Evaluating implementation of a fire-prevention injury prevention briefing in children's centres: Cluster randomised controlled trial

Background

Many developed countries have high mortality rates for fire-related deaths in children aged 0–14 years with steep social gradients. Evidence-based interventions to promote fire safety practices exist, but the impact of implementing a range of these interventions in children’s services has not been assessed. We developed an Injury Prevention Briefing (IPB), which brought together evidence about effective fire safety interventions and good practice in delivering interventions; plus training and facilitation to support its use and evaluated its implementation.

Methods

We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial, with integrated qualitative and cost-effectiveness nested studies, across four study sites in England involving children’s centres in disadvantaged areas; participants were staff and families attending those centres. Centres were stratified by study site and randomised within strata to one of three arms: IPB plus facilitation (IPB+), IPB only, usual care. IPB+ centres received initial training and facilitation at months 1, 3, and 8. Baseline data from children’s centres were collected between August 2011 and January 2012 and follow-up data were collected between June 2012 and June 2013. Parent baseline data were collected between January 2012 and May 2012 and follow-up data between May 2013 and September 2013. Data comprised baseline and 12 month parent- and staff-completed questionnaires, facilitation contact data, activity logs and staff interviews. The primary outcome was whether families had a plan for escaping from a house fire. Treatment arms were compared using multilevel models to account for clustering by children’s centre.

Results

1112 parents at 36 children’s centres participated. There was no significant effect of the intervention on families’ possession of plans for escaping from a house fire (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) IPB only vs. usual care: 0.93, 95%CI 0.58, 1.49; AOR IPB+ vs. usual care 1.41, 95%CI 0.91, 2.20). However, significantly more families in the intervention arms reported more behaviours for escaping from house fires (AOR IPB only vs. usual care: 2.56, 95%CI 01.38, 4.76; AOR IPB+ vs. usual care 1.78, 95%CI 1.01, 3.15).

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that children’s centres can deliver an injury prevention intervention to families in disadvantaged communities and achieve changes in home safety behaviours.

Multicentre individual randomised controlled trial of screening and brief alcohol intervention to prevent risky drinking in young people aged 14-15 in a high school setting (SIPS JR-HIGH): study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Drinking has adverse impacts on health, well-being, education and social outcomes for adolescents. Adolescents in England are among the heaviest drinkers in Europe. Recently, the proportion of adolescents who drink alcohol has fallen, although consumption among those who do drink has actually increased. This trial seeks to investigate how effective and efficient an alcohol brief intervention is with 11-15 years olds to encourage lower alcohol consumption.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is an individually randomised two-armed trial incorporating a control arm of usual school-based practice and a leaflet on a healthy lifestyle (excl. alcohol), and an intervention arm that combines usual practice with a 30 min brief intervention delivered by school learning mentors and a leaflet on alcohol. At least 30 schools will be recruited from four regions in England (North East, North West, London, Kent and Medway) to follow-up 235 per arm. The primary outcome is total alcohol consumed in the last 28 days, using the 28 day Timeline Follow Back questionnaire measured at the 12-month follow-up. The analysis of the intervention will consider effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. A qualitative study will explore, via 1:1 in-depth interviews with (n=80) parents, young people and school staff, intervention experience, intervention fidelity and acceptability issues, using thematic narrative synthesis to report qualitative data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was granted by Teesside University. Dissemination plans include academic publications, conference presentations, disseminating to local and national education departments and the wider public health community, including via Fuse, and engaging with school staff and young people to comment on whether and how the project can be improved.

TRIAL REGISTRATION TRIAL

ISRCTN45691494; Pre-results.

Psychometric assessment of the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit questionnaire in the United Kingdom

PURPOSE

To establish the psychometric properties of the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit 24-item (FS-ICU-24) questionnaire in the United Kingdom.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Family-Reported Experiences Evaluation study recruited family members of patients staying at least 24 hours in 20 participating intensive care units. Questionnaires were evaluated for nonresponse, floor/ceiling effects, redundancy, and construct validity. Internal consistency was evaluated with item-to-own scale correlations and Cronbach α. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were used to explore the underlying structure.

RESULTS

Twelve thousand three hundred forty-six family members of 6380 patients were recruited and 7173 (58%) family members of 4615 patients returned a completed questionnaire. One family member per patient was included in the psychometric assessment. Six items had greater than 10% nonresponse; 1 item had a ceiling effect; and 11 items had potential redundancy. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach α, overall .96; satisfaction with care, .94; satisfaction with decision making, .93). The 2-factor solution was not a good fit. Exploratory factor analysis indicated that satisfaction with decision making encompassed 2 constructs-satisfaction with information and satisfaction with the decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

The Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit 24-item questionnaire demonstrated good psychometric properties in the United Kingdom setting. Construct validity could be improved by use of 3 domains and some scope for further improvement was identified.

