Evaluation of venous thromboembolism risk assessment models for hospital inpatients: the VTEAM evidence synthesis

Background

Pharmacological prophylaxis during hospital admission can reduce the risk of acquired blood clots (venous thromboembolism) but may cause complications, such as bleeding. Using a risk assessment model to predict the risk of blood clots could facilitate selection of patients for prophylaxis and optimise the balance of benefits, risks and costs.

Objectives

We aimed to identify validated risk assessment models and estimate their prognostic accuracy, evaluate the cost-effectiveness of different strategies for selecting hospitalised patients for prophylaxis, assess the feasibility of using efficient research methods and estimate key parameters for future research.

Design

We undertook a systematic review, decision-analytic modelling and observational cohort study conducted in accordance with Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines.

Setting

NHS hospitals, with primary data collection at four sites.

Participants

Medical and surgical hospital inpatients, excluding paediatric, critical care and pregnancy-related admissions.

Interventions

Prophylaxis for all patients, none and according to selected risk assessment models.

Main outcome measures

Model accuracy for predicting blood clots, lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years associated with alternative strategies, accuracy of efficient methods for identifying key outcomes and proportion of inpatients recommended prophylaxis using different models.

Results

We identified 24 validated risk assessment models, but low-quality heterogeneous data suggested weak accuracy for prediction of blood clots and generally high risk of bias in all studies. Decision-analytic modelling showed that pharmacological prophylaxis for all eligible is generally more cost-effective than model-based strategies for both medical and surgical inpatients, when valuing a quality-adjusted life-year at £20,000. The findings were more sensitive to uncertainties in the surgical population; strategies using risk assessment models were more cost-effective if the model was assumed to have a very high sensitivity, or the long-term risks of post-thrombotic complications were lower. Efficient methods using routine data did not accurately identify blood clots or bleeding events and several pre-specified feasibility criteria were not met. Theoretical prophylaxis rates across an inpatient cohort based on existing risk assessment models ranged from 13% to 91%.

Limitations

Existing studies may underestimate the accuracy of risk assessment models, leading to underestimation of their cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness findings do not apply to patients with an increased risk of bleeding. Mechanical thromboprophylaxis options were excluded from the modelling. Primary data collection was predominately retrospective, risking case ascertainment bias.

Conclusions

Thromboprophylaxis for all patients appears to be generally more cost-effective than using a risk assessment model, in hospitalised patients at low risk of bleeding. To be cost-effective, any risk assessment model would need to be highly sensitive. Current evidence on risk assessment models is at high risk of bias and our findings should be interpreted in this context. We were unable to demonstrate the feasibility of using efficient methods to accurately detect relevant outcomes for future research.

Future work

Further research should evaluate routine prophylaxis strategies for all eligible hospitalised patients. Models that could accurately identify individuals at very low risk of blood clots (who could discontinue prophylaxis) warrant further evaluation.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165778 and Researchregistry5216.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127454) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 20. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Implementing early rehabilitation and mobilisation for children in UK paediatric intensive care units: the PERMIT feasibility study

Background

Early rehabilitation and mobilisation encompass patient-tailored interventions, delivered within intensive care, but there are few studies in children and young people within paediatric intensive care units.

Objectives

To explore how healthcare professionals currently practise early rehabilitation and mobilisation using qualitative and quantitative approaches; co-design the Paediatric Early Rehabilitation and Mobilisation during InTensive care manual of early rehabilitation and mobilisation interventions, with primary and secondary patient-centred outcomes; explore feasibility and acceptability of implementing the Paediatric Early Rehabilitation and Mobilisation during InTensive care manual within three paediatric intensive care units.

Design

Mixed-methods feasibility with five interlinked studies (scoping review, survey, observational study, codesign workshops, feasibility study) in three phases.

Setting

United Kingdom paediatric intensive care units.

Participants

Children and young people aged 0-16 years remaining within paediatric intensive care on day 3, their parents/guardians and healthcare professionals.

Interventions

In Phase 3, unit-wide implementation of manualised early rehabilitation and mobilisation.

Main outcome measures

Phase 1 observational study: prevalence of any early rehabilitation and mobilisation on day 3. Phase 3 feasibility study: acceptability of early rehabilitation and mobilisation intervention; adverse events; acceptability of study design; acceptability of outcome measures.

Data sources

Searched Excerpta Medica Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, MEDLINE, PEDro, Open grey and Cochrane CENTRAL databases.

Review methods

Narrative synthesis.

