Conectar
An association between deep sedation and adverse short-term outcomes has been demonstrated although this evidence has been inconsistent. The A2B (alpha-2 agonists for sedation in critical care) sedation trial is designed to determine whether the alpha-2 agonists clonidine and dexmedetomidine, compared with usual care, are clinically and cost-effective. The A2B intervention is a complex intervention conducted in 39 intensive care units (ICUs) in the UK. Multicentre organisational factors, variable cultures, perceptions and practices and the involvement of multiple members of the healthcare team add to the complexity of the A2B trial. From our pretrial contextual exploration it was apparent that routine practices such as type and frequency of pain, agitation and delirium assessment, as well as the common sedative agents used, varied widely across the UK. Anticipated challenges in implementing A2B focused on the impact of usual practice, perceptions of risk, ICU culture, structure and the presence of equipoise. Given this complexity, a process evaluation has been embedded in the A2B trial to uncover factors that could impact successful delivery and explore their impact on intervention delivery and interpretation of outcomes.
This is a mixed-methods process evaluation guided by the A2B intervention logic model. It includes two phases of data collection conducted during and at the end of trial. Data will be collected using a combination of questionnaires, stakeholder interviews and routinely collected trial data. A framework approach will be used to analyse qualitative data with synthesis of data within and across the phases. The nature of the relationship between delivery of the A2B intervention and the trial primary and secondary outcomes will be explored.
All elements of the A2B trial, including the process evaluation, are approved by Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (Ref. 18/SS/0085). Dissemination will be via publications, presentations and media engagement.
To gain a greater understanding of how compression therapy affects quality of life, this systematic review appraised existing published studies measuring the impact of compression therapy on health quality of life (HRQoL), and pain, among people with venous leg ulcers (VLU).
Five databases were searched, and two authors extracted data and appraised the quality of selected papers using the RevMan risk of bias tool. Due to heterogeneity in the types of compression and instruments used to evaluate HRQoL, meta-analysis was not appropriate; thus, a narrative synthesis of findings was undertaken.
Ten studies were included, 9 RCTs and one before-after study. The studies employed nine different HRQoL tools to measure the impact of a variety of compression therapy systems, with or without an additional exercise programme, versus other compression systems or usual care, and the results are mixed. With the use of the Cardiff Cardiff Wound Impact Schedule, the SF-8 and the SF-12, study authors found no differences in QoL scores between the study groups. This is similar to one study using QUALYs (Iglesias et al., 2004). Conversely, for studies using EuroQol-5D, VEINES-QOL, SF-36 and CIVIQ-20 differences in QoL scores between the study groups were noted, in favour of the study intervention groups. Two further studies using QUALYs found results that favoured a two-layer cohesive compression bandage and the TLCCB group, respectively. Results for the five studies that assessed pain are also mixed, with one study finding no difference between study groups, one finding that pain increased over the study period and three studies finding that pain reduced in the intervention groups. All studies were assessed as being at risk of bias in one or more domains.
Results were varied, reflecting uncertainty in determining the impact of compression therapy on quality of life and pain among people with a venous leg ulcer. The heterogeneity of the compression systems and the measures used to evaluate HRQoL make it a challenge to interpret the overall evidence. Further studies should strive for homogeneity in design, interventions and comparators to enhance both internal and external validity.
Current clinical trials on swallowing disorders (dysphagia) in Parkinson’s disease (PD) apply a high variety of outcomes and different outcome measures making comparative effectiveness research challenging. Furthermore, views of patients and dysphagia clinicians when selecting trial outcomes have not been considered in the past, thus study results may have little importance to them. This study aims to develop an agreed standardised Core Outcome Set for Dysphagia Interventions in Parkinson’s disease (COS-DIP), systematically measured and reported as a minimum for all clinical trials. It will also comprise guidance on outcome definitions, outcome measures and time points of measurement.