Understanding variations in patient screening and recruitment in a multicentre pilot randomised controlled trial: a vignette-based study

BACKGROUND

The INVESTIGATE-I study was designed to inform a future definitive randomised trial of invasive urodynamic testing, compared to basic clinical assessment with noninvasive tests prior to surgical treatment, in women with stress urinary incontinence or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence. In a pilot randomised controlled trial, women from seven participating sites were screened, consented and randomised. Overall, 771 patients were identified from clinic notes and correspondence as being potential recruits and were sent the Patient Information Leaflet. Of those screened, 284 were deemed eligible, giving an overall 'screen positive' rate of 37 %. The numbers screened at individual centres varied between 14 and 399; the 'screen positive' rate varied between 22 and 79 % and the percentage of eligible women recruited varied between 55 and 100 %. The aim of this additional substudy was to explore why 'screen positive' rates may have varied so widely between apparently similar sites.

RESULTS

All 11 trial staff involved in screening in the seven recruiting sites were asked to evaluate a series of 20 identical vignettes, mainly based on actual general practitioner referral letters. Of the vignettes, 16 mentioned one or more definite inclusion criteria; the remainder had possible inclusions. Four had definite exclusions; 12 had possible exclusions. Free-text comments were sought to clarify the screeners' decisions. For six vignettes everyone agreed that the patient was eligible; for one all agreed she was not eligible; the breakdown for the remainder was mixed. Free-text comments illuminated uncertainties that may have led to variability in judging potential eligibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Variability in judgements about potential trial eligibility highlights the importance of explicit and objective inclusion and exclusion criteria, and of agreed strategies for making judgements when information is missing. During the development and planning of trials, vignettes might be a valuable tool for training those involved in screening and recruiting patients, for identifying potential problems and ensuring greater consistency in the application of eligibility criteria.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISTCTN registry: ISRCTN71327395 , registered on 7 June 2010.

Dexamethasone and supportive care with or without whole brain radiotherapy in treating patients with non-small cell lung cancer with brain metastases unsuitable for resection or stereotactic radiotherapy (QUARTZ): results from a phase 3, non-inferiority, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and dexamethasone are widely used to treat brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although there have been no randomised clinical trials showing that WBRT improves either quality of life or overall survival. Even after treatment with WBRT, the prognosis of this patient group is poor. We aimed to establish whether WBRT could be omitted without a significant effect on survival or quality of life.

METHODS

The Quality of Life after Treatment for Brain Metastases (QUARTZ) study is a non-inferiority, phase 3 randomised trial done at 69 UK and three Australian centres. NSCLC patients with brain metastases unsuitable for surgical resection or stereotactic radiotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to optimal supportive care (OSC) including dexamethasone plus WBRT (20 Gy in five daily fractions) or OSC alone (including dexamethasone). The dose of dexamethasone was determined by the patients' symptoms and titrated downwards if symptoms improved. Allocation to treatment group was done by a phone call from the hospital to the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London using a minimisation programme with a random element and stratification by centre, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), gender, status of brain metastases, and the status of primary lung cancer. The primary outcome measure was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). QALYs were generated from overall survival and patients' weekly completion of the EQ-5D questionnaire. Treatment with OSC alone was considered non-inferior if it was no more than 7 QALY days worse than treatment with WBRT plus OSC, which required 534 patients (80% power, 5% [one-sided] significance level). Analysis was done by intention to treat for all randomly assigned patients. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN3826061.

FINDINGS

Between March 2, 2007, and Aug 29, 2014, 538 patients were recruited from 69 UK and three Australian centres, and were randomly assigned to receive either OSC plus WBRT (269) or OSC alone (269). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups, and the median age of participants was 66 years (range 38-85). Significantly more episodes of drowsiness, hair loss, nausea, and dry or itchy scalp were reported while patients were receiving WBRT, although there was no evidence of a difference in the rate of serious adverse events between the two groups. There was no evidence of a difference in overall survival (hazard ratio 1·06, 95% CI 0·90-1·26), overall quality of life, or dexamethasone use between the two groups. The difference between the mean QALYs was 4·7 days (46·4 QALY days for the OSC plus WBRT group vs 41·7 QALY days for the OSC group), with two-sided 90% CI of -12·7 to 3·3.

INTERPRETATION

Although the primary outcome measure result includes the prespecified non-inferiority margin, the combination of the small difference in QALYs and the absence of a difference in survival and quality of life between the two groups suggests that WBRT provides little additional clinically significant benefit for this patient group.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, and the National Health and Medical Research Council in Australia.

Acceptability of financial incentives for health behaviour change to public health policymakers: a qualitative study

Background

Providing financial incentives contingent on healthy behaviours is one way to encourage healthy behaviours. However, there remains substantial concerns with the acceptability of health promoting financial incentives (HPFI). Previous research has studied acceptability of HPFI to the public, recipients and practitioners. We are not aware of any previous work that has focused particularly on the views of public health policymakers.