Results

In the scoping review we identified 36 full-text reports evaluating rehabilitation initiated within 7 days of paediatric intensive care unit admission, outlining non-mobility and mobility early rehabilitation and mobilisation interventions from 24 to 72 hours and delivered twice daily. With the survey, 124/191 (65%) responded from 26/29 (90%) United Kingdom paediatric intensive care units; the majority considered early rehabilitation and mobilisation a priority. The observational study followed 169 patients from 15 units; prevalence of any early rehabilitation and mobilisation on day 3 was 95.3%. We then developed a manualised early rehabilitation and mobilisation intervention informed by current evidence, experience and theory. All three sites implemented the Paediatric Early Rehabilitation and Mobilisation during InTensive care manual successfully, recruited to target (30 patients recruited) and followed up the patients until day 30 or discharge; 21/30 parents consented to complete additional outcome measures.

Limitations

The findings represent the views of National Health Service staff but may not be generalisable. We were unable to conduct workshops and interviews with children, young people and parents to support the Paediatric Early Rehabilitation and Mobilisation during InTensive care manual development due to pandemic restrictions.

Conclusions

A randomised controlled trial is recommended to assess the effectiveness of the manualised early rehabilitation and mobilisation intervention.

Future work

A definitive cluster randomised trial of early rehabilitation and mobilisation in paediatric intensive care requires selection of outcome measure and health economic evaluation.

Study registration

The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019151050. The Phase 1 observational study is registered Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04110938 (Phase 1) (registered 1 October 2019) and the Phase 3 feasibility study is registered NCT04909762 (Phase 3) (registered 2 June 2021).

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/21/06) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 27. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Feasibility of a RCT of techniques for managing an impacted fetal head during emergency caesarean section: the MIDAS scoping study

Background

Second-stage caesarean sections, of which there are around 34,000 per year in the UK, have greater maternal and perinatal morbidity than those in the first stage. The fetal head is often deeply impacted in the maternal pelvis, and extraction can be difficult. Numerous techniques are reported, but the superiority of one over another is contentious and there is no national guidance.

Objective

To determine the feasibility of a randomised trial of different techniques for managing an impacted fetal head during emergency caesarean.

Design

A scoping study with five work packages: (1) national surveys to determine current practice and acceptability of research in this area, and a qualitative study to determine acceptability to women who have experienced a second-stage caesarean; (2) a national prospective observational study to determine incidence and rate of complications; (3) a Delphi survey and consensus meeting on choice of techniques and outcomes for a trial; (4) the design of a trial; and (5) a national survey and qualitative study to determine acceptability of the proposed trial.

Setting

Secondary care.

Participants

Health-care professionals, pregnant women, women who have had a second-stage caesarean, and parents.

Results

Most (244/279, 87%) health-care professionals believe that a trial in this area would help guide their practice, and 90% (252/279) would be willing to participate in such a trial. Thirty-eight per cent (98/259) of parents reported that they would take part. Women varied in which technique they thought was most acceptable. Our observational study found that impacted head is common (occurring in 16% of second-stage caesareans) and leads to both maternal (41%) and neonatal (3.5%) complications. It is most often treated by an assistant pushing the head up vaginally. We designed a randomised clinical trial comparing the fetal pillow with the vaginal push technique. The vast majority of health-care professionals, 83% of midwives and 88% of obstetricians, would be willing to participate in the trial proposed, and 37% of parents reported that they would take part. Our qualitative study found that most participants thought the trial would be feasible and acceptable.

Limitations

Our survey is subject to the limitation that, although responses refer to contemporaneous real cases, they are self-reported by the surgeon and collected after the event. Willingness to participate in a hypothetical trial may not translate into recruitment to a real trial.

Conclusions

We proposed a trial to compare a new device, the fetal pillow, with a long-established procedure, the vaginal push technique. Such a trial would be widely supported by health-care professionals. We recommend that it be powered to test an effect on important short term maternal and baby outcomes which would require 754 participants per group. Despite the well-known difference between intent and action, this would be feasible within the UK.

Future work

We recommend a randomised controlled trial of two techniques for managing an impacted fetal head with an in-built internal pilot phase and alongside economic and qualitative substudies.

Study registration

This study is registered as Research Registry 4942.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A modified video-feedback intervention for carers of foster children aged 6 years and under with reactive attachment disorder: a feasibility study and pilot RCT

BACKGROUND

Looked-after children are at risk of suboptimal attachment patterns and reactive attachment disorder. However, access to interventions varies widely and there are no evidence-based interventions for this disorder.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To adapt an existing video-feedback intervention to meet the specific needs of foster children in the UK with reactive attachment symptoms, (2) to conduct a case series to road-test the treatment manual and study procedures, (3) to conduct a scoping study of the key hurdles in a pilot trial and (4) to conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial of the adapted intervention to determine the feasibility of a future full-scale trial.

