To test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a novel preoperative tailored sleep intervention for patients undergoing total knee replacement.

Feasibility two-arm two-centre RCT using 1:1 randomisation with an embedded qualitative study.

Two National Health Service (NHS) secondary care hospitals in England and Wales.

Preoperative adult patients identified from total knee replacement waiting lists with disturbed sleep, defined as a score of 0–28 on the Sleep Condition Indicator questionnaire.

The REST intervention is a preoperative tailored sleep assessment and behavioural intervention package delivered by an Extended Scope Practitioner (ESP), with a follow-up phone call 4 weeks postintervention. All participants received usual care as provided by the participating NHS hospitals.

The primary aim was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full trial. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, 1-week presurgery, and 3 months postsurgery. Data collected to determine feasibility included the number of eligible patients, recruitment rates and intervention adherence. Qualitative work explored the acceptability of the study processes and intervention delivery through interviews with ESPs and patients.

Screening packs were posted to 378 patients and 57 patients were randomised. Of those randomised, 20 had surgery within the study timelines. An appointment was attended by 25/28 (89%) of participants randomised to the intervention. Follow-up outcomes measures were completed by 40/57 (70%) of participants presurgery and 15/57 (26%) postsurgery. Where outcome measures were completed, data completion rates were 80% or higher for outcomes at all time points, apart from the painDETECT: 86% complete at baseline, 72% at presurgery and 67% postsurgery. Interviews indicated that most participants found the study processes and intervention acceptable.

This feasibility study has demonstrated that with some amendments to processes and design, an RCT to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the REST intervention is feasible.

ISRCTN14233189.

Adolescents face challenges associated with unprecedented environmental, social and technological changes. The impacts of colonisation, intergenerational trauma, racism and socioeconomic disadvantage intensify these challenges for many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adolescents. However, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adolescents also have cultural, spiritual, family and community capital that fosters their well-being.

To date, little research has focused on understanding and appropriately measuring the well-being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adolescents, a pivotal factor in informing and guiding programmes and interventions that support them. This study will identify the domains of well-being and develop a new preference-based well-being measure based on the values and preferences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth (aged 12–17 years).

This project will be conducted across three research phases: (1) qualitative exploration of well-being using PhotoYarning and yarns with adult mentors to develop candidate items; (2) Think Aloud study, quantitative survey, psychometric analysis, validity testing of candidate items and finalisation of the descriptive system; and (3) scoring development using a quantitative preference-based approach. A multinomial (conditional) logit framework will be used to analyse responses and generate a scoring algorithm for the new preference-based well-being measure.

Ethics approvals have been obtained from: the Human Research Ethics Committees for each state and territory where data are being collected, the institutions where the research is being conducted and from the relevant Departments of Education. The new well-being measure will have wide applicability and can be used in assessing the effectiveness of programmes and services. This new national measure will ensure benefit and positive impact through the ability to identify and measure the aspects of well-being important to and valued by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences, and summaries will be provided to the study partner organisations and other relevant organisations.

Breast cancer incidence starts to increase exponentially when women reach 30–39 years, hence before they are eligible for breast cancer screening. The introduction of breast cancer risk assessment for this age group could lead to those at higher risk receiving benefits of earlier screening and preventive strategies. Currently, risk assessment is limited to women with a family history of breast cancer only. The Breast CANcer Risk Assessment in Younger women (BCAN-RAY) study is evaluating a comprehensive breast cancer risk assessment strategy for women aged 30–39 years incorporating a questionnaire of breast cancer risk factors, low-dose mammography to assess breast density and polygenic risk. This study will assess the feasibility and acceptability of the BCAN-RAY risk assessment strategy.