Our aim was to explore the views of public health policymakers on whether or not HPFI are acceptable; and what, if anything, could be done to maximise acceptability of HPFI.

Methods

We recruited 21 local, regional and national policymakers working in England via gatekeepers and snowballing. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with participants exploring experiences of, and attitudes towards, HPFI. We analysed data using the Framework approach.

Results

Public health policymakers working in England acknowledged that HPFI could be a useful behaviour change tool, but were not overwhelmingly supportive of them. In particular, they raised concerns about effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, potential ‘gaming’, and whether or not HPFI address the underlying causes of unhealthy behaviours. Shopping voucher rewards, of smaller value, targeted at deprived groups were particularly acceptable to policymakers. Participants were particularly concerned about the response of other stakeholders to HPFI – including the public, potential recipients, politicians and the media.

Overall, the interviews reflected three tensions. Firstly, a tension between wanting to trust individuals and promote responsibility; and distrust around the potential for ‘gaming the system’. Secondly, a tension between participants’ own views about HPFI; and their concerns about the possible views of other stakeholders. Thirdly, a tension between participants’ personal distaste of HPFI; and their professional view that they could be a valuable behaviour change tool.

Conclusions

There are aspects of design that influence acceptability of financial incentive interventions to public health policymakers. However, it is not clear that even interventions designed to maximise acceptability would be acceptable enough to be recommended for implementation. Further work may be required to help policymakers understand the potential responses of other stakeholder groups to financial incentive interventions.

Surgical Trial In Traumatic intraCerebral Haemorrhage (STITCH): a randomised controlled trial of Early Surgery compared with Initial Conservative Treatment

BACKGROUND

While it is accepted practice to remove extradural (EDH) and subdural haematomas (SDH) following traumatic brain injury, the role of surgery in parenchymal traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage (TICH) is controversial. There is no evidence to support Early Surgery in this condition.

OBJECTIVES

There have been a number of trials investigating surgery for spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage but none for TICH. This study aimed to establish whether or not a policy of Early Surgery for TICH improves outcome compared with a policy of Initial Conservative Treatment.

DESIGN

This was an international multicentre pragmatic parallel group trial. Patients were randomised via an independent telephone/web-based randomisation service.

SETTING

Neurosurgical units in 59 hospitals in 20 countries registered to take part in the study.

PARTICIPANTS

The study planned to recruit 840 adult patients. Patients had to be within 48 hours of head injury with no more than two intracerebral haematomas greater than 10 ml. They did not have a SDH or EDH that required evacuation or any severe comorbidity that would mean they could not achieve a favourable outcome if they made a complete recovery from their head injury.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomised to Early Surgery within 12 hours or to Initial Conservative Treatment with delayed evacuation if it became clinically appropriate.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) was measured at 6 months via a postal questionnaire. The primary outcome was the traditional dichotomised split into favourable outcome (good recovery or moderate disability) and unfavourable outcome (severe disability, vegetative, dead). Secondary outcomes included mortality and an ordinal assessment of Glasgow Outcome Scale and Rankin Scale.

RESULTS

Patient recruitment began in December 2009 but was halted by the funding body because of low UK recruitment in September 2012. In total, 170 patients were randomised from 31 centres in 13 countries: 83 to Early Surgery and 87 to Initial Conservative Treatment. Six-month outcomes were obtained for 99% of 168 eligible patients (82 Early Surgery and 85 Initial Conservative Treatment patients). Patients in the Early Surgery group were 10.5% more likely to have a favourable outcome (absolute benefit), but this difference did not quite reach statistical significance because of the reduced sample size. Fifty-two (63%) had a favourable outcome with Early Surgery, compared with 45 (53%) with Initial Conservative Treatment [odds ratio 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35 to 1.21; p = 0.17]. Mortality was significantly higher in the Initial Conservative Treatment group (33% vs. 15%; absolute difference 18.3%; 95% CI 5.7% to 30.9%; p = 0.006). The Rankin Scale and GOSE were significantly improved with Early Surgery using a trend analysis (p = 0.047 and p = 0.043 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first ever trial of surgery for TICH and indicates that Early Surgery may be a valuable tool in the treatment of TICH, especially if the Glasgow Coma Score is between 9 and 12, as was also found in Surgical Trial In spontaneous intraCerebral Haemorrhage (STICH) and Surgical Trial In spontaneous lobar intraCerebral Haemorrhage (STICH II). Further research is clearly warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 19321911.