DESIGN

This was a mixed-methods study. The adapted treatment manual was developed with expert input and tested on a small case series. Qualitative interviews with key stakeholders were used in the scoping study in preparation for the trial and later with foster carers who received the new intervention. The final stage was a feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trial of the new intervention, compared with usual care. Researchers assessing the outcomes were blinded to group assignment.

SETTING

The study was set in outpatient child and adolescent mental health services and partner social services departments. Sites included urban and rural/semirural areas.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were foster carers with children aged ≤ 6 years presenting with difficulties in the domain of reactive attachment disorder. Key stakeholders included children's services managers and mental health service practitioners in the scoping study. Foster carers who received the modified intervention participated in qualitative interviews.

INTERVENTION

The video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting and sensitive discipline is an extensively evaluated and effective treatment approach. This intervention was modified (based on the adapted version for foster care in the Netherlands) to suit the needs of young children with reactive attachment symptoms in foster care in the UK and was delivered to improve the sensitive responding of foster carers, foster carer-child relationships and child outcomes. The modified intervention was delivered in-home by trained mental health professionals over a period of 4-6 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The main outcome was reactive attachment symptom scores on the Disturbances of Attachment Interview.

RESULTS

A series of minor changes to the intervention programme were introduced, which focused on improving its suitability for the UK foster care context. Challenges in recruitment meant that, despite numerous modifications to the protocol and the inclusion of additional sites, only 30 families (target, n = 40) were recruited to the randomised controlled trial (15 allocated to each group). However, most other trial parameters were deemed feasible and acceptable, particularly the high levels of data and treatment completeness. All randomised families were available for baseline analyses, but two in the treatment arm were not available for post-treatment analyses. The revised intervention was positively received by practitioners and foster carers.

LIMITATIONS

Only three-quarters of the target sample size was recruited. Furthermore, the sites' own exclusion of potential participants and the low return rates of screening questionnaires raise the possibility of non-randomness of non-responses.

CONCLUSION

A larger-scale trial may be feasible, but only if recruitment barriers can be overcome. Dedicated resources to support recruitment within local authorities and wider inclusion criteria are recommended. Central resourcing of intervention capacity to supplement NHS staff is also recommended.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN18374094.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 35. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A peer-delivered intervention to reduce harm and improve the well-being of homeless people with problem substance use: the SHARPS feasibility mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

For people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, access to appropriate services can be challenging. There is evidence that development of trusting relationships with non-judgemental staff can facilitate service engagement. Peer-delivered approaches show particular promise, but the evidence base is still developing. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of a peer-delivered intervention, through 'Peer Navigators', to support people who are homeless with problem substance use to address a range of health and social issues.

OBJECTIVES

The study objectives were to design and implement a peer-delivered, relational intervention to reduce harms and improve health/well-being, quality of life and social functioning for people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use, and to conduct a concurrent process evaluation to inform a future randomised controlled trial.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods feasibility study with concurrent process evaluation was conducted, involving qualitative interviews [staff interviews (one time point), n = 12; Peer Navigator interviews (three or four time points), n = 15; intervention participant interviews: first time point, n = 24, and second time point, n = 10], observations and quantitative outcome measures.

SETTING

The intervention was delivered in three outreach services for people who are homeless in Scotland, and three Salvation Army hostels in England; there were two standard care settings: an outreach service in Scotland and a hostel in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were people experiencing homelessness and problem substance use (n = 68) (intervention).

INTERVENTION

This was a peer-delivered, relational intervention drawing on principles of psychologically informed environments, with Peer Navigators providing practical and emotional support.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes relating to participants' substance use, participants' physical and mental health needs, and the quality of Peer Navigator relationships were measured via a 'holistic health check', with six questionnaires completed at two time points: a specially created sociodemographic, health and housing status questionnaire; the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items plus the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7; the Maudsley Addiction Profile; the Substance Use Recovery Evaluator; the RAND Corporation Short Form survey-36 items; and the Consultation and Relational Empathy Measure.

RESULTS

The Supporting Harm Reduction through Peer Support (SHARPS) study was found to be acceptable to, and feasible for, intervention participants, staff and Peer Navigators. Among participants, there was reduced drug use and an increase in the number of prescriptions for opioid substitution therapy. There were reductions in risky injecting practice and risky sexual behaviour. Participants reported improvements to service engagement and felt more equipped to access services on their own. The lived experience of the Peer Navigators was highlighted as particularly helpful, enabling the development of trusting, authentic and meaningful relationships. The relationship with the Peer Navigator was measured as excellent at baseline and follow-up. Some challenges were experienced in relation to the 'fit' of the intervention within some settings and will inform future studies.

