In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), food insecurity and undernutrition disproportionately affect women of reproductive age, infants and young children. The disease burden from undernutrition in these vulnerable sections of societies remains a major concern in LMICs. Biomass fuel use for cooking is also common in LMICs. Empirical evidence from high-income countries indicates that early life nutritional and environmental exposures and their effect on infant lung function are important; however, data from sub-Saharan Africa are scarce.
To estimate the association between infant lung function and household food insecurity, energy poverty and maternal dietary diversity.
Pregnant women will be recruited in an existing Health and Demographic Surveillance Site in South-West Uganda. Household food insecurity, sources and uses of energy, economic measures and maternal dietary diversity will be collected during pregnancy and after birth. Primary health outcomes will be infant lung function determined by tidal breath flow and volume analysis at 6–10 weeks of age. Infant weight and length will also be collected.
A household Food Consumption Score and Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women (MDD-W) indicator will be constructed. The involved cost of dietary diversity will be estimated based on MDD-W. The association between household level and mothers’ food access indicators and infant lung function will be evaluated using regression models. The Multidimensional Energy Poverty Index (MEPI) will be estimated and used as an indicator of households’ environmental exposures. The association between household MEPI and infant lung function will be assessed using econometric models.
Ethical approvals have been obtained from Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (18-059), the Uganda Virus Research Institute Ethics Committee (097/2018) and Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (SS 4846). Study results will be shared with participants, policy-makers, other stakeholders and published in peer-reviewed journals.
To coproduce a school-based protocol and examine acceptability and feasibility of collecting saliva samples for genetic studies from secondary/high school students for the purpose of mental health research.
Protocol coproduction and mixed-methods feasibility pilot.
Secondary schools in Wales, UK.
Students aged 11–13 years.
Coproduced research protocol including an interactive science workshop delivered in schools; school, parental and student recruitment rates; adherence to protocol and adverse events; ability to extract and genotype saliva samples; student enjoyment of the science workshop and qualitative analysis of teacher focus groups on acceptability and feasibility.
Five secondary schools participated in the coproduction phase, and three of these took part in the research study (eligible sample n=868 students). Four further schools were subsequently approached, but none participated. Parental opt-in consent was received from 98 parents (11.3% eligible sample), three parents (0.3%) actively refused and responses were not received for 767 (88.4%) parents. We obtained saliva samples plus consent for data linkage for 79 students. Only one sample was of insufficient quality to be genotyped. The science workshop received positive feedback from students. Feedback from teachers showed that undertaking research like this in schools is viewed as acceptable in principle, potentially feasible, but that there are important procedural barriers to be overcome. Key recommendations include establishing close working relationships between the research team and school classroom staff, together with improved methods for communicating with and engaging parents.
There are major challenges to undertaking large-scale genetic mental health research in secondary schools. Such research may be acceptable in principle, and in practice DNA collected from saliva in classrooms is of sufficient quality. However, key challenges that must be overcome include ensuring representative recruitment of schools and sufficient parental engagement where opt-in parental consent is required.
The purpose of this study is to assess the ability of two new ECG markers (Regional Repolarisation Instability Index (R2I2) and Peak Electrical Restitution Slope) to predict sudden cardiac death (SCD) or ventricular arrhythmia (VA) events in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy undergoing implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention indication.
Multicentre Investigation of Novel Electrocardiogram Risk markers in Ventricular Arrhythmia prediction is a prospective, open label, single blinded, multicentre observational study to establish the efficacy of two ECG biomarkers in predicting VA risk. 440 participants with ischaemic cardiomyopathy undergoing routine first time implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation for primary prevention indication are currently being recruited. An electrophysiological (EP) study is performed using a non-invasive programmed electrical stimulation protocol via the implanted device. All participants will undergo the EP study hence no randomisation is required. Participants will be followed up over a minimum of 18 months and up to 3 years. The first patient was recruited in August 2016 and the study will be completed at the final participant follow-up visit. The primary endpoint is ventricular fibrillation or sustained ventricular tachycardia
Ethical approval has been granted by Research Ethics Committees Northern Ireland (reference no. 16/NI/0069). The results will inform the design of a definitive Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT). Dissemination will include peer reviewed journal articles reporting the qualitative and quantitative results, as well as presentations at conferences and lay summaries.
Commentary on: Dennis JM, McGovern AP, Vollmer SJ, et al. Improving survival of critical care patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in England: a National cohort study, March to June 2020. Crit Care Med 2021;49:209–14
It is essential that clinicians understand the evolving outcomes of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in order to improve services and undertake further, targeted research. In parallel with research evaluating the treatment of COVID-19, future research must address the impact of care delivery and organisation on patient-centred outcomes.
It is essential that clinicians understand the evolving outcomes of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in order to improve services and undertake further, targeted research.
In parallel with research evaluating the treatment of COVID-19, future research must address the impact of care delivery and organisation on patient-centred outcomes.
During the first 12 months, the COVID-19 pandemic affected more than 87 million individuals worldwide and caused almost 2 million deaths.
To identify that workarounds (defined as “informal temporary practices for handling exceptions to normal procedures or workflow”) by nurses using information technology potentially compromise medication safety. Therefore, we aimed to identify potential risk factors associated with workarounds performed by nurses in Barcode‐assisted Medication Administration in hospitals.
Medication errors occur during the prescribing, distribution and administration of medication. Errors could harm patients and be a tragedy for both nurses and medical doctors involved. Interventions to prevent errors have been developed, including those based on information technology. To cope with shortcomings in information technology‐based interventions as Barcode‐assisted Medication Administration, nurses perform workarounds. Identification of workarounds in information technology is essential to implement better‐designed software and processes which fit the nurse workflow.
We used the data from our previous prospective observational study, performed in four general hospitals in the Netherlands using Barcode techniques, to administer medication to inpatients.
Data were collected from 2014–2016. The disguised observation was used to gather information on potential risk factors and workarounds. The outcome was a medication administration with one or more workarounds. Logistic mixed models were used to determine the association between potential risk factors and workarounds. The STROBE checklist was used for reporting our data.
We included 5,793 medication administrations among 1,230 patients given by 272 nurses. In 3,633 (62.7%) of the administrations, one or more workarounds were observed. In the multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with workarounds were the medication round at 02 p.m.–06 p.m. (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.05–2.45) and 06 p.m.–10 p.m. (adjusted OR: 3.60, 95% CI: 2.11–6.14) versus the morning shift 06 a.m.–10 a.m., the workdays Monday (adjusted OR: 2.59, 95% CI: 1.51–4.44), Wednesday (adjusted OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.2–3.07) and Saturday (adjusted OR: 2.24, 95% CI: 1.31–3.84) versus Sunday, the route of medication, nonoral (adjusted OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.05–1.57) versus the oral route of drug administration, the Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical classification‐coded medication “other” (consisting of the irregularly used Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical classes [D, G, H, L, P, V, Y, Z]) (adjusted OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.05–2.11) versus Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical class A (alimentary tract and metabolism), and the patient–nurse ratio ≥6–1 (adjusted OR: 5.61, 95% CI: 2.9–10.83) versus ≤5–1.
We identified several potential risk factors associated with workarounds performed by nurses that could be used to target future improvement efforts in Barcode‐assisted Medication Administration.
Nurses administering medication in hospitals using Barcode‐assisted Medication Administration frequently perform workarounds, which may compromise medication safety. In particular, nurse workload and the patient–nurse ratio could be the focus for improvement measures as these are the most clearly modifiable factors identified in this study.