The mental health impacts of COVID-19 on frontline healthcare workers have been reported globally; however, there is limited evidence from low-income countries such as Ethiopia. We reviewed the literature to understand how COVID-19 impacted the mental health of frontline healthcare workers, including the associated risk and protective factors.

A scoping review of peer-reviewed research was conducted between 2020–2025 to explore the mental health and well-being of frontline healthcare workers in Ethiopia during COVID-19. The process adhered to the guidelines for data extraction outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Our search identified 35 studies, of which 29 studies were included in the final synthesis.

Three online databases, PubMed, Web of Science and PsycInfo, were systematically searched for data.

Studies were considered for inclusion in the review if they focused on mental health conditions and psychosocial well-being among healthcare workers during COVID-19 in Ethiopia. Studies were only included if published in English and excluded if they were conference abstracts, case studies, reviews, commentaries, contained incomplete data or lacked variables of interest.

Data extraction was conducted manually by two reviewers by using a data extraction sheet created in Excel.

Most frontline healthcare workers experienced symptoms of insomnia, psychological distress, stress, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and depression during COVID-19. Female frontline healthcare workers, nurses, midwives and laboratory technicians reported higher rates of adverse mental health outcomes. Our results found that being married, living together with a spouse and having a high educational level were risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes.

The mental health and well-being of frontline healthcare workers is at risk during a global health crisis; however, there is a limited understanding of how to protect the mental health of frontline healthcare workers in low-income countries, such as Ethiopia, at such a critical time. Additional research is needed to better inform mental health preparedness interventions for frontline healthcare workers in these contexts, particularly given predictions of another pandemic occurring within the next decade.

Fibrosing interstitial lung disease (F-ILD) are a heterogeneous group of diseases with multiple subtypes. Both idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and other ILDs associated with a risk of developing progressive pulmonary fibrosis (PPF) are subtypes of this category. A multidisciplinary team discussion, including a chest high-resolution CT (HRCT), is usually considered the gold standard for diagnosis of F-ILD. Repeated HRCT is one of several established methods to assess progression and thus development of PPF, but it is associated with substantial costs and radiation exposure. Thoracic ultrasound (TUS) and other ultrasound (US) methods have emerged as radiation-free methods for both diagnosing and monitoring disease severity in F-ILD. Yet, consistent knowledge on the use of different TUS- and US methods in patients with F-ILD is limited.

The LORD study is a prospective cohort study conducted in participants with F-ILD at a tertiary ILD centre in Denmark. Physiological testing and patient-related outcome measures, together with TUS- and US examinations, will be performed at inclusion, after 6 and 12 months. The correlations between these assessments will be evaluated. HRCT will be conducted between 3 months prior to and 1 month after baseline, and after 1 year. At least 34 participants will be included.

The protocol was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (journal number: 22/45135) and the Science Ethics Committee for the Region of Southern Denmark (journal number: S-20220036). Results will be published in peer-reviewed international journals and will be presented at an international congress.

NCT06844331.

Cannabis-based medicine may alleviate breathlessness. This study will investigate whether dronabinol, a synthetic form of ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (⁹-THC), reduces breathlessness in patients with severe and very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (sCOPD) compared to placebo.

This single-centre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial will enrol 30 patients with sCOPD and persistent breathlessness despite optimal treatment. Patients will be recruited from a pulmonary outpatient clinic in Denmark over 24 months. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) will receive either dronabinol or placebo for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout, before crossing over to the other treatment for 4 weeks. Exclusion criteria include ongoing infection, substance abuse and significant comorbidities. Primary outcome is breathing discomfort or unpleasantness measured using the 0–10 Numerical Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes include lung function (forced expiratory volume in one second), hair cortisol concentrations, functional tests, plasma THC blood concentrations and questionnaires assessing breathlessness, activity, quality of life, anxiety and depression. Continuous monitoring of vital signs, activity and sleep will be performed using a Garmin Venu 3 smartwatch. Data will be entered into electronic case report forms and monitored by the Good Clinical Practice (GCP) unit in Odense.