LIMITATIONS

Some participants did not complete the outcome measures, or did not complete both sets, meaning that we do not have baseline and/or follow-up data for all. The standard care data sample sizes make comparison between settings limited.

CONCLUSIONS

A randomised controlled trial is recommended to assess the effectiveness of the Peer Navigator intervention.

FUTURE WORK

A definitive cluster randomised controlled trial should particularly consider setting selection, outcomes and quantitative data collection instruments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN15900054.

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. 26, No. 14. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cue-based versus scheduled feeding for preterm infants transitioning from tube to oral feeding: the Cubs mixed-methods feasibility study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of evidence of the effect of cue-based feeding compared with scheduled feeding on important outcomes for preterm infants.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were as follows: (1) to describe the characteristics, components, theoretical basis and outcomes of approaches to feeding preterm infants transitioning from tube to oral feeding; (2) to identify operational policies, barriers and facilitators, and staff and parents' educational needs in neonatal units implementing cue-based feeding; (3) to co-produce an intervention for feeding preterm infants in response to feeding cues; (4) to appraise the willingness of parents and staff to implement and sustain the intervention; (5) to assess associated costs of implementing cue-based feeding; (6) to determine the feasibility and acceptability of a future trial; (7) to scope existing data-recording systems and potential outcome measures; and (8) to determine stakeholders' views of whether or not a randomised controlled trial of this approach is feasible.

DESIGN

This was a mixed-methods intervention development and feasibility study comprising (1) a systematic review, case studies, qualitative research and stakeholder consensus; (2) the co-production of the intervention; (3) a mixed-methods feasibility study; and (4) an assessment of stakeholder preferences for a future evaluation.

SETTING

Three neonatal units in the UK (two level 3 units and one level 2 unit).

PARTICIPANTS

Developmentally normal, clinically stable preterm infants receiving enteral feeds (n = 50), parents (n = 15 pre intervention development; n = 14 in the feasibility study) and health-care practitioners (n = 54 pre intervention development; n = 16 in the feasibility study).

INTERVENTION

An evidence-informed multicomponent intervention comprising training, a feeding protocol, feeding assessment tools, supplementary training materials [including posters, a film and a narrated PowerPoint (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) presentation] and the 'Our Feeding Journey' document.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures were recruitment and screening rates, infant weight gain, duration of the intervention, feeding outcomes, implementation outcomes (contextual facilitators and barriers, acceptability, adoption, appropriateness and fidelity) and stakeholder preferences for a future evaluation.

RESULTS

The systematic review of 25 studies concluded that evidence in favour of cue-based feeding should be treated cautiously. The case studies and qualitative research highlighted contextual barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of cue-based feeding. The telephone survey found that many neonatal units are considering implementing cue-based feeding. We recruited 37% of eligible infants, and there was good retention in the study until discharge but a high loss to follow-up at 2 weeks post discharge. The mean number of days from intervention to transition to full oral feeding was 10.8, and the mean daily change in weight gain was 25 g. The intervention was acceptable to parents and staff, although there was dissatisfaction with the study documentation. Intervention training did not reach all staff. A cluster-randomised design with a composite outcome was suggested by stakeholders for a future study.

LIMITATIONS

The intervention was available only in English. Intervention training did not reach all staff. There was low recruitment to qualitative interviews and observations. Only a small number of medical staff engaged in either the training or the interviews.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to implement a cue-based feeding intervention with improved training and documentation. Further work is needed to assess the feasibility of a future trial, noting evidence of existing lack of equipoise.

FUTURE WORK

The next steps are to digitalise the intervention and conduct a survey of all neonatal units in the UK.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018097317 and ISRCTN13414304.

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. 25, No. 74. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Acceptance and commitment therapy for older people with treatment-resistant generalised anxiety disorder: the FACTOID feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Generalised anxiety disorder, characterised by excessive anxiety and worry, is the most common anxiety disorder among older people. It is a condition that may persist for decades and is associated with numerous negative outcomes. Front-line treatments include pharmacological and psychological therapy, but many older people do not find these treatments effective. Guidance on managing treatment-resistant generalised anxiety disorder in older people is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether or not a study to examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy for older people with treatment-resistant generalised anxiety disorder is feasible, we developed an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy for this population, assessed its acceptability and feasibility in an uncontrolled feasibility study and clarified key study design parameters.

DESIGN

Phase 1 involved qualitative interviews to develop and optimise an intervention as well as a survey of service users and clinicians to clarify usual care. Phase 2 involved an uncontrolled feasibility study and qualitative interviews to refine the intervention.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from general practices, Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services, Community Mental Health Teams and the community.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were people aged ≥ 65 years with treatment-resistant generalised anxiety disorder.

