Delineate the scope of teleconsultation services that can be effectively performed to provide women with comprehensive gynaecological and obstetrical care.

Based on the literature and experts’ insights, we identified a list of gynaecological and obstetrical care practices suitable for teleconsultation. A three-round Delphi consensus survey was then conducted online among a panel of French experts. Experts using a 9-point Likert scale assessed the relevance of each teleconsultation practice in four key domains: prevention, gynaecology and antenatal and postnatal care. Consensus was determined by applying a dual-criteria approach: the median score on a 9-point Likert scale and the percentage of votes either below 5 or 5 and higher.

The study was conducted at a national level in France and involved multiple healthcare centres and professionals from various geographical locations.

The panel comprised 22 French experts with 19 healthcare professionals, including 12 midwives, 3 obstetricians-gynaecologists, 4 general practitioners and 3 healthcare system users. Participants were selected to include diverse practice settings encompassing hospital and private practices in both rural and urban areas.

The study’s primary outcome was the identification of gynaecological and obstetrical care practices suitable for teleconsultation. Secondary outcomes included the level of professional consensus on these practices.

In total, 71 practices were included in the Delphi survey. The practices approved for teleconsultation were distributed as follows: 92% in prevention (n=12/13), 55% in gynaecology (n=18/33), 31% in prenatal care (n=5/16) and 12% in postnatal care (n=1/9). Lastly, 10 practices remained under discussion: 7 in gynaecology, 2 in prenatal care and 1 in postnatal care.

Our consensus survey highlights both the advantages and limitations of teleconsultations for women’s gynaecological and obstetrical care, emphasising the need for careful consideration and tailored implementation.

Between 2009/2010 and 2019/2020, England witnessed an increase in suspected head and neck cancer (sHNC) referrals from 140 to 404 patients per 100 000 population. 1 in 10 patients are not seen within the 2-week target, contributing to patient anxiety. We will develop a pathway for sHNC referrals, based on the Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator. The evolution of a patient-reported symptom-based risk stratification system to redesign the sHNC referral pathway (EVEREST-HN) Programme comprises six work packages (WPs). This protocol describes WP1 and WP2. WP1 will obtain an understanding of language to optimise the SYmptom iNput Clinical (SYNC) system patient-reported symptom questionnaire for sHNC referrals and outline requirements for the SYNC system. WP2 will codesign key elements of the SYNC system, including the SYNC Questionnaire, and accompanying behaviour change materials.

WP1 will be conducted at three acute National Health Service (NHS) trusts with variation in service delivery models and ensuring a broad mixture of social, economic and cultural backgrounds of participants. Up to 150 patients with sHNC (n=50 per site) and 15 clinicians (n=5 per site) will be recruited. WP1 will use qualitative methods including interviews, observation and recordings of consultations. Rapid qualitative analysis and inductive thematic analysis will be used to analyse the data. WP2 will recruit lay patient representatives to participate in online focus groups (n=8 per focus group), think-aloud technique and experience-based codesign and will be analysed using qualitative and quantitative approaches.

The committee for clinical research at The Royal Marsden, a research ethics committee and the Health Research Authority approved this protocol. All participants will give informed consent. Ethical issues of working with patients on an urgent cancer diagnostic pathway have been considered. Findings will be disseminated via journal publications, conference presentations and public engagement activities.

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.

Transfusions in surgery can be life-saving interventions, but inappropriate transfusions may lack clinical benefit and cause harm. Transfusion decision-making in surgery is complex and frequently informed by haemoglobin (Hgb) measurement in the operating room. Point-of-care testing for haemoglobin (POCT-Hgb) is increasingly relied on given its simplicity and rapid provision of results. POCT-Hgb devices lack adequate validation in the operative setting, particularly for Hgb values within the transfusion zone (60–100 g/L). This study aims to examine the accuracy of intraoperative POCT-Hgb instruments in non-cardiac surgery, and the association between POCT-Hgb measurements and transfusion decision-making.

PREMISE is an observational prospective method comparison study. Enrolment will occur when adult patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery require POCT-Hgb, as determined by the treating team. Three concurrent POCT-Hgb results, considered as index tests, will be compared with a laboratory analysis of Hgb (lab-Hgb), considered the gold standard. Participants may have multiple POCT-Hgb measurements during surgery. The primary outcome is the difference in individual Hgb measurements between POCT-Hgb and lab-Hgb, primarily among measurements that are within the transfusion zone. Secondary outcomes include POCT-Hgb accuracy within the entire cohort, postoperative morbidity, mortality and transfusion rates. The sample size is 1750 POCT-Hgb measurements to obtain a minimum of 652 Hgb measurements

Institutional ethics approval has been obtained by the Ottawa Health Science Network—Research Ethics Board prior to initiating the study. Findings from this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant scientific conferences. Social media will be leveraged to further disseminate the study results and engage with clinicians.