This will be the largest randomised, double-blinded, crossover trial to investigate dronabinol in patients with COPD and will provide new knowledge on the efficacy and safety.

Written informed consents will be obtained from study patients. The study has been approved by the Danish Medicines Agency (case number: 2023010659) and the medical research ethics committees (case number: 2301456). It is registered in the European Union Clinical Trials Registry (2024-513593-22-00) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06473701). The trial follows the Declaration of Helsinki II and International Council for Harmonisation-GCP guidelines. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications.

The European Union Clinical Trials Registry (2024-513593-22-00) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06473701).

PRELUCA is a randomised, intervention, non-inferiority study designed to use real-time, longitudinal circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) measurements to evaluate the efficacy of immunotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary outcome is overall survival between the two groups: the standard of care group (computer tomography scan evaluation) and intervention group (ctDNA evaluation).

The inclusion and exclusion criteria align with European Society for Medical Oncology treatment guidelines and permit broad inclusion of NSCLC patients, ensuring ‘real-world’ representativeness. The study uses a tumour-informed method, using baseline next generation sequencing analyses to design patient-specific droplet digital PCR assays, which are run with collected blood samples 1 week prior to the intended treatment, enabling real-time evaluation via ctDNA Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours.

Inclusion began in July 2023 and patients are now being actively included in five locations across Denmark. Approval by The Committee on Health Research Ethics of Region Zealand was gained on 4 May 2023.

NCT05889247.

Post-traumatic neck pain is common, representing a substantial human and societal burden. About 15%–25% of individuals involved in an accident causing whiplash continue to experience moderate-to-severe symptoms and functional impairment 1 year post-trauma. Factors such as age, high pain intensity, hypersensitivity to pain and early post-traumatic hyperarousal are associated with persistent neck pain. However, multiple questions remain unanswered regarding how best to improve early care. As such, research on recovery patterns (including indicators for health economic burden) and their predictors is still needed, including biomarkers for pre-traumatic and peri-traumatic stress, and the value of early prediction tools.

This prospective cohort study will include 100 participants (≥18 years) suffering from post-traumatic neck pain sustained within 72 hours of an accident. At baseline (a combination of inclusion and 1 week assessment), eligible participants will undergo a thorough evaluation, including assessment of descriptive characteristics, self-reported variables (eg, pain, disability, sleep quality and post-traumatic stress), biomarkers (eg, heart rate variability (HRV) and hair cortisol) and clinical tests (eg, cervical range of motion). Follow-up will be conducted at 3, 6 and 12 months post-trauma. Further, register data (eg, data on labour market attachment) will be added for the period. Among other methods, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and multivariable regression analyses will be used to evaluate performance and associations of the prediction tools and their associations with measures of HRV.

The sample size calculation is based on previous studies, estimating that 15% of participants will develop moderate-to-severe ongoing symptoms. Using a conservative estimate, 64 participants are needed to achieve a statistical power of 90% with an expected area under the curve of 0.80. Accounting for a 25% loss to follow-up, 80 participants are required. For regression analysis, 100 participants will be included. The prediction tool will be validated using ROC analysis, sensitivity and specificity. Logistic regression models will be performed with and without biomarkers and pain sensitivity. Health economic costs will be compared across groups. Multivariable regression will examine the link between HRV and post-traumatic stress disorder, adjusting for confounders and a moderation analysis will assess hair cortisol as a potential moderator.

The study is approved by the Regional Committee on Health Research Ethics of Southern Denmark (S-20230037). Due to the acute nature of recruitment, the study design does not allow for a 24-hour reflection period; however, this approach has been approved by the Committee.

Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated through non-scientific outlets, including patient and professional publications, press releases and social media. If effective, workshops for clinicians will be organised. Results will be published regardless of outcome, with coauthorships following ICMJE guidelines.

NCT06176209.

