with an MRI lesion using bRFA showed early efficacy to ablate cancer with low rates of genitourinary and rectal side-effects

Protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial of targeted oxygen therapy in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients

IntroductionOxygen is the most commonly administered drug to mechanically ventilated critically ill adults, yet little is known about the optimum oxygen saturation (SpO2) target for these patients; the current standard of care is an SpO2of 96% or above. Small pilot studies have demonstrated that permissive hypoxaemia (aiming for a lower SpO2than normal by using a lower fractional inspired oxygen concentration (FIO2)) can be achieved in the critically ill and appears to be safe. This approach has not been evaluated in a National Health Service setting. It is possible that permissive hypoxaemia may be beneficial to critically ill patients thus it requires robust evaluation.Methods and analysisTargeted OXygen therapY in Critical illness (TOXYC) is a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate whether recruiting patients to a study of permissive hypoxaemia is possible in the UK. It will also investigate biological mechanisms that may underlie the links between oxygenation and patient outcomes. Mechanically ventilated patients with respiratory failure will be recruited from critical care units at two sites and randomised (1:1 ratio) to an SpO2target of either 88%–92% or ≥96% while intubated with an endotracheal tube. Clinical teams can adjust FIO2and ventilator settings as they wish to achieve these targets. Clinical information will be collected before, during and after the intervention and blood samples taken to measure markers of systemic oxidative stress. The primary outcome of this study is feasibility, which will be assessed by recruitment rate, protocol adherence and withdrawal rates. Secondary outcomes will include a comparison of standard critical care outcome measures between the two intervention groups, and the measurement of biomarkers of systemic oxidative stress. The results will be used to calculate a sample size, likely number of sites and overall length of time required for a subsequent large multicentre RCT.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the London - Harrow Research Ethics Committee on 2 November 2017 (REC Reference 17/LO/1334) and received HRA approval on 13 November 2017. Results from this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at medical and scientific meetings, in the NIHR Journals Library and patient information websites.Trial registration numberNCT03287466; Pre-results.</jats:sec

Untangling child welfare inequalities and the ‘Inverse Intervention Law’ in England

This article addresses some potential limitations of key findings from recent research into inequalities in children’s social services by providing additional evidence from multilevel models that suggest the socioeconomic social gradient and ‘Inverse Intervention Law’ in children’s services interventions are statistically significant after controlling for possible confounding spatial and population effects. Multilevel negative binomial regression models are presented using English child welfare data to predict the following intervention rates at lower super output area-level: Child in Need (n = 2707, middle super output area [MSOA] n = 543, local authority [LA] n = 13); Child Protection Plan (n = 4115, MSOA n = 837, LA n = 18); and Children Looked After (n = 4115, MSOA n = 837, LA n = 18). We find strong evidence supporting the existence of a steep socioeconomic social gradient in child welfare interventions. Furthermore, we find certain local authority contexts exacerbate this social gradient. Contexts of low overall deprivation and high income inequality are associated with greater socioeconomic inequalities in neighbourhood intervention rates. The relationship between neighbourhood deprivation and children looked after rates is almost five times stronger in local authorities with these characteristics than it is in local authorities with high overall deprivation and low income inequality. We argue that social policy responses addressing structural determinants of child welfare inequalities are needed, and that strategies to reduce the numbers of children taken into care must address underlying poverty and income inequality at both a local and national level

The effect of dutasteride on MRI-defined prostate cancer lesions: MAPPED (Magnetic resonance imaging in Primary Prostate Cancer after Exposure to Dutasteride) - a randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial

PURPOSE: Dutasteride is licensed for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia, and has been associated with a lower progression rate in low-risk prostate cancer. We have evaluated the effect of dutasteride on prostate cancer volume as assessed by T2-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, men with biopsy-proven low-intermediate risk prostate cancer (up to Gleason 3+4 and PSA up to 15 ng/ml) who had an MR visible lesion of >/= 0.2ml on T2-weighted sequences were randomized to daily dutasteride 0.5mg or placebo for 6 months. Lesion volume was assessed at baseline, 3 and 6 months, with an image-guided biopsy to the lesion at study exit. The primary endpoint was percentage reduction in lesion volume over 6 months. This trial was registered with the European Clinical Trials register (EudraCT 2009-102405-18). RESULTS: Forty-two men were recruited between June 2010 and January 2012. In the dutasteride group, the average volumes at baseline and 6 months were 0.55ml and 0.38ml respectively, and the average percentage reduction was 36%. In the placebo group, the average volumes at baseline and 6 months were 0.65ml and 0.76ml respectively, and the average percentage reduction was -12%. The difference in percentage reductions between groups was 48% (95% CI 27.4-68.3%. p< 0.0001). The most common adverse event was deterioration in erectile function (25% in men randomized to dutasteride, 16% in men randomized to placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Dutasteride was associated with a significant reduction in prostate cancer volume on T2 weighted MRI images compared to placebo