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. 19, No. 70. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of internet-delivered interventions providing personalized feedback for weight loss in overweight and obese adults

BACKGROUND

Obesity levels continue to rise annually. Face-to-face weight loss consultations have previously identified mixed effectiveness and face high demand with limited resources. Therefore, alternative interventions, such as internet-delivered interventions, warrant further investigation. The aim was to assess whether internet-delivered weight loss interventions providing personalized feedback were more effective for weight loss in overweight and obese adults in comparison with control groups receiving no personalized feedback.

METHOD

Nine databases were searched, and 12 studies were identified that met all inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis, identified participants receiving personalized feedback via internet-delivered interventions, had 2.13 kg mean difference (SMD) greater weight loss (and BMI change, waist circumference change and 5% weight loss) in comparison with control groups providing no personalized feedback. This was also true for results at 3 and 6-month time points but not for studies where interventions lasted ≥12 months.

CONCLUSION

This suggests that personalized feedback may be an important behaviour change technique (BCT) to incorporate within internet-delivered weight loss interventions. However, meta-analysis results revealed no differences between internet-delivered weight loss interventions with personalized feedback and control interventions ≥12 months. Further investigation into longer term internet-delivered interventions is required to examine how weight loss could be maintained. Future research examining which BCTs are most effective for internet-delivered weight loss interventions is suggested.

Autologous tolerogenic dendritic cells for rheumatoid and inflammatory arthritis

Objectives

To assess the safety of intra-articular (IA) autologous tolerogenic dendritic cells (tolDC) in patients with inflammatory arthritis and an inflamed knee; to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the approach and to assess potential effects on local and systemic disease activities.

Methods

An unblinded, randomised, controlled, dose escalation Phase I trial. TolDC were differentiated from CD14+ monocytes and loaded with autologous synovial fluid as a source of autoantigens. Cohorts of three participants received 1×10⁶, 3×10⁶ or 10×10⁶ tolDC arthroscopically following saline irrigation of an inflamed (target) knee. Control participants received saline irrigation only. Primary outcome was flare of disease in the target knee within 5 days of treatment. Feasibility was assessed by successful tolDC manufacture and acceptability via patient questionnaire. Potential effects on disease activity were assessed by arthroscopic synovitis score, disease activity score (DAS)28 and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Immunomodulatory effects were sought in peripheral blood.

Results

There were no target knee flares within 5 days of treatment. At day 14, arthroscopic synovitis was present in all participants except for one who received 10×10⁶ tolDC; a further participant in this cohort declined day 14 arthroscopy because symptoms had remitted; both remained stable throughout 91 days of observation. There were no trends in DAS28 or HAQ score or consistent immunomodulatory effects in peripheral blood. 9 of 10 manufactured products met quality control release criteria; acceptability of the protocol by participants was high.

Conclusion

IA tolDC therapy appears safe, feasible and acceptable. Knee symptoms stabilised in two patients who received 10×10⁶ tolDC but no systemic clinical or immunomodulatory effects were detectable.

Trial registration number

NCT01352858.

An external pilot study to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial comparing eye muscle surgery against active monitoring for childhood intermittent exotropia [X(T)]

INTRODUCTION

The evidence base for the treatment of strabismus (squint) is poor. Our main aim is to improve this evidence base for the treatment of a common type of childhood squint {intermittent exotropia, [X(T)]}. We conducted an external pilot study in order to inform the design and conduct of a future full randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

Children of between 6 months and 16 years with a recent diagnosis of X(T) were eligible for recruitment. Participants were recruited from secondary care at the ophthalmology departments at four UK NHS foundation trusts. Participants were randomised to either active monitoring or surgery. This report describes the findings of the Pilot Rehearsal Trial and Qualitative Study, and assesses the success against the objectives proposed.

RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION

The experience gained during the Pilot Rehearsal Trial demonstrates the ability to recruit and retain sites that are willing to randomise children to both trial arms, and for parents to agree to randomisation of their children to such a study. One child declined the group allocation. A total of 231 children were screened (expected 240), of whom 138 (60%) were eligible (expected 228: 95%) and 49 (35% of eligible) children were recruited (expected 144: 63% of eligible). Strategies that improved recruitment over the course of the trial are discussed, together with the reasons why fewer children were eligible for recruitment than initially anticipated. Attrition was low. Outcome data were obtained for 47 of 49 randomised children.

TRIAL PROCESSES AND DATA COLLECTION

The Trial Management processes proved effective. There were high levels of completion on all of the data collection forms. However, the feedback from the treatment orthoptists revealed that some modifications should be made to the length and frequency of the health service assessment and travel assessment questionnaires, thus reducing the burden on participants in the main trial. Modifications to the wording of the questions also need to be made.

MONITORING OF BIAS

Children who recruited to the trial were older and had more severe strabismus than those children eligible but declining participation. Strategies to account for this in a full trial are proposed.

REASONS FOR PARTICIPATION OR DECLINING STUDY

These were identified using qualitative interviews. The principal reasons for declining entry into the study were strong preferences for and against surgical treatment.

