Management guidelines for low back pain (LBP) recommend exclusion of serious pathology, followed by simple analgesics, superficial heat therapy, early mobilisation and patient education. An audit in a large metropolitan hospital emergency department (ED) revealed high rates of non-recommended medication prescription for LBP (65% of patients prescribed opioids, 17% prescribed benzodiazepines), high inpatient admission rates (20% of ED LBP patients), delayed patient mobilisation (on average 6 hours) and inadequate patient education (48% of patients). This study aims to improve medication prescription for LBP in this ED by implementing an intervention shown previously to improve guideline-based management of LBP in other Australian EDs.

A controlled interrupted time series study will evaluate the intervention in the ED before (24 weeks; 20 March 2023–3 September 2023) and after (24 weeks; 27 November 2024–12 May 2024) implementation (12 weeks; 4 September 2023–26 November 2023), additionally comparing findings with another ED in the same health service. The multicomponent implementation strategy uses a formalised clinical flow chart to support clinical decision-making and aims to change clinician behaviour, through clinician education, provision of alternative treatments, educational resources, audit and feedback, supported by implementation champions. The primary outcome is the percentage of LBP patients prescribed non-recommended medications (opioids, benzodiazepines and/or gabapentinoids), assessed via routinely collected ED data. Anticipated sample size is 2000 patients (n=1000 intervention, n=1000 control) based on average monthly admissions of LBP presentations in the EDs. Secondary outcomes include inpatient admission rate, time to mobilisation, provision of patient education, imaging requests, representation to the ED within 6 months and healthcare costs. In nested qualitative research, we will study ED clinicians’ perceptions of the implementation and identify how benefits can be sustained over time.

This study received ethical approval from the Metro North Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/2022/MNHA/87995). Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences and educational workshops.

ACTRN12622001536752.

To examine the associations of cardiorespiratory fitness (VO₂ max) and muscular strength with indicators related to the risk scale, such as perceived competence, sensation seeking, competitiveness, risk taking and risk perception in sports.

Cross-sectional study.

High schools from the Region of Murcia (Spain).

Three-hundred-and-seventeen adolescents participated (mean age: 13.69±1.2 years old).

Body mass, body height, Course-Navette test, upper limb strength and psychoeducational factors that determine the propensity towards sports accidents in school children, the Sports Accident Propensity Scale were evaluated. It was performance t-test for independent samples, stepwise multiple linear regression models and a multiple mediation analysis.

The analysis showed significant differences with respect to sex in height, VO₂ max, handgrip strength and in all factors of the questionnaire (p=0.02-2 max, strength in the handgrip test and age showed a higher score in factors 1 and 3. Higher scores in factor 2 were associated with better VO₂ max and strength in handgrip test. Youngers and better values of strength in the handgrip showed higher score in factors 4 and 5. The mediation analysis with two mediating variables (handgrip strength and VO₂ max) showed a significant indirect effect. When handgrip strength and VO₂ max were included in the equations, the association between sex and each factor ceased to be significant.

This study highlights the potential benefits of muscular strength (handgrip) and VO₂ max in the perceived risk scale, and the variable of age on this.

Clinical trial: NCT05544370 (pre-results).

Malignant mesothelioma is a rapidly lethal cancer that has been increasing at an epidemic rate over the last three decades. Targeted therapies for mesothelioma have been lacking. A previous study called MiST1 (NCT03654833), evaluated the efficacy of Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition in mesothelioma. This study met its primary endpoint with 15% of patients having durable responses exceeding 1 year. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate PARP inhibitors in relapsed mesothelioma patients, where options are limited. Niraparib is the PARP inhibitor used in NERO.

NERO is a multicentre, two-arm, open-label UK randomised phase II trial designed to evaluate the efficacy of PARP inhibition in relapsed mesothelioma. 84 patients are being recruited. NERO is not restricted by line of therapy; however, eligible participants must have been treated with an approved platinum based systemic therapy. Participants will be randomised 2:1, stratified according to histology and response to prior platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive either active symptom control (ASC) and niraparib or ASC alone, for up to 24 weeks. Participants will be treated until disease progression, withdrawal, death or development of significant treatment limiting toxicity. Participants randomised to niraparib will receive 200 or 300 mg daily in a 3-weekly cycle. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival, where progression is determined by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) or RECIST 1.1; investigator reported progression; or death from any cause, whichever comes first. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, best overall response, 12-week and 24 week disease control, duration of response, treatment compliance and safety/tolerability. If NERO shows niraparib to be safe and biologically effective, it may lead to future late phase randomised controlled trials in relapsed mesothelioma.

The study received ethical approval from London-Hampstead Research Ethics Committee on 06-May-2022 (22/LO/0281). Data from all centres will be analysed together and published as soon as possible.

ISCRTN16171129; NCT05455424.