To evaluate whether a focused, expert medication management intervention is feasible and potentially effective in preventing anticoagulation-related adverse events for patients transitioning from hospital to home.

Randomised, parallel design.

Medical wards at six hospital sites in southern Ontario, Canada.

Adults 18 years of age or older being discharged to home on an oral anticoagulant (OAC) to be taken for at least 4 weeks.

Clinical pharmacologist-led intervention, including a detailed discharge medication management plan, a circle of care handover and early postdischarge virtual check-up visits to 1 month with 3-month follow-up. The control group received the usual care.

Primary outcomes were study feasibility outcomes (recruitment, retention and cost per patient). Secondary outcomes included adverse anticoagulant safety events composite, quality of transitional care, quality of life, anticoagulant knowledge, satisfaction with care, problems with medications and health resource utilisation.

Extensive periods of restriction of recruitment plus difficulties accessing patients at the time of discharge negatively impacted feasibility, especially cost per patient recruited. Of 845 patients screened, 167 were eligible and 56 were randomised. The mean age (±SD) was 71.2±12.5 years, 42.9% females, with two lost to follow-up. Intervention patients were more likely to rate their ability to manage their OAC as improved (17/27 (63.0%) vs 7/22 (31.8%), OR 3.6 (95% CI 1.1 to 12.0)) and their continuity of care as improved (21/27 (77.8%) vs 2/22 (9.1%), OR 35.0 (95% CI 6.3 to 194.2)). Fewer intervention patients were taking one or more inappropriate medications (7 (22.5%) vs 15 (60%), OR 0.19 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.62)).

This pilot randomised controlled trial suggests that a transitional care intervention at hospital discharge for older adults taking OACs was well received and potentially effective for some surrogate outcomes, but overly costly to proceed to a definitive large trial.

NCT02777047.

This study used National Health Insurance claims data from Korea to report the prevalence of sleep disorders and treatment status, including traditional Korean medicine, in the last 10 years.

This is a retrospective cohort study in Korea. All diagnosis and prescription data, including herbal medicine claims, from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service from 2011 to 2020 were reviewed. Prevalence estimation, direct medical expenses and prescribed amounts for sleep disorders were recorded.

The prevalence of sleep disorders increased from 3 867 975 (7.62%) in 2011 to 7 446 846 (14.41%) in 2020, nearly doubling over 10 years. Insomnia was observed in 91.44% (n=9 011 692) of the patients. The mean number of hospital visits per patient for sleep disorders was 11.5 (±26.62). Benzodiazepines are the most commonly prescribed medications for sleep disorders, and gamma-isoyosan is the most frequently prescribed herbal medicine.

Sleep disorders are continuously increasing, as is the use of medical services—personal and social medical expenses are also increasing accordingly. Sleep disorders should be recognised as a significant health problem that needs to be actively addressed to improve quality of life.

Concerns about falling (CaF) are common in older people and have been associated with avoidance of activities of daily life. Exercise designed to prevent falls can reduce CaF, but the effects are usually short-lived. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) can reduce CaF for longer but is not readily available in the community and unlikely to prevent falls. A multidomain intervention that combines CBT, motivational interviewing and exercise could be the long-term solution to treat CaF and reduce falls in older people with CaF. This paper describes the design of a randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of two different 12 week self-managed eHealth programmes to reduce CaF compared with an active control.

A total of 246 participants (82 per group) aged 65 and over, with substantial concerns about falls or balance will be recruited from the community. They will be randomised into: (1) myCompass-Own Your Balance (OYB) (online CBT programme) intervention or (2) myCompass-OYB plus StandingTall intervention (an eHealth balance exercise programme), both including motivational interviewing and online health education or (3) an active control group (online health education alone). The primary outcome is change in CaF over 12 months from baseline of both intervention groups compared with control. The secondary outcomes at 2, 6 and 12 months include balance confidence, physical activity, habitual daily activity, enjoyment of physical activity, social activity, exercise self-efficacy, rate of falls, falls health literacy, mood, psychological well-being, quality of life, exercise self-efficacy, programme adherence, healthcare use, user experience and attitudes towards the programme. An intention-to-treat analysis will be applied. The healthcare funder’s perspective will be adopted for the economic evaluation if appropriate.