INTERVENTION

Participants received up to 16 one-to-one sessions of acceptance and commitment therapy, adapted for older people with treatment-resistant generalised anxiety disorder, in addition to usual care. Sessions were delivered by therapists based in primary and secondary care services, either in the clinic or at participants' homes. Sessions were weekly for the first 14 sessions and fortnightly thereafter.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The co-primary outcome measures for phase 2 were acceptability (session attendance and satisfaction with therapy) and feasibility (recruitment and retention). Secondary outcome measures included additional measures of acceptability and feasibility and self-reported measures of anxiety, worry, depression and psychological flexibility. Self-reported outcomes were assessed at 0 weeks (baseline) and 20 weeks (follow-up). Health economic outcomes included intervention and resource use costs and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Fifteen older people with treatment-resistant generalised anxiety disorder participated in phase 1 and 37 participated in phase 2. A high level of feasibility was demonstrated by a recruitment rate of 93% and a retention rate of 81%. A high level of acceptability was found with respect to session attendance (70% of participants attended ≥ 10 sessions) and satisfaction with therapy was adequate (60% of participants scored ≥ 21 out of 30 points on the Satisfaction with Therapy subscale of the Satisfaction with Therapy and Therapist Scale-Revised, although 80% of participants had not finished receiving therapy at the time of rating). Secondary outcome measures and qualitative data further supported the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Health economic data supported the feasibility of examining cost-effectiveness in a future randomised controlled trial. Although the study was not powered to examine clinical effectiveness, there was indicative evidence of improvements in scores for anxiety, depression and psychological flexibility.

LIMITATIONS

Non-specific therapeutic factors were not controlled for, and recruitment in phase 2 was limited to London.

CONCLUSIONS

There was evidence of high levels of feasibility and acceptability and indicative evidence of improvements in symptoms of anxiety, depression and psychological flexibility. The results of this study suggest that a larger-scale randomised controlled trial would be feasible to conduct and is warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12268776.

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. 25, No. 54. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Patch augmentation surgery for rotator cuff repair: the PARCS mixed-methods feasibility study

BACKGROUND

A rotator cuff tear is a common, disabling shoulder problem. Symptoms may include pain, weakness, lack of shoulder mobility and sleep disturbance. Many patients require surgery to repair the tear; however, there is a high failure rate. There is a need to improve the outcome of rotator cuff surgery, and the use of patch augmentation (on-lay or bridging) to provide support to the healing process and improve patient outcomes holds promise. Patches have been made using different materials (e.g. human/animal skin or tissue and synthetic materials) and processes (e.g. woven or mesh).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the Patch Augmented Rotator Cuff Surgery (PARCS) feasibility study was to determine the design of a definitive randomised controlled trial assessing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a patch to augment surgical repair of the rotator cuff that is both acceptable to stakeholders and feasible.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods feasibility study of a randomised controlled trial.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library databases were searched between April 2006 and August 2018.

METHODS

The project involved six stages: a systematic review of clinical evidence, a survey of the British Elbow and Shoulder Society's surgical membership, a survey of surgeon triallists, focus groups and interviews with stakeholders, a two-round Delphi study administered via online questionnaires and a 2-day consensus meeting. The various stakeholders (including patients, surgeons and industry representatives) were involved in stages 2-6.

RESULTS

The systematic review comprised 52 studies; only 15 were comparative and, of these, 11 were observational (search conducted in August 2018). These studies were typically small (median number of participants 26, range 5-152 participants). There was some evidence to support the use of patches, although most comparative studies were at a serious risk of bias. Little to no published clinical evidence was available for a number of patches in clinical use. The membership survey of British Elbow and Shoulder surgeons [105 (21%) responses received] identified a variety of patches in use. Twenty-four surgeons (77%) completed the triallist survey relating to trial design. Four focus groups were conducted, involving 24 stakeholders. Differing views were held on a number of aspects of trial design, including the appropriate patient population (e.g. patient age) to participate. Agreement on the key research questions and the outline of two potential randomised controlled trials were achieved through the Delphi study [29 (67%)] and the consensus meeting that 22 participants attended.

LIMITATIONS

The main limitation was that the findings were influenced by the participants, who are not necessarily representative of the views of the relevant stakeholder groups.

CONCLUSION

The need for further clinical studies was clear, particularly given the range and number of different patches available.

FUTURE WORK

Randomised comparisons of on-lay patch use for completed rotator cuff repairs and bridging patch use for partial rotator cuff repairs were identified as areas for further research. The value of an observational study to assess safety concerns of patch use was also highlighted. These elements are included in the trial designs proposed in this study.

STUDY REGISTRATION

The systematic review is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017057908.

