Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a causative virus for the common cold worldwide and can result in hospitalisations and even death in patients with high-risk conditions and older adults. However, the relationship between RSV or other incidental respiratory infections and acute exacerbations of underlying conditions has not been well investigated. The primary objective of this study is to estimate RSV prevalence, risk factors for adverse outcomes or hospitalisation and their effect on the hospital course of patients with acute respiratory symptoms admitted from emergency departments. Furthermore, we evaluate the prevalence of other respiratory viruses associated with respiratory symptoms.

We are conducting a multicentre prospective cohort study in Japan. We plan to enrol 3000 consecutive patients admitted from emergency departments with acute respiratory symptoms or signs from 1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024. A nasopharyngeal swab is obtained within 24 hours of admission and the prevalence of RSV and other respiratory viruses is measured using the FilmArray Respiratory 2.1 panel. Paired serum samples are collected from patients with suspected lower respiratory infections to measure RSV antibodies at admission and 30 days later. Information on patients’ hospital course is retrieved from the electronic medical records at discharge, death or 30 days after admission. Furthermore, information on readmission to the hospital and all-cause mortality is collected 180 days after admission. We assess the differences in clinical outcomes between patients with RSV or other respiratory viruses and those without, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Clinical outcomes include in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, disease progression, laboratory tests and management of respiratory symptoms or underlying conditions.

The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of participating hospitals. Our study reports will be published in academic journals as well as international meetings.

NCT05913700.

Providing comprehensible information is essential to the process of valid informed consent. Recruitment materials designed by sponsoring institutions in English-speaking, high-income countries are commonly translated for use in global health studies in other countries; however, key concepts are often missed, misunderstood or ‘lost in translation’. The aim of this study was to explore the language barriers to informed consent, focusing on the challenges of translating recruitment materials for maternal health studies into Zambian languages.

We used a qualitative approach, which incorporated a multistakeholder workshop (11 participants), in-depth interviews with researchers and translators (8 participants) and two community-based focus groups with volunteers from community advisory boards (20 participants). Content analysis was used to identify terms commonly occurring in recruitment materials prior to the workshop. The framework analysis approach was used to analyse interview data, and a simple inductive thematic analysis approach was used to analyse focus group data.

The study was based in Lusaka, Zambia.

The workshop highlighted difficulties in translating research terms and pregnancy-specific terms, as well as widespread concern that current templates are too long, use overly formal language and are designed with little input from local teams. Framework analysis of in-depth interviews identified barriers to participant understanding relating to design and development of recruitment materials, language, local context and communication styles. Focus group participants confirmed these findings and suggested potential solutions to ensure the language and content of recruitment materials can be better understood.

Our findings demonstrate that the way in which recruitment materials are currently designed, translated and disseminated may not enable potential trial participants to fully understand the information provided. Instead of using overly complex institutional templates, recruitment materials should be created through an iterative and interactive process that provides truly comprehensible information in a format appropriate for its intended participants.

To explore researchers’ experiences of funding processes, the effort and burden involved in applying for funding, obtaining funding and/or fulfilling reporting requirements with a UK health and social care research funder.

A cross-sectional online survey study with open (free-text) and closed questions (August to November 2021).

Researchers with experience of applying for/obtaining funding and/or experience of fulfilling reporting requirements for UK health and social care research funded between January 2018 and June 2021.

The survey was completed by 182 researchers, of which 176 had experience with applying for/obtaining funding, and 143 had experience with fulfilling reporting requirements during the timeframe. The majority of the 176 respondents (58%) completed between 7 and 13 key processes in order to submit an application and 69% felt that it was critically important to undertake these key processes. Respondents (n=143) reported submitting an average of 17 reports as part of research monitoring to a range of organisations (eg, funders, Higher Education Institutions). However, only 33% of respondents felt it was critically important to provide the requested reporting information to the different organisations. Thematic analysis of free-text questions on application and reporting identified themes relating to process inefficiencies including streamlining and alignment of systems, lack of understanding of processes including a need for improved communication and feedback from organisations with clear explanations about what information is needed, when and why, the support required by respondents and the time, effort and impact on workload and well-being.

Through this study, we were able to identify funding processes that are considered by some to be effortful, but necessary, as well as those that were perceived as unnecessary, complex and repetitive, and may waste some researchers time and effort and impact on well-being. Possible solutions to increase efficiency and enhance value in these processes were identified.