There is limited evidence on how to effectively treat individuals from marginalised populations with dependence on amphetamine and/or methamphetamine (collectively referred to hereafter as amphetamine dependence). The disease burden is extremely high in this population, especially related to psychiatric comorbidities, cardiovascular complications, injection-related infections and poor social functioning. ATLAS4Dependence is a multi-centre randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that will investigate the effectiveness and safety of substitution treatment with dextroamphetamine compared with placebo in people with amphetamine dependence.

The trial will recruit 226 adult patients in several outpatient clinics in Norway.Inclusion criteria comprise individuals with amphetamine dependence, defined as use on three or more days per week during the past 28 days, who currently inject or have formerly injected drugs. This includes individuals both with and without comorbid opioid dependence, as well as those currently receiving or not receiving opioid agonist treatment. Participants will be randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either dextroamphetamine or placebo for 12 weeks. Flexible doses within the range of 30–120 mg daily will be provided based on individual assessments. The participants in both arms will be offered standard psychosocial and medical follow-up in accordance with current clinical practice. The endpoint assessments will be conducted at 12 weeks with weekly self-reports and safety assessments and a follow-up assessment at 52 weeks. The primary objective of the study is to assess the impact of 12 weeks daily prescribed oral dextroamphetamine versus placebo on the use of illicit amphetamines as well as on the total amount of amphetamines used (including both illicit and prescribed sources). Secondary outcomes are the differences between the groups at 12 weeks regarding psychological distress, symptoms of psychosis, quality of life, cardiovascular risk factors, injection-related infections, executive functioning, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder-related symptoms, sleep, violence risk, fatigue, symptoms of craving and withdrawal, treatment retention, days of use of illicit amphetamines and use at 4 weeks and 8 weeks during the intervention period, use of other illicit substances and alcohol, as well as a cost-effectiveness analysis (using private economy, criminal activity and health service utilisation) and a qualitative approach to assess overall experiences with the study intervention. Analysis and reporting will follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. All tests will be two-sided. Descriptive results and the estimated effectiveness will be presented with 95% CIs. The difference between the groups at the primary time point (at the end of the 12-week trial) will be assessed using ² test (for use of illicit amphetamines measured by monthly urine tests) and Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) (for weekly self-reported total amount of amphetamines). Analyses for the primary endpoint will be undertaken on an intention-to-treat basis and reported on as such, but sensitivity analyses with per protocol analyses will also be presented.

The study is approved by European Medicines Agency, Clinical Trial Information System (CTIS). Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients. Study results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals.

CTIS 2023-510404-44-00.

To develop, evaluate and validate the musculoskeletal health climate questionnaire (MHCQ), a multidimensional questionnaire for measuring musculoskeletal health climate.

Cross-sectional test–retest study including systematic scale development and psychometric validation.

The questionnaire was developed following the best practice recommendations for scale development outlined by Boateng et al (2017), including item development, scale development and scale evaluation with input from experts, stakeholders and the target population. Validation was conducted among employees in three physically demanding occupations in Denmark (care workers, slaughterhouse workers and residential painters), where a total of 1420 participants were recruited through labour unions. Of these, 796 completed the retest survey 30 days later. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA, respectively), internal consistency (Cronbach’s α), test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC)) and SEM were used to assess the psychometric properties. Criterion validity was examined via associations with pain points, pain medication use and sickness absence. Construct validity was assessed using correlations with the prevent for work questionnaire (P4Wq).

EFA and CFA supported a four-factor model (supervisor’s practices, workplace practices, worker involvement practices and workers’ pain practices) with good to excellent fit (comparative fit index, 0.96–0.99; root mean square error of approximation, 0.04–0.06). All scales showed high internal consistency (α=0.80–0.88) and excellent test–retest reliability (ICC=0.86–0.92). Associations with musculoskeletal outcomes supported criterion validity. Weak to moderate correlations with the P4Wq subscales (rho

The MHCQ provides a validated, multidimensional tool to assess workplace climate related to musculoskeletal health. It can support workplace assessments and prevention efforts by capturing shared perceptions of leadership, support, involvement and pain-related norms. Further longitudinal research and the use of objective outcome data are needed to assess predictive validity and strengthen the instrument’s applicability across settings.

