FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

'The paper brochure is worth its weight in gold: a qualitative study of older adults experiences and preferences for information delivery prior to elective hospitalisation for transcatheter aortic valve implantation in Norway

Por: Brors · G. · Larsen · M. H. · Fagerheim · T. · Ree · C. H. · Lines · B. · Vaga · B. I. · Nost · T. H.
Objectives

Older adults can have difficulties understanding and recalling information prior to hospitalisation for elective treatment. Limited research exists regarding how older adults perceive the accessibility and comprehensibility of the information provided by the hospital prior to elective hospitalisation. This study aims to explore how older adults undergoing elective hospitalisation for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) experience the information received from the hospital and their preferences for modes of information delivery.

Design

A qualitative design was used. Data were collected through individual semistructured interviews with older adults prior to hospital discharge following elective TAVI. The data were analysed using reflective thematic analysis.

Setting

All patients scheduled for elective hospitalisation for TAVI at a public university hospital in Norway were screened for eligibility.

Participants

18 older adults participated in the study. Their median age was 82 years (range 67–91), and two thirds were males.

Results

The data were categorised into four main themes: ‘The paper brochure is worth its weight in gold’, ‘Combination of different modes of information delivery increased understanding and recall’, ‘Trust reduced the need to access and understand information’ and ‘Family played a crucial role in accessing and interpreting health information’.

Conclusion

Older adults undergoing elective hospitalisation found the traditional brochure valuable, alone or in combination with the digital material, which included an animated film. The participants emphasised that support from family members was required to access the digital information.

Effect of no reduction versus closed reduction on distal radius fractures in adults aged 65 years and older: a protocol for the DISCLOSE randomised equivalence trial

Por: Kärnä · L. · Ponkilainen · V. · Reito · A. · Ostergaard · H. · Brorson · S. · Tootsi · K. · Paasikallio · K. · Senholt · T. · Li · Y. · Heikkinen · J. · Kukkonen · J. · Ryhänen · J. · Christensen · R. · Mattila · V. M. · Launonen · A. P.
Introduction

Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are common injuries, especially in older adults due to age-related frailty. Most DRFs in patients aged 60 and older are treated non-operatively since surgery offers no clinically important benefits. Although anatomical alignment has traditionally been the goal of the treatment, evidence suggests that in older populations, radiographic outcomes do not reliably correlate with functional outcomes. Current evidence, including one randomised trial, shows no functional benefit of closed reduction compared with casting alone, calling into question the routine use of the procedure in older patients. The primary objective is to evaluate whether no reduction is equivalent to closed reduction in patients aged 65 years or older with a displaced DRF, based on wrist-related pain and disability measured by the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score at 12 months.

Methods and analysis

This is a multi-centre, randomised controlled, equivalence trial conducted in hospitals in Finland, Denmark, Sweden and Estonia. We aim to enrol 532 patients aged ≥65 years with a displaced DRF (AO/OTA 23A/23C). Participants will be randomised (1:1) to receive either a dorsal cast without reduction (experimental intervention) or closed reduction followed by casting (control comparator). The primary endpoint is the difference between groups assessed using the PRWE outcome score at 12 months. The equivalence margin will be set at 6 PRWE points. Key secondary endpoints will include the Numeric Rating Scale for pain, patient satisfaction, quality of life (EQ-5D-5L Index) and serious adverse events at 3 months and 12 months and cosmesis at 3 months. Our main analyses will follow an intention-to-treat principle, analysed using repeated measures mixed model.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval has been granted by the Ethics Committee of Tampere University Hospital (R25001). Results of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals.

Protocol version

6 July 2025, v1.0.

Trial registration number

NCT07042139.

Reporting of environmental outcomes in randomised clinical trials: a protocol for a scoping review

Por: Petersen · J. J. · Hemberg · L. · Thabane · L. · Hopewell · S. · Chan · A.-W. · Hrobjartsson · A. · Mathiesen · O. · Kandasamy · S. · Siegfried · N. · Williamson · P. R. · Fox · L. · Kamp · C. B. · Hoffmann · J.-M. · Brorson · S. · Jakobsen · J. C. · Bentzer · P.
Introduction

To increase the sustainability of healthcare, clinical trials must assess the environmental impact of interventions alongside clinical outcomes. This should be guided by Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extensions, which will be developed by The Implementing Climate and Environmental Outcomes in Trials Group. The objective of the scoping review is to describe the existing methods for reporting and measuring environmental outcomes in randomised trials. The results will be used to inform the future development of the SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions on environmental outcomes (SPIRIT-ICE and CONSORT-ICE).

Methods and analysis

This protocol outlines the methodology for a scoping review, which will be conducted in two distinct sections: (1) identifying any existing guidelines, reviews or methodological studies describing environmental impacts of interventions and (2) identifying how environmental outcomes are reported in randomised trial protocols and trial results. A search specialist will search major medical databases, reference lists of trial publications and clinical trial registries to identify relevant publications. Data from the included studies will be extracted independently by two review authors. Based on the results, a preliminary list of items for the SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions will be developed.

Ethics and dissemination

This study does not include any human participants, and ethics approval is not required according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The findings from the scoping review will be published in international peer-reviewed journals, and the findings will be used to inform the design of a Delphi survey of relevant stakeholders.

Open science

Registered with Open Science 28 of February 2025.

Protocol for development of SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions for reporting climate and environmental outcomes in randomised trials (SPIRIT-ICE and CONSORT-ICE)

Por: Petersen · J. J. · Hemberg · L. · Thabane · L. · Hopewell · S. · Chan · A.-W. · Hrobjartsson · A. · Mathiesen · O. · Kandasamy · S. · Siegfried · N. · Williamson · P. R. · Fox · L. · Kamp · C. B. · Hoffmann · J.-M. · Brorson · S. · Boutron · I. · McGain · F. · McAlister · S. · Mutengu · L
Introduction

The WHO has declared climate change the defining public health challenge of the 21st century. Incorporating climate and environmental outcomes in randomised trials is essential for enhancing healthcare treatments’ sustainability and safeguarding global health. To implement such outcomes, it is necessary to establish a framework for unbiased and transparent planning and reporting. We aim to develop extensions to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT 2025) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT 2025) statements by introducing guidelines for reporting climate and environmental outcomes.

Methods and analysis

This is a protocol for SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions on reporting climate and environmental outcomes in randomised trials termed SPIRIT-Implementing Climate and Environmental (ICE) and CONSORT-ICE. The development of the extensions will consist of five phases: phase 1—project launch, phase 2—review of the literature, phase 3—Delphi survey, phase 4—consensus meeting and phase 5—dissemination and implementation. The phases are expected to overlap. The SPIRIT-ICE and CONSORT-ICE extensions will be developed in parallel. The extensions will guide researchers on how and what to report when assessing climate and environmental outcomes.

Ethics and dissemination

The protocol was submitted to the Danish Research Ethics Committees, Denmark in June 2025. Ethics approval is expected in September 2025. The SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.

Brachial plexus nerve block versus haematoma block for closed reduction of distal radius fracture in adults: The BLOCK Trial - a protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Por: Dupont Harwood · C. · Jellestad · A.-S. L. · Bahuet · A.-X. R. · Knudsen · R. L. · Andersen · L. C. · Mathiesen · O. · Asko Andersen · J. · Jakobsen · J. C. · Rothe · C. · Jorgensen · C. C. · Viberg · B. · Brorson · S. · Brabrand · M. · Gundtoft · P. H. · Terndrup · M. · Lange · K. H.
Introduction

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.

Methods and analysis

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.

Ethics and disseminationf

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.

Trial registration number

NCT06678438.

❌