Smoking cessation in pregnancy remains a public health priority. Our team used the Behaviour Change Wheel to develop the Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit smoking (MOHMQuit) intervention with health system, leader (including managers and educators) and clinician components. MOHMQuit addresses a critical evidence to practice gap in the provision of smoking cessation support in antenatal care. It involves nine maternity services in New South Wales in a cluster randomised stepped-wedge controlled trial of effectiveness. This paper describes the design and rationale for the process evaluation of MOHMQuit. The process evaluation aims to assess to what extent and how MOHMQuit is being implemented (acceptability; adoption/uptake; appropriateness; feasibility; fidelity; penetration and sustainability), and the context in which it is implemented, in order to support further refinement of MOHMQuit throughout the trial, and aid understanding and interpretation of the results of the trial.

The process evaluation is an integral part of the stepped-wedge trial. Its design is underpinned by implementation science frameworks and adopts a mixed methods approach. Quantitative evidence from participating leaders and clinicians in our study will be used to produce individual and site-level descriptive statistics. Qualitative evidence of leaders’ perceptions about the implementation will be collected using semistructured interviews and will be analysed descriptively within-site and thematically across the dataset. The process evaluation will also use publicly available data and observations from the research team implementing MOHMQuit, for example, training logs. These data will be synthesised to provide site-level as well as individual-level implementation outcomes.

The study received ethical approval from the Population Health Services Research Ethics Committee for NSW, Australia (Reference 2021/ETH00887). Results will be communicated via the study’s steering committee and will also be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

Australian New Zealand Trials Registry ACTRN12622000167763. https://www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au/anzctr/trial/ACTRN12622000167763.

Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) involves repeated administrations of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine to children below the age of 5 years during the peak transmission season in areas of seasonal malaria transmission. While highly impactful in reducing Plasmodium falciparum malaria burden in controlled research settings, the impact of SMC on infection prevalence is moderate in real-life settings. It remains unclear what drives this efficacy decay. Recently, the WHO widened the scope for SMC to target all vulnerable populations. The Ministry of Health (MoH) in Burkina Faso is considering extending SMC to children below 10 years old. We aim to assess the impact of SMC on clinical incidence and parasite prevalence and quantify the human infectious reservoir for malaria in this population.

We will perform a cluster randomised trial in Saponé Health District, Burkina Faso, with three study arms comprising 62 clusters of three compounds: arm 1 (control): SMC in under 5-year-old children, implemented by the MoH without directly observed treatment (DOT) for the full course of SMC; arm 2 (intervention): SMC in under 5-year-old children, with DOT for the full course of SMC; arm 3 (intervention): SMC in under 10-year-old children, with DOT for the full course of SMC. The primary endpoint is parasite prevalence at the end of the malaria transmission season. Secondary endpoints include the impact of SMC on clinical incidence. Factors affecting SMC uptake, treatment adherence, drug concentrations, parasite resistance markers and transmission of parasites will be determined.

The London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine’s Ethics Committee (29193) and the Burkina Faso National Medical Ethics Committee (Deliberation No 2023-05-104) approved this study. The findings will be presented to the community; disease occurrence data and study outcomes will also be shared with the Burkina Faso MoH. Findings will be published irrespective of their results.

NCT05878366.

Women with complex health needs are more at risk of having children’s social care involvement with their newborns than other mothers. Around the time of pregnancy, there are opportunities for health services to support women with these needs and mitigate the risk of mother–baby separation. Yet little is known about healthcare professionals’ experiences of providing this support.

We administered an online survey to perinatal healthcare professionals across England (n=70 responders), including midwives, obstetricians, perinatal psychologists/psychiatrists and health visitors. We asked about their experiences of providing care for pregnant women with chronic physical conditions, mental health needs, intellectual/developmental disabilities and substance use disorders, who might be at risk of children’s social care involvement. We conducted a framework analysis.

We constructed five themes from participant data. These include (1) inaccessible healthcare for women with complex needs, (2) the challenges and importance of restoring trust, (3) services focusing on individuals, not families, (4) the necessity and caution around multidisciplinary support and (5) underfunded services inhibiting good practice.

Women who are at risk of children’s social care involvement will likely experience perinatal healthcare inequities. Our findings suggest that current perinatal healthcare provision for this population is inadequate and national guidelines need updated to inform support.

Many rural communities bear a disproportionate share of drug-related harms. Innovative harm reduction service models, such as vending machines or kiosks, can expand access to services that reduce drug-related harms. However, few kiosks operate in the USA, and their implementation, impact and cost-effectiveness have not been adequately evaluated in rural settings. This paper describes the Kentucky Outreach Service Kiosk (KyOSK) Study protocol to test the effectiveness, implementation outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a community-tailored, harm reduction kiosk in reducing HIV, hepatitis C and overdose risk in rural Appalachia.