HARMS

There were no serious unexpected adverse events. Two children had overcorrection of their X(T) with reduction in binocular vision following surgery, which is in line with previous studies. No children in the active monitoring arm developed a constant strabismus although two showed some reduction in control.

CONCLUSIONS

The SamExo study has demonstrated that it is possible to recruit and retain participants to a randomised trial of surgery compared with active monitoring for X(T). For longer-term full RCTs, in order to maximise the generalisability of future studies, consideration needs to be given to planning more time and clinic appointments to assess eligibility and to allow consideration of participation; the greater use of research nurses for recruitment; and accommodating the strong preferences of some parents both for and against surgical intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN44114892.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Antidepressant augmentation with metyrapone for treatment-resistant depression (the ADD study): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Many patients with major depressive disorder have treatment-resistant depression, defined as no adequate response to two consecutive courses of antidepressants. Some evidence suggests that antiglucocorticoid augmentation of antidepressants might be efficacious in patients with major depressive disorder. We aimed to test the proof of concept of metyrapone for the augmentation of serotonergic antidepressants in the clinically relevant population of patients with treatment-resistant depression.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial recruited patients from seven UK National Health Service (NHS) Mental Health Trusts from three areas (northeast England, northwest England, and the Leeds and Bradford area). Eligible patients were aged 18-65 years with treatment-resistant depression (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17-item score of ≥18 and a Massachusetts General Hospital Treatment-Resistant Depression staging score of 2-10) and taking a single-agent or combination antidepressant treatment that included a serotonergic drug. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) through a centralised web-based system to metyrapone (500 mg twice daily) or placebo, in addition to their existing antidepressant regimen, for 21 days. Permuted block randomisation was done with a block size of two or four, stratified by centre and primary or secondary care setting. The primary outcome was improvement in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score 5 weeks after randomisation, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population of all randomly assigned patients that completed the MADRS assessment at week 5. The study has an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN45338259) and is registered with the EU Clinical Trial register, number 2009-015165-31.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 8, 2011, and Dec 10, 2012, 165 patients were recruited and randomly assigned (83 to metyrapone and 82 to placebo), with 143 (87%) completing the primary outcome assessment (69 [83%] in the metyrapone and 74 [90%] in the placebo group). At 5 weeks, MADRS score did not significantly differ between groups (21·7 points [95% CI 19·2-24·4] in the metyrapone group vs 22·6 points [20·1-24·8] in the placebo group; adjusted mean difference of -0·51 points [95% CI -3·48 to 2·46]; p=0·74). 12 serious adverse events were reported in four (5%) of 83 patients in the metyrapone group and six (7%) of 82 patients in the placebo group, none of which were related to study treatment. 134 adverse events occurred in 58 (70%) patients in the metyrapone group compared with 95 events in 45 (55%) patients in the placebo group, of which 11 (8%) events in the metyrapone group and four (4%) in the placebo group were judged by principle investigators at the time of occurrence to be probably related to the study drug.

INTERPRETATION

Metyrapone augmentation of antidepressants is not efficacious in a broadly representative population of patients with treatment-resistant depression within the NHS and therefore is not an option for patients with treatment-resistant depression in routine clinical practice at this time. Further research is needed to clarify if such augmentation might benefit subpopulations with demonstrable hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis abnormalities.

FUNDING

Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a UK Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research partnership.

Trial participation as avoidance strategy: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Trial participation decisions are often influenced by expectations of potential benefit. Attention has focused on trial participation as a means of securing something seen as desirable, such as experimental treatment. In contrast, we consider a case in which one trial arm involved receiving less than usual care. We explore how this influenced participants' decisions to participate.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with 29 women participating in a pilot trial comparing invasive urodynamic testing (typically normal care) to basic clinical assessment with non-invasive tests, prior to surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence. Analysis was based on the constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Invasive tests were something many were aware of and worried about. Participants understood that trial participation meant they might avoid having these tests, and for about one-third, this was the primary factor motivating participation. A further third mentioned they were not looking forward to tests (if allocated to them) or were lucky to have missed them (if allocated to basic clinical assessment). None of the women appeared to have discussed their desire to avoid having invasive tests with their clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to cases in which trial participation is motivated by the wish to secure an intervention not otherwise available, this study reports the opposite - trial participation as an opportunity to avoid having something regarded as undesirable. The option to decline a particular intervention should always be available, and care must be taken to ensure that potential participants are aware that trial participation is not the only possible means of avoidance.