Ethical approval was obtained from the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2019/ETH12840). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals, local and international conferences, community events and media releases.

ACTRN12621000440820.

To create case definitions for confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses, COVID-19 vaccination status and three separate definitions of high risk of severe COVID-19, as well as to assess whether the implementation of these definitions in a cohort reflected the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 epidemiology in England.

Retrospective cohort study.

Electronic healthcare records from primary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD) linked to secondary care data (Hospital Episode Statistics) data covering 24% of the population in England.

2 271 072 persons aged 1 year and older diagnosed with COVID-19 in CPRD Aurum between 1 August 2020 and 31 January 2022.

Age, sex and regional distribution of COVID-19 cases and COVID-19 vaccine doses received prior to diagnosis were assessed separately for the cohorts of cases identified in primary care and those hospitalised for COVID-19 (primary diagnosis code of ICD-10 U07.1 ‘COVID-19’). Smoking status, body mass index and Charlson Comorbidity Index were compared for the two cohorts, as well as for three separate definitions of high risk of severe disease used in the UK (National Health Service Highest Risk, PANORAMIC trial eligibility, UK Health Security Agency Clinical Risk prioritisation for vaccination).

Compared with national estimates, CPRD case estimates under-represented older adults in both the primary care (age 65–84: 6% in CPRD vs 9% nationally) and hospitalised (31% vs 40%) cohorts, and over-represented people living in regions with the highest median wealth areas of England (20% primary care and 20% hospital admitted cases in South East vs 15% nationally). The majority of non-hospitalised cases and all hospitalised cases had not completed primary series vaccination. In primary care, persons meeting high-risk definitions were older, more often smokers, overweight or obese, and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score.

CPRD primary care data are a robust real-world data source and can be used for some COVID-19 research questions, however, limitations of the data availability should be carefully considered. Included in this publication are supplemental files for a total of over 28 000 codes to define each of three definitions of high risk of severe disease.

To quantify direct costs and healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) associated with acute COVID-19 in adults in England.

Population-based retrospective cohort study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum primary care electronic medical records linked to Hospital Episode Statistics secondary care administrative data.

Patients registered to primary care practices in England.

1 706 368 adults with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or antigen test from August 2020 to January 2022 were included; 13 105 within the hospitalised cohort indexed between August 2020 and March 2021, and 1 693 263 within the primary care cohort indexed between August 2020 and January 2022. Patients with a COVID-19-related hospitalisation within 84 days of a positive test were included in the hospitalised cohort.

Primary and secondary care HCRU and associated costs ≤4 weeks following positive COVID-19 test, stratified by age group, risk of severe COVID-19 and immunocompromised status.

Among the hospitalised cohort, average length of stay, including critical care stays, was longer in older adults. Median healthcare cost per hospitalisation was higher in those aged 75–84 (£8942) and ≥85 years (£8835) than in those aged

COVID-19-related hospitalisations in older adults, particularly critical care stays, were the primary drivers of high COVID-19 resource use in England. These findings may inform health policy decisions and resource allocation in the prevention and management of COVID-19.

The Self-Management Analysis in Chronic Conditions (SMACC) checklist was developed as a guidance tool to support the development, comparison and evaluation of self-management support programmes for persons with a chronic condition. The checklist was based on a previously performed concept analysis of self-management. The aim of this study was to validate its content using an international Delphi study and to deliver a final version.

A two-round Delphi study was conducted between October 2022 and January 2023. Using the researchers’ networks, professionals with research or clinical expertise in self-management support and chronic conditions were recruited via online purposive snowball sampling. Participants were asked to score each item of the checklist (16 items total) on 3 content validity indicators: (1) clarity and comprehensibility, (2) relevance and importance and (3) degree of alignment with the overall goal of the checklist to promote adequate and comprehensive self-management support programmes. A consensus threshold of 75% agreement was used. The participants were also asked general questions about the checklist as a whole and were asked to provide feedback considering its refinement.

