Homecare is a critical component of the ongoing restructuring of healthcare worldwide, given the shift from institution- to home-based care. The homecare evidence base still contains significant gaps: There is a lack of knowledge regarding quality and safety work and interventions. This study explores how home healthcare professionals perceive and use the concept of risk to guide them in providing high-quality healthcare while maintaining resilience.

The study design is a qualitative multiple case study. The phenomena explored were risk perception, sensemaking and adaptations of care delivered to patients in their homes. Inductive content analysis was conducted.

The study was conducted in three Norwegian municipalities. Each municipality was defined as a single case.

Interviews with healthcare professionals were performed both individually and in focus groups of three to five persons. 19 interviews with 35 informants were conducted: 11 individual semistructured interviews and 8 focus groups.

Four themes were identified: ‘professionalism is constantly prioritising and aligning care based on here-and-now observations’ ‘teamwork feels safe and enhances quality’ ‘taking responsibility for system risk’ and ‘reluctantly accepting the extended expectations from society’.

To make sense of risk when aspiring for high-quality care in everyday work, the healthcare professionals in this sample mainly used their clinical gaze, gut feeling and experience to detect subtle changes in the patients’ condition. Assessing risk information, not only individually but also as a team, was reportedly crucial for high-quality care. Healthcare professionals emphasised the well-being, safety and soundness of the patients when acting on risk information. They felt obliged to act on their gut feeling, moral compass and clinical understanding of quality.

To investigate the association between opioid replacement therapy (ORT) and benzodiazepine (BZD) coprescription and all-cause mortality compared with the prescription of ORT alone.

Population-based cohort study.

Scotland, UK.

Participants were people prescribed ORT between January 2010 and end of December 2020 aged 18 years or above.

All-cause mortality, drug-related deaths and non-drug related deaths.

ORT continuous treatment duration.

Cox regression with time-varying covariates.

During follow-up, 5776 of 46 899 participants died: 1398 while on coprescription and 4378 while on ORT only. The mortality per 100 person years was 3.11 during coprescription and 2.34 on ORT only. The adjusted HR for all-cause mortality was 1.17 (1.10 to 1.24). The adjusted HR for drug-related death was 1.14 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.24) and the hazard for death not classified as drug-related was 1.19 (95% CI, 1.09 to 1.30).

Coprescription of BZDs in ORT was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality, although with a small effect size than the international literature. Coprescribing was also associated with longer retention in treatment. Risk from BZD coprescription needs to be balanced against the risk from illicit BZDs and unplanned treatment discontinuation. A randomised controlled trial is urgently needed to provide a clear clinical direction.

NCT04622995.

The Bronchiolitis Endotracheal Surfactant Study (BESS) is a randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy of endo-tracheal surfactant therapy for critically ill infants with bronchiolitis. To explore acceptability of BESS, including approach to consent within a limited time frame, we explored parent and staff experiences of trial involvement in the first two bronchiolitis seasons to inform subsequent trial conduct.

A mixed-method embedded study involving a site staff survey, questionnaires and interviews with parents approached about BESS.

Fourteen UK paediatric intensive care units.

Of the 179 parents of children approached to take part in BESS, 75 parents (of 69 children) took part in the embedded study. Of these, 55/69 (78%) completed a questionnaire, and 15/69 (21%) were interviewed. Thirty-eight staff completed a questionnaire.

Parents and staff found the trial acceptable. All constructs of the Adapted Theoretical Framework of Acceptability were met. Parents viewed surfactant as being low risk and hoped their child’s participation would help others in the future. Although parents supported research without prior consent in studies of time critical interventions, they believed there was sufficient time to consider this trial. Parents recommended that prospective informed consent should continue to be sought for BESS. Many felt that the time between the consent process and intervention being administered took too long and should be ‘streamlined’ to avoid delays in administration of trial interventions. Staff described how the training and trial processes worked well, yet patients were missed due to lack of staff to deliver the intervention, particularly at weekends.

Parents and staff supported BESS trial and highlighted aspects of the protocol, which should be refined, including a streamlined informed consent process. Findings will be useful to inform proportionate approaches to consent in future paediatric trials where there is a short timeframe for consent discussions.

ISRCTN11746266.