The COS-DIP development will comprise five stages following established methodology: (1) a recent scoping review on all applied outcomes, their definitions, methods and time points of measurement in clinical trials in dysphagia in PD, (2) online surveys and focus groups with clinicians, patients, caregivers and family members to identify outcomes that are important to them, (3) an identified list of outcomes based on results of stage 1 and 2, (4) three round online Delphi survey with up to 200 key stakeholders to determine core outcomes and (5) two online consensus meetings with up to 40 representative key stakeholders to agree on all outcomes, definitions, methods and time points of measurement in the final COS-DIP.
Full ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee, School of Linguistic, Speech and Communication Sciences, Trinity College Dublin, on 15 May 2023 (HT27). Dissemination of the COS-DIP will be enhanced through presentations at (inter-) national conferences and through peer-reviewed, open access publications of related manuscripts. Lay and professional information sheets and infographics will be circulated through relevant patient and professional organisations and networks.
The COS-DIP study was registered prospectively with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database on 24 September 2021 (www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1942).
To measure coping strategies and associated psychological distress, burnout and work ability in hospital doctors in Ireland.
National cross-sectional study of randomised sample of trainee and consultant hospital doctors.
Irish publicly funded hospitals and residential institutions.
1749 doctors returned surveys (55% response rate).
Dependent variables were psychological distress (measured using 12-item General Health Questionnaire), burnout (Maslach Burnout Inventory) and work ability (single-item measure). Adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies (Brief Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced) were covariates.
The coping mechanism most frequently reported by this cohort was the adaptive strategy of active planning. Increased mean hours worked (MHW) (OR 1.02; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.03), a low Work Ability Score (OR 3.23; 95% CI 2.47 to 4.23) and maladaptive coping strategies (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.31) were significantly associated with psychological distress. Adaptive coping was associated with decreased psychological distress (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.00). Increased MHW (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.97 to 0.99), insufficient work ability (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.80) and maladaptive coping (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.85 to 0.89) were significantly associated with burnout. Increased MHW (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00) and maladaptive coping (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.92) were significantly associated with insufficient work ability.
Adaptive coping is associated with decreased psychological distress but does not mitigate the effect of increased work hours, which are associated with burnout, distress and insufficient work ability, regardless of a doctor’s coping style. The burden of psychological distress on doctors cannot be mitigated meaningfully unless workplace factors are addressed.
One in six people live with disability in Australia with higher levels of disability of people from diverse communities, such as those with culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds. In Australia, CALD refers to people from diverse ethnicity and cultures, nationalities, societal structures and religions that may or may not speak a language other than English. This study employs researchers with lived experience of disability and peer support to study the impact of peer support for people with disability, including people from CALD backgrounds, in two peer-led organisations in New South Wales (NSW) Australia.
This study uses participatory action research and inclusive research design with researchers with lived experience, having lived experience of disability and a peer in the disability community, leading the research.
Over three years, three different groups will be recruited through Community Disability Alliance Hunter (CDAH) and Diversity and Disability Alliance (DDAlliance): (1) peers with disability, (2) peer leaders with disability and (3) researchers with lived experience of disability and peer support. Data collection and creation methods include semistructured interviews, surveys and focus groups. Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis through the lens of the researchers with lived experience.
Ethical approval was granted by the University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committee (Approval No: H-2021-0088). Dissemination includes peer-reviewed publications, presentations at local, national and international conferences and written reports for user-led organisations, disability service providers, disability agencies and people with disability.
Almost all patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) in intensive care units (ICUs) require analgesia and sedation. The most widely used sedative drug is propofol, but there is uncertainty whether alpha2-agonists are superior. The alpha 2 agonists for sedation to produce better outcomes from critical illness (A2B) trial aims to determine whether clonidine or dexmedetomidine (or both) are clinically and cost-effective in MV ICU patients compared with usual care.