Open urethroplasty versus endoscopic urethrotomy--clarifying the management of men with recurrent urethral stricture (the OPEN trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Urethral stricture is a common cause of difficulty passing urine in men with prevalence of 0.5 %; about 62,000 men in the UK. The stricture is usually sited in the bulbar part of the urethra causing symptoms such as reduced urine flow. Initial treatment is typically by endoscopic urethrotomy but recurrence occurs in about 60 % of men within 2 years. The best treatment for men with recurrent bulbar stricture is uncertain. Repeat endoscopic urethrotomy opens the narrowing but it usually scars up again within 2 years requiring repeated procedures. The alternative of open urethroplasty involves surgically reconstructing the urethra, which may need an oral mucosal graft. It is a specialist procedure with a longer recovery period but may give lower risk of recurrence. In the absence of firm evidence as to which is best, individual men have to trade off the invasiveness and possible benefit of each option. Their preference will be influenced by individual social circumstances, availability of local expertise and clinician guidance. The open urethroplasty versus endoscopic urethrotomy (OPEN) trial aims to better guide the choice of treatment for men with recurrent urethral strictures by comparing benefit over 2 years in terms of symptom control and need for further treatment.

Methods/Design

OPEN is a pragmatic, UK multicentre, randomised trial. Men with recurrent bulbar urethral strictures (at least one previous treatment) will be randomised to undergo endoscopic urethrotomy or open urethroplasty. Participants will be followed for 24 months after randomisation, measuring symptoms, flow rate, the need for re-intervention, health-related quality of life, and costs. The primary clinical outcome is the difference in symptom control over 24 months measured by the area under the curve (AUC) of a validated score. The trial has been powered at 90 % with a type I error rate of 5 % to detect a 0.1 difference in AUC measured on a 0–1 scale. The analysis will be based on all participants as randomised (intention-to-treat). The primary economic outcome is the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year. A qualitative study will assess willingness to be randomised and hence ability to recruit to the trial.

Discussion

The OPEN Trial seeks to clarify relative benefit of the current options for surgical treatment of recurrent bulbar urethral stricture which differ in their invasiveness and resources required. Our feasibility study identified that participation would be limited by patient preference and differing recruitment styles of general and specialist urologists. We formulated and implemented effective strategies to address these issues in particular by inviting participation as close as possible to diagnosis. In addition re-calculation of sample size as recruitment progressed allowed more efficient design given the limited target population and funding constraints. Recruitment is now to target.

Trial registration

ISRCTN98009168 Date of registration: 29 November 2012.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-1120-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Family-Reported Experiences Evaluation (FREE) study: a mixed-methods study to evaluate families’ satisfaction with adult critical care services in the NHS

Background

To improve care it is necessary to feed back experiences of those receiving care. Of patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs), approximately one-quarter die, and few survivors recollect their experiences, so family members have a vital role. The most widely validated tool to seek their views is the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit questionnaire (FS-ICU).

Objectives

To test face and content validity and comprehensibility of the FS-ICU (phase 1). To establish internal consistency, construct validity and reliability of the FS-ICU; to describe family satisfaction and explore how it varies by family member, patient, unit/hospital and other contextual factors and by country; and to model approaches to sampling for future use in quality improvement (phase 2).

Design

Mixed methods: qualitative study (phase 1) and cohort study (phase 2).

Setting

NHS ICUs (n = 2, phase 1;n = 20, phase 2).

Participants

Health-care professionals, ex-patients, family members of ICU patients (n = 41, phase 1). Family members of ICU patients (n = 12,303, phase 2).

Interventions

None.

Main outcome measures

Key themes regarding each item of the 24-item FS-ICU (FS-ICU-24) (phase 1). Overall family satisfaction and domain scores of the FS-ICU-24 (phase 2).

Results

In phase 1, face validity, content validity and comprehensibility were good. Adaptation to the UK required only minor edits. In phase 2, one to four family members were recruited for 60.6% of 10,530 patients (staying in ICU for 24 hours or more). Of 12,303 family members, 7173 (58.3%) completed the questionnaire. Psychometric assessment of the questionnaire established high internal consistency and criterion validity. Exploratory factor analysis indicated new domains:satisfaction with care,satisfaction with informationandsatisfaction with the decision-making process. All scores were high with skewed distributions towards more positive scores. For family members of ICU survivors, factors associated with increased/decreased satisfaction were age, ethnicity, relationship to patient, and visit frequency, and patient factors were acute severity of illness and invasive ventilation. For family members of ICU non-survivors, average satisfaction was higher but no family member factors were associated with increased/decreased satisfaction; patient factors were age, acute severity of illness and duration of stay. Neither ICU/hospital factors nor seasonality were associated. Funnel plots confirmed significant variation in family satisfaction across ICUs. Adjusting for family member and patient characteristics reduced variation, resulting in fewer ICUs identified as potential outliers. Simulations suggested that family satisfaction surveys using short recruitment windows can produce relatively unbiased estimates of average family satisfaction.

Conclusions

The Family-Reported Experiences Evaluation study has provided a UK-adapted, psychometrically valid questionnaire for overall family satisfaction and three domains. The large sample size allowed for robust multilevel multivariable modelling of factors associated with family satisfaction to inform important adjustment of any future evaluation.

