Vertigo is a prevalent and burdensome symptom. More than 80% of patients with vertigo are primarily treated by their general practitioner (GP) and are never referred to a medical specialist. Despite this therapeutic responsibility, the GP’s diagnostic toolkit has serious limitations. All recommended tests lack empirical evidence, because a diagnostic accuracy study on vestibular disorders (‘How well does test x discriminate between patients with or without target condition y?’) has never been performed in general practice. The VERtigo DIagnosis study aims to fill this gap.

We will perform a diagnostic accuracy study on vertigo of primary vestibular origin in general practice to assess the discriminative ability of history taking and physical examination. We will compare all index tests with a respective reference standard. We will focus on five target conditions that account for more than 95% of vertigo diagnoses in general practice: (1) benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, (2) vestibular neuritis, (3) Ménière’s disease, (4) vestibular migraine (VM) and (5) central causes other than VM. As these five target conditions have a different pathophysiology and lack one generally accepted gold standard, we will use consensus diagnosis as a construct reference standard. Data for each patient, including history, physical examination and additional tests as recommended by experts in an international Delphi procedure, will be recorded on a standardised form and independently reviewed by a neurologist and otorhinolaryngologist. For each patient, the reviewers have to decide about the presence/absence of each target condition. We will calculate sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios and diagnostic ORs, followed by decision rules for each target condition.

The study obtained approval from the Vrije Universiteit Medical Center Medical Ethical Review Committee (reference: 2022.0817—NL83111.029.22). We will publish our findings in peer-reviewed international journals.

ISRCTN97250704.

The objective of this study was to explore determinants of variation in overall caretaker satisfaction with curative care for sick children under the age of 5 in five low-income and middle-income countries.

A pooled cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the Service Provision Assessment.

We used data collected in five countries (Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Malawi and Tanzania) between 2013 and 2018.

Respondents were 13 149 caretakers of children under the age of 5 who consulted for a sick child visit.

The outcome variable was whether the child’s caretaker was very satisfied versus more or less satisfied or not satisfied overall. Predictors pertained to child and caretaker characteristics, health system foundations and process of care (eg, care competence, user experience). Two-level logistic regression models were used to assess the extent to which these categories of variables explained variation in satisfaction. The main analyses used pooled data; country-level analyses were also performed.

Process of care, including user experience, explained the largest proportion of variance in caretaker satisfaction (13.8%), compared with child and caretaker characteristics (0.9%) and health system foundations (3.8%). The odds of being very satisfied were lower for caretakers who were not given adequate explanation (OR: 0.56, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.67), who had a problem with medication availability (OR: 0.31, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.35) or who encountered a problem with the cost of services (OR: 0.57, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.66). The final model explained only 21.8% of the total variance. Country-level analyses showed differences in variance explained and in associations with predictors.

Better process of care, especially user experience, should be prioritised for its benefit regarding caretaker satisfaction. Unmeasured factors explained the majority of variation in caretaker satisfaction and should be explored in future studies.

Our aim was to investigate the association between early environmental factors and the development of coeliac disease (CeD) in adolescents, recruited from a cohort nested in the Danish National Birth Cohort (DNBC).

The study was designed as a prospective cohort study, nested in DNBC

The Glutenfunen cohort comprises 1266 participants, nested in DNBC. All participants were screened for CeD, and in total, 28 cases of biopsy proven CeD were identified. Data about breastfeeding, timing of introduction to solid food in infancy, use of antibiotics, infections and symptoms were parentally reported prospectively at 6 months and 18 months, respectively. We estimated ORs and 95% CIs of CeD in adolescents using logistic regression analysis.

Viral croup reported at 18 months of age was associated with CeD in adolescents with an OR of 3.2 (95% CI: 1.2 to 8.7). Furthermore, otitis media also reported at 18 months of age was linked with CeD with an OR of 3.2 (95% CI: 1.5 to 7.3). We were not able to find any statistical associations between CeD and breastfeeding, frequency of infections, parentally reported use of antibiotic and timing of solid foods.

In this study, we present an overview of the relationship between early environmental factors and occurrence of CeD in adolescents. Our findings, despite limitations due to a limited number of cases of CeD, suggest a role of viral infections in the pathogenesis of CeD

To generate qualitative data on the views of Occupational Therapists and Physiotherapists about why people do not receive the Royal College of Physicians’ recommended minimum of 45 minutes (min) of daily therapy after stroke, in order to inform a Delphi study.

Focus group study.

Stroke services in the South of England.

A total of nine participants, in two groups, including therapists covering inpatient and Early Supported Discharge (ESD) services with awareness of the 45 min guideline.

Thematic analysis of focus group data identified five factors that influence the amount of therapy a person receives: The Person (with stroke), Individual Therapist, Stroke Multidisciplinary Team, the Organisation and the Guideline. Study findings suggest that the reasons why a person does not receive the therapy recommendation in inpatient and ESD services relate to either the suitability of the guideline for the person with stroke, or the ability of the service to deliver the guideline.

This study provides evidence for possible reasons why some people do not receive a minimum of 45 minutes of therapy, 5 days per week, related to (1) the suitability of the guideline for people with stroke and (2) services’ ability to deliver this amount of intervention. These two factors are related; therapists decide who should receive therapy and how much in the context of (a) resource availability and (b) people’s need and the benefit they will experience. The study findings, combined with the findings from other studies, will be used to initiate a Delphi study, which will establish consensus among therapists regarding the reasons why some people do not receive the guideline amount of therapy.

To gain a consensus among therapists for reasons why a person who had a stroke may not receive the Royal College of Physicians’ recommended minimum of 45 min of daily therapy.

Three-round remote e-Delphi study.

National study, based in the UK.

Occupational therapists and physiotherapists with experience of delivering therapy after stroke and awareness of the 45 min guideline.

Forty-five therapists consented to participate in the study. Thirty-five (78%) completed round one, 29 of 35 (83%) completed round 2 and 26 of 29 (90%) completed round three. A consensus (75%) was reached for 32 statements. Reasons why a person may not receive 45 min were related to the suitability of the guideline for the individual (based on factors like therapy tolerance or medical status) or the capability of the service to provide the intervention. In addition to the statements for which there was a consensus, 32 concepts did not reach a consensus. Specifically, there was a lack of consensus concerning the suitability of the guideline for people receiving Early Supported Discharge (ESD) services and a lack of agreement about whether people who need more than 45 min of therapy actually receive it.

Some people do not receive 45 min of therapy as they are considered unsuitable for it and some do not receive it due to services’ inability to provide it. It is unclear which reasons for guideline non-achievement are most common. Future research should focus on why the guideline is not achieved in ESD, and why people who require more than 45 min may not receive it. This could contribute to practical guidance for therapists to optimise therapy delivery for people after stroke.