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. 25, No. 13. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Individualised placement and support programme for people unemployed because of chronic pain: a feasibility study and the InSTEP pilot RCT

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a common cause of health-related incapacity for work among people in the UK. Individualised placement and support is a systematic approach to rehabilitation, with emphasis on early supported work placement. It is effective in helping people with severe mental illness to gain employment, but has not been tested for chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE

To inform the design of a definitive randomised controlled trial to assess the clinical effectiveness of individualised placement and support for people unemployed because of chronic pain.

METHODS

A mixed-methods feasibility study comprising qualitative interviews and focus groups with key stakeholders, alongside a pilot trial.

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

Primary care-based health-care professionals, employment support workers, employers, clients who participated in an individualised placement and support programme, and individuals aged 18-64 years with chronic pain who were unemployed for at least 3 months.

INTERVENTION

An individualised placement and support programme integrated with a personalised, responsive pain management plan, backed up by communication with a general practitioner and rapid access to community-based pain services.

OUTCOMES

Outcomes included stakeholder views about a trial and methods of recruitment; the feasibility and acceptability of the individualised placement and support intervention; study processes (including methods to recruit participants from primary care, training and support needs of the employment support workers to integrate with pain services, acceptability of randomisation and the treatment-as-usual comparator); and scoping of outcome measures for a definitive trial.

RESULTS

All stakeholders viewed a trial as feasible and important, and saw the relevance of employment interventions in this group. Using all suggested methods, recruitment was feasible through primary care, but it was slow and resource intensive. Recruitment through pain services was more efficient. Fifty people with chronic pain were recruited (37 from primary care and 13 from pain services). Randomisation was acceptable, and 22 participants were allocated to individualised placement and support, and 28 participants were allocated to treatment as usual. Treatment as usual was found acceptable. Retention of treatment-as-usual participants was acceptable throughout the 12 months. However, follow-up of individualised placement and support recipients using postal questionnaires proved challenging, especially when the participant started paid work, and new approaches would be needed for a trial. Clients, employment support workers, primary care-based health-care professionals and employers contributed to manualisation of the intervention. No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Unless accurate and up-to-date employment status information can be collected in primary care health records, or linkage can be established with employment records, research such as this relating to employment will be impracticable in primary care. The trial may be possible through pain services; however, clients may differ. Retention of participants proved challenging and methods for achieving this would need to be developed. The intervention has been manualised.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN30094062.

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. 25, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Psychological intervention, antipsychotic medication or a combined treatment for adolescents with a first episode of psychosis: the MAPS feasibility three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

When psychosis emerges in young people there is a risk of poorer outcomes, and access to evidence-based treatments is paramount. The current evidence base is limited. Antipsychotic medications show only a small benefit over placebo, but young people experience more side effects than adults. There is sparse evidence for psychological intervention. Research is needed to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of psychological intervention versus antipsychotic medication versus a combined treatment for adolescents with psychosis.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of Managing Adolescent first-episode Psychosis: a feasibility Study (MAPS) was to determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial to answer the question of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these three treatment options.

DESIGN

This was a prospective, randomised, open-blinded, evaluation feasibility trial with a single blind. Participants were allocated 1 : 1 : 1 to receive antipsychotic medication, psychological intervention or a combination of both. A thematic qualitative study explored the acceptability and feasibility of the trial.

SETTING

Early intervention in psychosis services and child and adolescent mental health services in Manchester, Oxford, Lancashire, Sussex, Birmingham, Norfolk and Suffolk, and Northumberland, Tyne and Wear.

PARTICIPANTS

People aged 14-18 years experiencing a first episode of psychosis either with an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, schizophrenia spectrum diagnosis or meeting the entry criteria for early intervention in psychosis who had not received antipsychotic medication or psychological intervention within the last 3 months.

INTERVENTIONS

Psychological intervention involved up to 26 hours of cognitive-behavioural therapy and six family intervention sessions over 6 months, with up to four booster sessions. Antipsychotic medication was prescribed by the participant's psychiatrist in line with usual practice. Combined treatment was a combination of psychological intervention and antipsychotic medication.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was feasibility (recruitment, treatment adherence and retention). We used a three-stage progression criterion to determine feasibility. Secondary outcomes were psychosis symptoms, recovery, anxiety and depression, social and educational/occupational functioning, drug and alcohol use, health economics, adverse/metabolic side effects and adverse/serious adverse events.