Adult ICU patients within 48 hours of starting MV, expected to require at least 24 hours further MV, are randomised in an open-label three arm trial to receive propofol (usual care) or clonidine or dexmedetomidine as primary sedative, plus analgesia according to local practice. Exclusions include patients with primary brain injury; postcardiac arrest; other neurological conditions; or bradycardia. Unless clinically contraindicated, sedation is titrated using weight-based dosing guidance to achieve a Richmond-Agitation-Sedation score of –2 or greater as early as considered safe by clinicians. The primary outcome is time to successful extubation. Secondary ICU outcomes include delirium and coma incidence/duration, sedation quality, predefined adverse events, mortality and ICU length of stay. Post-ICU outcomes include mortality, anxiety and depression, post-traumatic stress, cognitive function and health-related quality of life at 6-month follow-up. A process evaluation and health economic evaluation are embedded in the trial.
The analytic framework uses a hierarchical approach to maximise efficiency and control type I error. Stage 1 tests whether each alpha2-agonist is superior to propofol. If either/both interventions are superior, stages 2 and 3 testing explores which alpha2-agonist is more effective. To detect a mean difference of 2 days in MV duration, we aim to recruit 1437 patients (479 per group) in 40–50 UK ICUs.
The Scotland A REC approved the trial (18/SS/0085). We use a surrogate decision-maker or deferred consent model consistent with UK law. Dissemination will be via publications, presentations and updated guidelines.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03653832.
Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a rare genetic disease associated with multiple fractures throughout life. It is often treated with osteoporosis medications but their effectiveness at preventing fractures is unknown. The Treatment of Osteogenesis Imperfecta with Parathyroid Hormone and Zoledronic Acid trial will determine if therapy with teriparatide (TPTD) followed by zoledronic acid (ZA) can reduce the risk of clinical fractures in OI.
Individuals aged ≥18 years with a clinical diagnosis of OI are eligible to take part. At baseline, participants will undergo a spine X-ray, and have bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at the spine and hip. Information on previous fractures and previous bone targeted treatments will be collected. Questionnaires will be completed to assess pain and other aspects of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Participants will be randomised to receive a 2-year course of TPTD injections 20 µg daily followed by a single intravenous infusion of 5 mg ZA, or to receive standard care, which will exclude the use of bone anabolic drugs. Participants will be followed up annually, have a repeat DXA at 2 years and at the end of study. Spine X-rays will be repeated at the end of study. The duration of follow-up will range between 2 and 8 years. The primary endpoint will be new clinical fractures confirmed by X-ray or other imaging. Secondary endpoints will include participant reported fractures, BMD and changes in pain and HRQoL.
The study received ethical approval in December 2016. Following completion of the trial, a manuscript will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. The results will inform clinical practice by determining if TPTD/ZA can reduce the risk of fractures in OI compared with standard care.
by Silvia A. Purro, Michael Farmer, Elizabeth Noble, Claire J. Sarell, Megan Powell, Daniel Yip, Lauren Giggins, Leila Zakka, David X. Thomas, Mark Farrow, Andrew J. Nicoll, Dominic Walsh, John Collinge
Oligomers formed from monomers of the amyloid β-protein (Aβ) are thought to be central to the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Unsurprisingly for a complex disease, current mouse models of AD fail to fully mimic the clinical disease in humans. Moreover, results obtained in a given mouse model are not always reproduced in a different model. Cellular prion protein (PrPC) is now an established receptor for Aβ oligomers. However, studies of the Aβ-PrPC interaction in different mouse models have yielded contradictory results. Here we performed a longitudinal study assessing a range of biochemical and histological features in the commonly used J20 and APP-PS1 mouse models. Our analysis demonstrated that PrPC ablation had no effect on amyloid accumulation or oligomer production. However, we found that APP-PS1 mice had higher levels of oligomers, that these could bind to recombinant PrPC, and were recognised by the OC antibody which distinguishes parallel, in register fibrils. On the other hand, J20 mice had a lower level of Aβ oligomers, which did not interact with PrPC when tested in vitro and were OC-negative. These results suggest the two mouse models produce diverse Aβ assemblies that could interact with different targets, highlighting the necessity to characterise the conformation of the Aβ oligomers concomitantly with the toxic cascade elicited by them. Our results provide an explanation for the apparent contradictory results found in APP-PS1 mice and the J20 mouse line in regards to Aβ toxicity mediated by PrPC.
FreshRSS 