Although poor mental health among young people has been increasing in the past decades, many young people are reluctant to use traditional mental healthcare. To cater to the needs of young people, various youth-friendly treatment options have been developed. These include the youth-friendly health service (YFHS) standards put forth by the WHO in 2012 and the integrated youth services (IYS) for mental health developed in certain countries globally. However, no synthesis of the effect of these services on youth mental health has been conducted. The aim of the proposed study is to conduct a systematic review of the effect of mental health treatments conducted within YFHS and IYS clinics. The primary research question is what effect mental health interventions given at ‘youth-friendly’ clinics for treating mental health, such as IYS and YFHS, have on the mental health and quality of life (QoL) of young people?

A preliminary search for other reviews on the topic was conducted during the first half of 2024, after which a protocol of the present study was registered in PROSPERO. In May 2024, a search was carried out in the PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science databases, which gave references for 12 738 papers to be screened for inclusion in the review, and a follow-up search was carried out in April 2025, yielding a further 2182 references. For inclusion, studies must have participants between 12 and 25 years of age; interventions be given at clinics designed to be ‘youth-friendly’ or given at an IYS; control condition, if any, consisting of standard care or waiting list; outcomes must be mental health symptomology or QoL. To be included, studies must be published from 2012 and onwards. Screening of titles and abstracts in the initial search was carried out independently by two reviewers. Screening of studies found in the follow-up search and in the reference lists of included articles will be carried out in the same way. Data analysis of the initial search was conducted in the latter half of 2024, while final data analysis including the results from the follow-up search is ongoing. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools will be used to assess bias of included articles, and certainty of the evidence will be evaluated according to the GRADE methodology. A meta-analysis of the results will be performed if a sufficient amount of homogenous data is found; otherwise, a synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted.

The proposed review may form a valuable synthesis of the state of the art of treatment options catering to young people. Investigating the effectiveness of YFHS or IYS in treating young people’s mental health may inform future directions for development and research. The present study does not need ethical approval, since only previously published, ethically approved data are used in the current study. The findings of the study will be disseminated through submissions to peer-reviewed journals and international conferences, as well as disseminated within the Swedish YFHS community.

ID nr CRD42024528687.

Distal radius fractures account for one-fifth of all fractures in the active elderly population and may cause chronic pain, loss of hand function and reduced work productivity, imposing a significant socioeconomic burden. Most are initially treated with closed reduction and casting, but 30% subsequently require surgery due to insufficient realignment. The current approaches for analgesia for closed reduction are suboptimal. A brachial plexus nerve block provides complete pain relief and muscle relaxation distal to the elbow, potentially creating better conditions for realignment of the fractured bone ends. This may ultimately translate into reduced need for surgery and result in better functional outcomes and fewer complications compared to a haematoma block, which is the current standard care in Denmark.

The BLOCK Trial is an investigator-initiated, parallel-group, allocation-concealed, outcome assessor and analyst-blinded, superiority, randomised, controlled, clinical multicentre trial performed at 11 Danish emergency departments. Eligible adult patients with a distal radius fracture who need closed reduction will be included and allocated 1:1 to either an ultrasound-guided brachial plexus nerve block or a haematoma block. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with distal radius fracture surgery 90 days after closed reduction. We will include 1716 participants to detect or discard a relative risk reduction of surgery of 20%. Secondary outcomes include treatment-related complications, patient-reported wrist function, pain during closed reduction and proportion of patients with unacceptable radiographic fracture position immediately after closed reduction.

The trial is approved by the Danish Medicines Agency and the Danish Research Ethics Committees (EU CT number: 2024-512191-35-00). All results will be summarised on www.theblocktrial.com, clinicaltrials.gov and euclinicaltrials.eu after publication. Primary and secondary outcome results from 0 to 90 days will be presented in the main article and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. Results from outcomes on the 12-month follow-up will be presented separately.

NCT06678438.