RESULTS

We recruited 61 out of 90 (67.8%; amber zone) potential participants (psychological intervention, n = 18; antipsychotic medication, n = 22; combined treatment, n = 21). Retention to follow-up was 51 out of 61 participants (83.6%; green zone). In the psychological intervention arm and the combined treatment arm, 32 out of 39 (82.1%) participants received six or more sessions of cognitive-behavioural therapy (green zone). In the combined treatment arm and the antipsychotic medication arm, 28 out of 43 (65.1%) participants received antipsychotic medication for 6 consecutive weeks (amber zone). There were no serious adverse events related to the trial and one related adverse event. Overall, the number of completed secondary outcome measures, including health economics, was small.

LIMITATIONS

Medication adherence was determined by clinician report, which can be biased. The response to secondary outcomes was low, including health economics. The small sample size obtained means that the study lacked statistical power and there will be considerable uncertainty regarding estimates of treatment effects.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to conduct a trial comparing psychological intervention with antipsychotic medication and a combination treatment in young people with psychosis with some adaptations to the design, including adaptations to collection of health economic data to determine cost-effectiveness.

FUTURE WORK

An adequately powered definitive trial is required to provide robust evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN80567433.

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. 25, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Retrograde intramedullary nail fixation compared with fixed-angle plate fixation for fracture of the distal femur: the TrAFFix feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

Fractures of the distal femur are an increasingly common injury; the optimal management of these injuries remains controversial. The two interventions used in UK practice are intramedullary fixation, with a locked retrograde nail, and extramedullary fixation, with a fixed angle plate.

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the feasibility of a definitive trial and included a process evaluation to understand the generalisability and likely success of a future trial.

DESIGN

A multicentre, parallel, two-arm, randomised controlled feasibility trial with an embedded process evaluation. Treatment with a plate or nail was allocated in a 1 : 1 ratio, stratified by centre and chronic cognitive impairment. Surgeons were not blinded, but participants were not told their allocation.

SETTING

Seven NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a fracture of the distal femur who the attending surgeon believed would benefit from internal fixation were potentially eligible. Patients were excluded if they had a loose arthroplasty requiring revision or a femoral deformity or arthroplasty that precluded nail fixation. The sample was recruited between 29 September 2016 and 31 August 2017. Consent was obtained from the patient or appropriate consultee before enrolment.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomised to receive fixation of their distal femur fracture with either a proximally and distally locked retrograde nail that spanned the diaphysis of the femur or an anatomical distal femoral locking plate with at least one locked screw distal to the fracture. Reduction and supplemental fixation were at the surgeon's discretion.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome measures for this study were the recruitment rate and the completion rate of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L), at 6 weeks and 4 months. Additional measurements included baseline characteristics, measures of social support and self-efficacy, disability rating index, dementia quality-of-life measures and a radiographical assessment of any malunion. Participants' and staff views were obtained, at interview, for the process evaluation.

RESULTS

The process evaluation showed that surgeon-related factors, principally confidence with both technologies and a lack of individual equipoise, were key barriers to recruitment. A total of 23 participants were randomised and analysed (nail, n = 11; plate, n = 12). The recruitment rate was estimated as 0.42 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.62] participants per centre per month, lower than the prespecified feasibility threshold of 1.0 participants per centre per month. Data completeness of the EQ-5D-5L was estimated at 65% (95% CI 43% to 83%).

CONCLUSIONS

This feasibility study has challenged many of the assumptions that underpinned the development of proposed definitive trial protocol. A modified protocol is proposed that would be feasible given the recruitment rate observed here, which is equal to that reported in the similar FixDT trial [Health Technology Assessment (HTA) 11/136/04: Costa ML, Achten J, Hennings S, Boota N, Griffin J, Petrou S, et al. Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT. Health Technol Assess 2018;22(25)], which delivered to target and budget.

FUTURE WORK

A definitive trial with a modified design is recommended, including an internal pilot to confirm initial recruitment rate assumptions.

REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN92089567.

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. 23, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also supported by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

Cultural adaptation of an existing children's weight management programme: the CHANGE intervention and feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

Excess weight in children is a continuing health issue. Community-based children's weight management programmes have had some effect in promoting weight loss. Families from minority ethnic communities are less likely to complete these programmes but, to date, no programmes have been culturally adapted to address this.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to (1) culturally adapt an existing weight management programme for children aged 4-11 years and their families to make it more suited to Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities but inclusive of all families and (2) evaluate the adapted programme to assess its feasibility and acceptability, as well as the feasibility of methods, for a future full-scale trial.

DESIGN

In phase I, a cultural adaptation of a programme that was informed by formative research and guided by two theoretical frameworks was undertaken and in phase II this adapted programme was delivered in a cluster-randomised feasibility study (for which the clusters were the standard and adapted children's weight management programmes).

SETTING

Birmingham: a large, ethnically diverse UK city.