KyOSK is a community-level, controlled quasi-experimental, non-randomised trial. KyOSK involves two cohorts of people who use drugs, one in an intervention county (n=425) and one in a control county (n=325). People who are 18 years or older, are community-dwelling residents in the target counties and have used drugs to get high in the past 6 months are eligible. The trial compares the effectiveness of a fixed-site, staffed syringe service programme (standard of care) with the standard of care supplemented with a kiosk. The kiosk will contain various harm reduction supplies accessible to participants upon valid code entry, allowing dispensing data to be linked to participant survey data. The kiosk will include a call-back feature that allows participants to select needed services and receive linkage-to-care services from a peer recovery coach. The cohorts complete follow-up surveys every 6 months for 36 months (three preceding kiosk implementation and four post-implementation). The study will test the effectiveness of the kiosk on reducing risk behaviours associated with overdose, HIV and hepatitis C, as well as implementation outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

The University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board approved the protocol. Results will be disseminated in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals, online and print media, and community meetings.

NCT05657106.

Patient partnership is a key component of patient-centred care. One form of partnership is individual peer support, which can improve patients’ quality of life and adherence to treatment. Patient with multiple sclerosis could benefit from this type of support, but such an intervention has not been explored in the literature.

We propose in this article a pilot study protocol to assess the feasibility and acceptability of healthcare-integrated individual peer support, and the feasibility of a large-scale efficacy trial.

The PAIR-SEP study is a mixed-methods pilot clinical trial combining quantitative and qualitative approaches. Sixty patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis undergoing drug therapy from the Neurology centre of Nantes University Hospital (France) will be randomised on a 1:1 ratio to receive either usual care only or usual care combined with peer support (three individual sessions at 1, 3 and 5 months with a peer helper).

We will evaluate clinical outcomes in preparation of the large-scale trial: therapeutic adherence 6 months after baseline, therapeutic compliance, quality of life, anxiety and depression, social support. All dimensions will be assessed using validated health questionnaires at baseline and at 6 months.

Intervention’s acceptability and feasibility will be evaluated using qualitative methods: undirected interviews with patients from the intervention group and separate focus-groups with the peer helpers the healthcare team.

Ethical approval was obtained from the local ethics committee on 1 October 2022. This study was designed in collaboration with multiple sclerosis peer helpers.

The trial findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

NCT05519553.

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.

In Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ), integration across the healthcare continuum has been a key approach to strengthening the health system and improving health outcomes. A key example has been four regional District Health Board (DHB) groupings, which, from 2011 to 2022, required the country’s 20 DHBs to work together regionally. This research explores how this initiative functioned, examining how, for whom and in what circumstances regional DHB groupings worked to deliver improvements in system integration and health outcomes and equity.

We used a realist-informed evaluation study design. We used documentary analysis to develop programme logic models to describe the context, structure, capabilities, implementation activities and impact of each of the four regional groupings and then conducted interviews with stakeholders. We developed a generalised context-mechanisms-outcomes model, identifying key commonalities explaining how regional work ‘worked’ across NZ while noting important regional differences.

NZ’s four regional DHB groupings.

Forty-nine stakeholders from across the four regional groupings. These included regional DHB governance groups and coordinating regional agencies, DHB senior leadership, Māori and Pasifika leadership and lead clinicians for regional work streams.

Regional DHB working was layered on top of an already complex DHB environment. Organisational heterogeneity and tensions between local and regional priorities were key contextual factors. In response, regional DHB groupings leveraged a combination of ‘hard’ policy and planning processes, as well as ‘soft’, relationship-based mechanisms, aiming to improve system integration, population health outcomes and health equity.

The complexity of DHB regional working meant that success hinged on building relationships, leadership and trust, alongside robust planning and process mechanisms. As NZ reorients its health system towards a more centralised model underpinned by collaborations between local providers, our findings point to a need to align policy expectations and foster environments that support connection and collegiality across the health system.

The RESPIRA cohort aims to describe the nature, magnitude, time course and efficacy of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination, population prevalence, and household transmission of COVID-19.

From November 2020, we selected age-stratified random samples of COVID-19 cases from Costa Rica confirmed by PCR. For each case, two population-based controls, matched on age, sex and census tract were recruited, supplemented with hospitalised cases and household contacts. Participants were interviewed and blood and saliva collected for antibodies and PCR tests. Participants will be followed for 2 years to assess antibody response and infection incidence.

Recruitment included 3860 individuals: 1150 COVID-19 cases, 1999 population controls and 719 household contacts from 304 index cases. The age and regional distribution of cases was as planned, including four age strata, 30% rural and 70% urban. The control cohort had similar sex, age and regional distribution as the cases according to the study design. Among the 1999 controls recruited, 6.8% reported at enrolment having had COVID-19 and an additional 12.5% had antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Compliance with visits and specimens has been close to 70% during the first 18 months of follow-up. During the study, national vaccination was implemented and nearly 90% of our cohort participants were vaccinated during follow-up.