Limitations

Responses to three free-text questions indicate the questionnaire may not be sensitive to all aspects of family satisfaction.

Future work

Reservations remain about the current questionnaire. While formal analysis of the free-text questions did not form part of this proposal, brief analysis suggested considerable scope for improvement of the FS-ICU-24.

Study registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN47363549.

Funding details

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

INVESTIGATE-I (INVasive Evaluation before Surgical Treatment of Incontinence Gives Added Therapeutic Effect?): a mixed-methods study to assess the feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial of invasive urodynamic testing prior to surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

The position of invasive urodynamic testing in the diagnostic pathway for urinary incontinence (UI) is unclear. Systematic reviews have called for further trials evaluating clinical utility, although a preliminary feasibility study was considered appropriate.

OBJECTIVES

To inform the decision whether or not to proceed to a definitive randomised trial of invasive urodynamic testing compared with clinical assessment with non-invasive tests, prior to surgery in women with stress UI (SUI) or stress predominant mixed UI (MUI).

DESIGN

A mixed-methods study comprising a pragmatic multicentre randomised pilot trial; economic evaluation; survey of clinicians' views about invasive urodynamic testing; qualitative interviews with clinicians and trial participants.

SETTING

Urogynaecology, female urology and general gynaecology units in Newcastle, Leicester, Swansea, Sheffield, Northumberland, Gateshead and South Tees.

PARTICIPANTS

Trial recruits were women with SUI or stress predominant MUI who were considering surgery after unsuccessful conservative treatment. Relevant clinicians completed two online surveys. Subsets of survey respondents and trial participants took part in separate qualitative interview studies.

INTERVENTIONS

Pilot trial participants were randomised to undergo clinical assessment with non-invasive tests (control arm); or assessment as controls, plus invasive urodynamic testing (intervention arm).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Confirmation that units can identify and recruit eligible women; acceptability of investigation strategies and data collection tools; acquisition of outcome data to determine the sample size for a definitive trial. The proposed primary outcome for the definitive trial was International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire (ICIQ) Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (ICIQ-FLUTS) (total score) 6 months after surgery or the start of non-surgical treatment; secondary outcomes included: ICIQ-FLUTS (subscales); ICIQ Urinary Incontinence Short Form; ICIQ Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Quality of Life; Urogenital Distress Inventory; EuroQol-5D; costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost per QALY, Short Form 12; 3-day bladder diary.

RESULTS

Of 284 eligible women, 222 (78%) were recruited; 165/219 (75%) returned questionnaires at baseline and 125/200 (63%) who were sent questionnaires at follow-up. There were few missing data items in returned questionnaires, with individual outcome scales calculable for 81%-94%. Most women underwent surgery; management plans were changed in 19 (19%) participants following invasive urodynamic testing. Participant Costs Questionnaires were returned by 53% 6 months after treatment; complete data to undertake cost-utility analysis were available in 27% (intervention) and 47% (control). While insufficient to recommend changes in practice, the results suggest further research would be valuable. All clinicians responding to the survey had access to invasive urodynamic testing, and most saw it as essential prior to surgery in women with SUI with or without other symptoms; nevertheless, 70% considered the research question underlying INVESTIGATE important and most were willing to randomise patients in a definitive trial. Participants interviewed were positive about the trial and associated documentation; the desire of some women to avoid invasive urodynamic testing contrasted with opinions expressed by clinicians through both survey and interview responses.

CONCLUSIONS

All elements of a definitive trial and economic evaluation were rehearsed; several areas for protocol modification were identified. Such a trial would require to 400-900 participants, depending on the difference in primary outcome sought.

FUTURE WORK

A definitive trial of invasive urodynamic testing versus clinical assessment prior to surgery for SUI or stress predominant MUI should be undertaken.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71327395.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Swallowing outcome measures in head and neck cancer--How do they compare?

OBJECTIVES

Dysphagia is a common and debilitating side effect of chemoradiotherapy. Assessment is difficult; swallowing is multifactorial and studies choose from a range of dysphagia assessments. This study intended to investigate the relationship between swallowing assessments of dysphagia in a cohort of patients and to evaluate whether clinical swallowing measures can predict patient reported swallowing outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and seventy-three head and neck cancer patients from two teaching hospitals were recruited prospectively over 25 months. At three months follow-up patients were assessed using Rosenbeck's Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS), The 100 ml Water Swallow Test (WST), The Performance Status Scale: Normalcy of Diet and the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI).