PARTICIPANTS

In phase I, Pakistani and Bangladeshi parents of children with excess weight, and, in phase II, children aged 4-11 years who have excess weight and their families.

INTERVENTIONS

A culturally adapted children's weight management programme, comprising six sessions, which was delivered to children and parents, targeting diet and physical activity and incorporating behaviour change techniques, was developed in phase I and delivered in the intervention arm to 16 groups in phase II. The eight groups in the comparator arm received the standard (unadapted) children's weight management programme.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of Pakistani and Bangladeshi families completing (attending ≥ 60% of) the adapted programme. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of all families completing the adapted programme, the feasibility of delivery of the programme, the programme's acceptability to participants, the feasibility of trial processes and the feasibility of collection of outcome and cost data.

RESULTS

The proportion of Pakistani and Bangladeshi families and all families completing the adapted programme was 78.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 64.8% to 88.2%] and 76.3% (95% CI 67.0% to 83.6%), respectively. The programme was feasible to deliver with some refinements and was well received. Ninety-two families participated in outcome data collection. Data collection was mostly feasible, but participant burden was high. Data collection on the cost of programme delivery was feasible, but costs to families were more challenging to capture. There was high attrition over the 6-month follow-up period (35%) and differential attrition in the two study arms (29% and 52% in the intervention and comparator arms, respectively).

LIMITATIONS

The study was not designed to address the issue of low participant uptake of children's weight management programmes. The design of a future trial may include individual randomisation and a 'minimal intervention' arm, the acceptability of which has not been evaluated in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

The theoretically informed, culturally adapted children's weight management programme was highly acceptable to children and families of all ethnicities. Consideration should be given to a future trial to evaluate clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the adapted programme, but the design of a future trial would need to address the logistics of data collection, participant burden and study attrition.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN81798055.

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. 23, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Kate Jolly is part-funded by the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West Midlands.

Preoperative behavioural intervention to reduce drinking before elective orthopaedic surgery: the PRE-OP BIRDS feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

Heavy alcohol consumption is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications and extended hospital stay. Alcohol consumption therefore represents a modifiable risk factor for surgical outcomes. Brief behavioural interventions have been shown to be effective in reducing alcohol consumption among increased risk and risky drinkers in other health-care settings and may offer a method of addressing preoperative alcohol consumption.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the feasibility of introducing a screening process to assess adult preoperative drinking levels and to deliver a brief behavioural intervention adapted for the target population group. To conduct a two-arm (brief behavioural intervention plus standard preoperative care vs. standard preoperative care alone), multicentre, pilot randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of proceeding to a definitive trial. To conduct focus groups and a national web-based survey to establish current treatment as usual for alcohol screening and intervention in preoperative assessment.

DESIGN

A single-centre, qualitative, feasibility study was followed by a multicentre, two-arm (brief behavioural intervention vs. treatment as usual), individually randomised controlled pilot trial with an embedded qualitative process evaluation. Focus groups and a quantitative survey were employed to characterise treatment as usual in preoperative assessment.

SETTING

The feasibility study took place at a secondary care hospital in the north-east of England. The pilot trial was conducted at three large secondary care centres in the north-east of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Nine health-care professionals and 15 patients (mean age 70.5 years, 86.7% male) participated in the feasibility study. Eleven health-care professionals and 68 patients (mean age 66.2 years, 80.9% male) participated in the pilot randomised trial. An additional 19 health-care professionals were recruited to one of three focus groups, while 62 completed an electronic survey to characterise treatment as usual.

INTERVENTIONS

The brief behavioural intervention comprised two sessions. The first session, delivered face to face in the preoperative assessment clinic, involved 5 minutes of structured brief advice followed by 15-20 minutes of behaviour change counselling, including goal-setting, problem-solving and identifying sources of social support. The second session, an optional booster, took place approximately 1 week before surgery and offered the opportunity to assess progress and boost self-efficacy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Feasibility was assessed using rates of eligibility, recruitment and retention. The progression criteria for a definitive trial were recruitment of ≥ 40% of eligible patients and retention of ≥ 70% at 6-month follow-up. Acceptability was assessed using themes identified in qualitative data.

RESULTS

The initial recruitment of eligible patients was low but improved with the optimisation of recruitment processes. The recruitment of eligible participants to the pilot trial (34%) fell short of the progression criteria but was mitigated by very high retention (96%) at the 6-month follow-up. Multimethod analyses identified the methods as acceptable to the patients and professionals involved and offers recommendations of ways to further improve recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence supports the feasibility of a definitive trial to assess the effectiveness of brief behavioural intervention in reducing preoperative alcohol consumption and for secondary outcomes of surgical complications if recommendations for further improvements are adopted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36257982.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 12. See the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library website for further project information.