Accuracy of Transperineal Targeted Prostate Biopsies, Visual Estimation and Image Fusion in Men Needing Repeat Biopsy in the PICTURE Trial

PURPOSE: To evaluate detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) using MRI-targeted biopsies, and compare visual-estimation to image-fusion targeting, in patients requiring repeat prostate biopsies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective, ethics-committee approved, registered PICTURE trial enrolling 249 consecutive patients (11th/January/2012-29th/January/2014). Men underwent an mpMRI and were blinded to its results. All underwent transperineal template prostate mapping (TTPM) biopsies. In 200 with a lesion, this was preceded by visual-estimation and image-fusion targeted biopsies. For the primary endpoint, csPCa was defined as Gleason >/=4+3 and/or any grade of cancer length >/=6mm. Other definitions of csPCa were also evaluated. RESULTS: Mean (SD) age was 62.6 (7) years, median (IQR) PSA 7.17ng/ml (5.25, 10.09), mean primary lesion size 0.37cc (SD1.52), with mean 4.3 (SD2.3) targeted cores per lesion (visual-estimation and image-fusion combined) and mean 48.7 (SD12.3) TTPM-biopsy cores. TTPM-biopsies detected 97 (48.5%) cases of csPCa and 85 (42.5%) insignificant cancers. Overall, mpMRI-targeted biopsies detected 81 (40.5%) csPCa and 63 (31.5%) insignificant cancers. Eighteen (9%) with csPCa on MRI-targeted biopsies were benign or clinically insignificant on TTPM-biopsy. Thirty-four (17%) had csPCa detected on TTPM-biopsy but not on MRI-targeted biopsies; approximately half of these were present in non-targeted areas. csPCa was found with visual-estimation and image-fusion in 53/169 (31.3%) and 48/169 (28.4%) (McNemar's test, p=0.5322). Visual-estimation missed 23 (13.6%) csPCa detected by image-fusion; image-fusion missed 18 (10.8%) csPCa that visual-estimation detected. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-targeted biopsies are accurate at detection of csPCa and reducing over-diagnosis of insignificant cancers. To maximise detection both visual-estimation and image-fusion targeted biopsies are required

Can "presumed consent" justify the duty to treat infectious diseases? An analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>AIDS, SARS, and the recent epidemics of the avian-flu have all served to remind us the debate over the limits of the moral duty to care. It is important to first consider the question of whether or not the "duty to treat" might be subject to contextual constraints. The purpose of this study was to investigate the opinions and beliefs held by both physicians and dentists regarding the occupational risks of infectious diseases, and to analyze the argument that the notion of "presumed consent" on the part of professionals may be grounds for supporting the duty to treat.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>For this cross-sectional survey, the study population was selected from among physicians and dentists in Ankara. All of the 373 participants were given a self-administered questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In total, 79.6% of the participants said that they either had some degree of knowledge about the risks when they chose their profession or that they learned of the risks later during their education and training. Of the participants, 5.2% said that they would not have chosen this profession if they had been informed of the risks. It was found that 57% of the participants believed that there is a standard level of risk, and 52% of the participants stated that certain diseases would exceed the level of acceptable risk unless specific protective measures were implemented.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>If we use the presumed consent argument to establish the duty of the HCW to provide care, we are confronted with problems ranging over the difficulty of choosing a profession autonomously, the constant level of uncertainty present in the medical profession, the near-impossibility of being able to evaluate retrospectively whether every individual was informed, and the seemingly inescapable problem that this practice would legitimize, and perhaps even foster, discrimination against patients with certain diseases. Our findings suggest that another problem can be added to the list: one-fifth of the participants in this study either lacked adequate knowledge of the occupational risks when they chose the medical profession or were not sufficiently informed of these risks during their faculty education and training. Furthermore, in terms of the moral duty to provide care, it seems that most HCWs are more concerned about the availability of protective measures than about whether they had been informed of a particular risk beforehand. For all these reasons, the presumed consent argument is not persuasive enough, and cannot be used to justify the duty to provide care. It is therefore more useful to emphasize justifications other than presumed consent when defining the duty of HCWs to provide care, such as the social contract between society and the medical profession and the fact that HCWs have a greater ability to provide medical aid.</p