This study involves women undergoing risk assessment as part of the BCAN-RAY case-control study (n=750). They will be aged 30–39 years without a strong family history of breast cancer and invited to participate via general practice. A comparison of uptake rates by socioeconomic status and ethnicity between women who participated in the BCAN-RAY study and women who declined participation will be conducted. All participants will be asked to complete self-report questionnaires to assess key potential harms including increased state anxiety (State Trait Anxiety Inventory), cancer worry (Lerman Cancer Worry Scale) and satisfaction with the decision to participate (Decision Regret Scale), alongside potential benefits such as feeling more informed about breast cancer risk. A subsample of approximately 24 women (12 at average risk and 12 at increased risk) will additionally participate in semistructured interviews to understand the acceptability of the risk assessment strategy and identify any changes needed to it to increase uptake.

Ethical approval was granted by North West—Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (reference: 22/NW/0268). Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and charitable organisations.

NCT05305963.

To explore and model factors affecting antibiotic prescribing decision-making early in the pandemic.

Semistructured qualitative interview study.

National Health Service (NHS) trusts/health boards in England and Wales.

Clinicians from NHS trusts/health boards in England and Wales.

Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with clinicians in six NHS trusts/health boards in England and Wales as part of the Procalcitonin Evaluation of Antibiotic use in COVID-19 Hospitalised patients study, a wider study that included statistical analysis of procalcitonin (PCT) use in hospitals during the first wave of the pandemic. Thematic analysis was used to identify key factors influencing antibiotic prescribing decisions for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia during the first wave of the pandemic (March to May 2020), including how much influence PCT test results had on these decisions.

During the first wave of the pandemic, recommendations to prescribe antibiotics for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were based on concerns about secondary bacterial infections. However, as clinicians gained more experience with COVID-19, they reported increasing confidence in their ability to distinguish between symptoms and signs caused by SARS-CoV-2 viral infection alone, and secondary bacterial infections. Antibiotic prescribing decisions were influenced by factors such as clinician experience, confidence, senior support, situational factors and organisational influences. A decision-making model was developed.

This study provides insight into the decision-making process around antibiotic prescribing for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia during the first wave of the pandemic. The importance of clinician experience and of senior review of decisions as factors in optimising antibiotic stewardship is highlighted. In addition, situational and organisational factors were identified that could be optimised. The model presented in the study can be used as a tool to aid understanding of the complexity of the decision-making process around antibiotic prescribing and planning antimicrobial stewardship support in the context of a pandemic.

ISRCTN66682918.

The United Kingdom Childhood Cancer Study’s (UKCCS’s) matched cohort was established to examine the longer term morbidity and mortality of individuals previously diagnosed with cancer before 15 years of age, comparing future healthcare patterns in 5-year cancer survivors to baseline activity seen in age- and sex-matched individuals from the general population.

Predicated on a national childhood cancer case-control study conducted in the early 1990s (4430 cases, 9753 controls) in England, Scotland and Wales, the case population comprises 3125 cancer survivors (>5 years), and the control population 7156 age- and sex-matched individuals from the general population who did not have cancer as a child. Participants are now being followed up via linkage to national administrative healthcare databases (deaths, cancers and secondary care hospital activity).

Enabling the creation of cohorts with minimal selection bias and loss to follow-up, the original case-control study registered all newly diagnosed cases of childhood cancer and their corresponding controls, regardless of their family’s participation. Early findings based on the registered case population found marked survival variations with age and sex across subtypes and differences with deprivation among acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) survivors. More recently, comparing the health-activity patterns of the case and control populations revealed that survivors of childhood ALL experienced excess outpatient and inpatient activity across their teenage/young adult years. Adding to increased risks of cancer and death and involving most clinical specialties, excesses were not related to routine follow-up monitoring and showed no signs of diminishing over time.

With annual linkage updates, the UKCCS’s maturing population-based matched cohorts provide the foundation for tracking the health of individuals through their lifetime. Comparing the experience of childhood cancer survivors to that of unaffected general-population counterparts, this will include examining subsequent morbidity and mortality, secondary care hospital activity and the impact of deprivation on longer term outcomes.