RESULTS

The highest correlation was observed between the MDADI and Normalcy of Diet (rho 0.68) and the lowest between the MDADI and the PAS (rho 0.34). Using multiple regression the PAS and WST accounted for 44% of the variance in the MDADI scores (R2 = 0.44, F = 37.8, p < 0.001). On stepwise regression, the model only retained the Normalcy of Diet scores (R2 = 0.42, F=107.9, p < 0.001). Separating the PAS into subgroups, those with no penetration or aspiration on the PAS scored significantly higher on the MDADI (p = <0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patient reported swallowing outcomes were strongly aligned with diet restrictions but poorly aligned with clinical assessment. The WST, however, was more correlated than the PAS score, representing a more functional assessment. Clinical dysphagia, associated with significant morbidity, and patient reported dysphagia related to quality of life are not interchangeable and must be measured separately.

The NULevel trial of a scalable, technology-assisted weight loss maintenance intervention for obese adults after clinically significant weight loss: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Effective weight loss interventions are widely available but, after weight loss, most individuals regain weight. This article describes the protocol for the NULevel trial evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a systematically developed, inexpensive, scalable, technology-assisted, behavioural intervention for weight loss maintenance (WLM) in obese adults after initial weight loss.

METHODS/DESIGN

A 12-month single-centre, two-armed parallel group, participant randomised controlled superiority trial is underway, recruiting a total of 288 previously obese adults after weight loss of ≥5 % within the previous 12 months. Participants are randomly assigned to intervention or control arms, with a 1:1 allocation, stratified by sex and percentage of body weight lost (<10 % vs ≥10 %). Change in weight (kg) from baseline to 12 months is the primary outcome. Weight, other anthropometric variables and 7-day physical activity (assessed via accelerometer) measures are taken at 0 and 12 months. Questionnaires at 0, 6 and 12 months assess psychological process variables, health service use and participant costs. Participants in the intervention arm initially attend an individual face-to-face WLM consultation with an intervention facilitator and then use a mobile internet platform to self-monitor and report their diet, daily activity (via pedometer) and weight through daily weighing on wirelessly connected scales. Automated feedback via mobile phone, tailored to participants' weight regain and goal progress is provided. Participants in the control arm receive quarterly newsletters (via links embedded in text messages) and wirelessly connected scales. Qualitative process evaluation interviews are conducted with a subsample of up to 40 randomly chosen participants. Acceptability and feasibility of procedures, cost-effectiveness, and relationships among socioeconomic variables and WLM will also be assessed.

DISCUSSION

It is hypothesised that participants allocated to the intervention arm will show significantly lower levels of weight regain from baseline than those in the control arm. To date, this is the first WLM trial using remote real-time weight monitoring and mobile internet platforms to deliver a flexible, efficient and scalable intervention, tailored to the individual. This trial addresses a key research need and has the potential to make a vital contribution to the evidence base to inform future WLM policy and provision.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14657176 (registration date 20 March 2014).

A mixed methods study to assess the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of invasive urodynamic testing versus clinical assessment and non-invasive tests prior to surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women: the INVESTIGATE-I study

BACKGROUND

The position of invasive urodynamic testing (IUT) in diagnostic pathways for urinary incontinence is unclear, and systematic reviews have called for further trials evaluating clinical utility. The objective of this study was to inform the decision whether to proceed to a definitive randomised trial of IUT compared to clinical assessment with non-invasive tests, prior to surgery in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence (MUI).

METHODS

A mixed methods study comprising a pragmatic multicentre randomised pilot trial, a qualitative face-to face interview study with patients eligible for the trial, an exploratory economic evaluation including value of information study, a survey of clinicians' views about IUT, and qualitative telephone interviews with purposively sampled survey respondents. Only the first and second of these elements are reported here. Trial participants were randomised to either clinical assessment with non-invasive tests (control arm) or clinical assessment with non-invasive tests plus IUT (intervention arm). The main outcome measures of these feasibility studies were confirmation that units can identify and recruit eligible women, acceptability of investigation strategies and data collection tools, and acquisition of outcome data to determine the sample size for a definitive trial. The primary outcome proposed for a definitive trial was ICIQ-FLUTS (total score) 6 months after surgery or the start of nonsurgical treatment.

RESULTS

Of 284 eligible women, 222 (78%) were recruited, 165/219 (75%) returned questionnaires at baseline, and 125/200 returned them (63%) at follow-up. Most women underwent surgery; management plans were changed in 19 (19%) participants following IUT. Participants interviewed were positive about the trial and the associated documentation.

CONCLUSIONS

All elements of a definitive trial were rehearsed. Such a trial would require between 232 and 922 participants, depending on the target difference in the primary outcome. We identified possible modifications to our protocol for application in a definitive trial including clarity over inclusion/exclusions, screening processes, reduction in secondary outcomes, and modification to patient questionnaire booklets and bladder diaries. A definitive trial of IUT versus clinical assessment prior to surgery for SUI or stress predominant MUI is feasible and remains relevant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN 71327395, registered 7 June 2010.