Fifty-four professionals with an average 14.5 years of experience participated in round 1, 48 with an average 12.5 years of experience participated in round 2. The majority of professionals were from Western Europe. For the majority of items consensus was reached after round 1. In round 2, 3 of the 4 remaining items reached consensus, 1 last item was retained based on highly recurring feedback.

The SMACC checklist was considered a valid and comprehensive tool to aid the development, evaluation and comparison of self-management support programmes. It was acknowledged as a useful instrument to supplement existing frameworks and was seen as feasible to implement in both research and clinical settings. Further validation in the field, with input from patients and peer experts, will be valuable.

The study was conducted to assess potential drug–drug interactions (PDDIs) and its determinants among patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy.

An institutional-based cross-sectional study was used. This study was conducted from 1 June 2021 to 15 December 2021, in Northwest Ethiopia oncology centres.

All eligible patients with cancer received a combination of chemotherapy.

The prevalence and severity of PDDIs were evaluated using three drug interaction databases. Characteristics of participants were presented, arranged and summarised using descriptive statistics. The predictors and outcome variables were examined using logistic regression. The cut-off point was a p value of 0.05.

Of 422 patients included in the study, 304 patients were exposed to at least one PDDI with a prevalence of 72.1% (95 % CI: 68% to 76%) using three drug interaction databases. There were varied reports of the severity of PDDI among databases, but the test agreement using the kappa index was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.52 to 0.62, p=0.0001) which is interpreted as a moderate agreement among three databases. Patients aged ≥50 years old had the risk to be exposed to PDDI by odds of 3.1 times (adjusted OR (AOR)=3.1, 95% CI (1.8 to 5.3); p=0.001) as compared with patients

The main finding of this study is the high prevalence of PDDI, signifying the need for strict patient monitoring for PDDIs among patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. We suggest the use of at least three drug databases for quality screening. Patients with an age ≥50 years old, polypharmacy and comorbidity were significantly associated with PDDIs. The establishment of oncology clinical pharmacists and computerised reminder mechanisms for PDDIs through drug utilisation review is suggested.

Approximately 30% of somatic hospital inpatients experience psychosocial distress, contributing to increased (re-)hospitalisation rates, treatment resistance, morbidity, and direct and indirect costs. However, such distress often remains unrecognised and unaddressed. We established ‘SomPsyNet’, a ‘stepped and collaborative care model’ (SCCM) for somatic hospital inpatients, aiming at alleviating this issue through early identification of distress and provision of appropriate care, providing problem-focused pathways and strengthening collaborative care. We report the protocol of the ‘SomPsyNet’ study, aiming to evaluate implementation and impact of the SCCM on distressed patients’ health-related quality of life. Secondary objectives include assessing efficacy of the screening procedures, influence of SCCM on other health outcomes and associated costs.

Our stepped wedge cluster randomised trial conducted at three tertiary hospitals comprises three conditions: treatment as usual (TAU) without screening for distress (phase 0), TAU with screening but without consequences (phase I, main comparator) and TAU with screening and psychosomatic-psychiatric consultations for those distressed (phase II). The time-of-transition between phases I and II was randomised. Sample size target is N=2200–2500 participants, with 6 month follow-up for distressed (anticipated n=640–700) and a subsample of non-distressed (anticipated n=200) patients. Primary outcome is mental health-related quality of life (SF-36 ‘Mental Health Component Summary score’); secondary outcomes include psychosocial distress, anxiety, depressive and somatic symptoms, symptom burden and distress, resilience, social support and qualitative of life, assessed by internationally accepted instruments, with good psychometric properties. Further, health claims data will be used to assess SCCM’s impact on direct and indirect costs.

SomPsyNet adheres to the Helsinki Declaration and is approved by the ‘Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz’ (2019–01724). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and communicated to participants, healthcare professionals and the public.

Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal; ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04269005, updated 19.09.2023).