RESPIRA will enable multiple analyses, including population prevalence of infection, clinical, behavioural, immunological and genetic risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 acquisition and severity, and determinants of household transmission. We are conducting retrospective and prospective assessment of antibody levels, their determinants and their protective efficacy after infection and vaccination, the impact of long-COVID and a series of ancillary studies. Follow-up continues with bimonthly saliva collection for PCR testing and biannual blood collection for immune response analyses. Follow-up will be completed in early 2024.

NCT04537338.

In Australia, only 22% of male and 8% of female adolescents meet the muscle-strengthening physical activity guidelines, and few school-based interventions support participation in resistance training (RT). After promising findings from our effectiveness trial, we conducted a state-wide dissemination of the ‘Resistance Training for Teens’ (RT4T) intervention from 2015 to 2020. Despite high estimated reach, we found considerable variability in programme delivery and teachers reported numerous barriers to implementation. Supporting schools when they first adopt evidence-based programmes may strengthen programme fidelity, sustainability, and by extension, programme impact. However, the most effective implementation support model for RT4T is unclear.

To compare the effects of three implementation support models on the reach (primary outcome), dose delivered, fidelity, sustainability, impact and cost of RT4T.

We will conduct a hybrid type III implementation–effectiveness trial involving grade 9 and 10 (aged 14–16 years) students from 90 secondary schools in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Schools will be recruited across one cohort in 2023, stratified by school type, socioeconomic status and location, and randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive one of the following levels of implementation support: (1) ‘low’ (training and resources), (2) ‘moderate’ (training and resources+external support) or ‘high’ (training and resources+external support+equipment). Training includes a teacher workshop related to RT4T programme content (theory and practical sessions) and the related resources. Additional support will be provided by trained project officers from five local health districts. Equipment will consist of a pack of semiportable RT equipment (ie, weighted bars, dumbbells, resistance bands and inverted pull up bar stands) valued at ~$A1000 per school. Study outcomes will be assessed at baseline (T0), 6 months (T1) and 18 months (T2). A range of quantitative (teacher logs, observations and teacher surveys) and qualitative (semistructured interviews with teachers) methods will be used to assess primary (reach) and secondary outcomes (dose delivered, fidelity, sustainability, impact and cost of RT4T). Quantitative analyses will use logistic mixed models for dichotomous outcomes, and ordinal or linear mixed effects regression models for continuous outcomes, with alpha levels set at p

Ethics approval has been obtained from the University of Newcastle (H-2021-0418), the NSW Department of Education (SERAP:2022215), Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH00052) and the Catholic Schools Office. The design, conduct and reporting will adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement, the Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies statement and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist. Findings will be published in open access peer-reviewed journals, key stakeholders will be provided with a detailed report. We will support ongoing dissemination of RT4T in Australian schools via professional learning for teachers.

ACTRN12622000861752.

Healthcare workers were recruited early in 2020 to chart effects on their health as the COVID-19 pandemic evolved. The aim was to identify modifiable workplace risk factors for infection and mental ill health.

Participants were recruited from four Canadian provinces, physicians (medical doctors, MDs) in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec, registered nurses (RNs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs) and healthcare aides (HCAs) in Alberta and personal support workers (PSWs) in Ontario. Volunteers gave blood for serology testing before and after vaccination. Cases with COVID-19 were matched with up to four referents in a nested case-referent study.

Overall, 4964/5130 (97%) of those recruited joined the longitudinal cohort: 1442 MDs, 3136 RNs, 71 LPNs, 235 PSWs, 80 HCAs. Overall, 3812 (77%) were from Alberta. Prepandemic risk factors for mental ill health and respiratory illness differed markedly by occupation. Participants completed questionnaires at recruitment, fall 2020, spring 2021, spring 2022. By 2022, 4837 remained in the cohort (127 had retired, moved away or died), for a response rate of 89% (4299/4837). 4567/4964 (92%) received at least one vaccine shot: 2752/4567 (60%) gave postvaccine blood samples. Ease of accessing blood collection sites was a strong determinant of participation. Among 533 cases and 1697 referents recruited to the nested case-referent study, risk of infection at work decreased with widespread vaccination.

Serology results (concentration of IgG) together with demographic data will be entered into the publicly accessible database compiled by the Canadian Immunology Task Force. Linkage with provincial administrative health databases will permit case validation, investigation of longer-term sequelae of infection and comparison with community controls. Analysis of the existing dataset will concentrate on effects on IgG of medical condition, medications and stage of pregnancy, and the role of occupational exposures and supports on mental health during the pandemic.