Potentially harmful non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) utilisation persists at undesirable rates worldwide. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings and to suggest directions for future research.

Scoping review.

PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central and Google Scholar (1 January 2000 to 31 May 2022).

Studies reporting on the effectiveness of interventions to systematically reduce potentially harmful NSAID utilisation in healthcare settings.

Using Covidence systematic review software, we extracted study and intervention characteristics, including the effectiveness of interventions in reducing NSAID utilisation.

From 7818 articles initially identified, 68 were included in the review. Most studies took place in European countries (45.6%) or the USA (35.3%), with randomised controlled trial as the most common design (55.9%). Interventions were largely clinician-facing (76.2%) and delivered in primary care (60.2%) but were rarely (14.9%) guided by an implementation model, framework or theory. Academic detailing, clinical decision support or electronic medical record interventions, performance reports and pharmacist review were frequent approaches employed. NSAID use was most commonly classified as potentially harmful based on patients’ age (55.8%), history of gastrointestinal disorders (47.1%), or history of kidney disease (38.2%). Only 7.4% of interventions focused on over-the-counter (OTC) NSAIDs in addition to prescription. The majority of studies (76.2%) reported a reduction in the utilisation of potentially harmful NSAIDs. Few studies (5.9%) evaluated pain or quality of life following NSAIDs discontinuation.

Many varied interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs have been applied in healthcare settings worldwide. Based on these findings and identified knowledge gaps, further efforts to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of interventions and the combination of intervention characteristics associated with effective de-implementation are needed. In addition, future work should be guided by de-implementation theory, focus on OTC NSAIDs and incorporate patient-focused strategies and outcomes, including the evaluation of unintended consequences of the intervention.

Systematically measuring the work environment of healthcare employees is key to continuously improving the quality of care and addressing staff shortages. In this study, we systematically analyse the responses to the one open-ended question posed in the Dutch version of the Culture of Care Barometer (CoCB-NL) to examine (1) if the responses offered new insights into healthcare employees’ perceptions of their work environment and (2) if the original CoCB had any themes missing.

Retrospective text analysis using Rigorous and Accelerated Data Reduction technique.

University hospital in the Netherlands using the CoCB-NL as part of the annual employee survey.

All hospital employees were invited to participate in the study (N=14 671). In total, 2287 employees responded to the open-ended question.

2287 comments were analysed. Comments that contained more than one topic were split according to topic, adding to the total (n=2915). Of this total, 372 comments were excluded because they lacked content or respondents indicated they had nothing to add. Subsequently, 2543 comments were allocated to 33 themes. Most comments (n=2113) addressed the 24 themes related to the close-ended questions in the CoCB-NL. The themes most commented on concerned questions on ‘organisational support’. The remaining 430 comments covered nine additional themes that addressed concerns about work environment factors (team connectedness, team effectiveness, corporate vision, administrative burden and performance pressure) and themes (diversity and inclusion, legal frameworks and collective bargaining, resilience and work–life balance, and personal matters).

Analysing responses to the open-ended question in the CoCB-NL led to new insights into relevant elements of the work environment and missing themes in the COCB-NL. Moreover, the analysis revealed important themes that not only require attention from healthcare organisations to ensure adequate improvements in their employees’ work environment but should also be considered to further develop the CoCB-NL.

Vertigo is a prevalent and burdensome symptom. More than 80% of patients with vertigo are primarily treated by their general practitioner (GP) and are never referred to a medical specialist. Despite this therapeutic responsibility, the GP’s diagnostic toolkit has serious limitations. All recommended tests lack empirical evidence, because a diagnostic accuracy study on vestibular disorders (‘How well does test x discriminate between patients with or without target condition y?’) has never been performed in general practice. The VERtigo DIagnosis study aims to fill this gap.

We will perform a diagnostic accuracy study on vertigo of primary vestibular origin in general practice to assess the discriminative ability of history taking and physical examination. We will compare all index tests with a respective reference standard. We will focus on five target conditions that account for more than 95% of vertigo diagnoses in general practice: (1) benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, (2) vestibular neuritis, (3) Ménière’s disease, (4) vestibular migraine (VM) and (5) central causes other than VM. As these five target conditions have a different pathophysiology and lack one generally accepted gold standard, we will use consensus diagnosis as a construct reference standard. Data for each patient, including history, physical examination and additional tests as recommended by experts in an international Delphi procedure, will be recorded on a standardised form and independently reviewed by a neurologist and otorhinolaryngologist. For each patient, the reviewers have to decide about the presence/absence of each target condition. We will calculate sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios and diagnostic ORs, followed by decision rules for each target condition.

The study obtained approval from the Vrije Universiteit Medical Center Medical Ethical Review Committee (reference: 2022.0817—NL83111.029.22). We will publish our findings in peer-reviewed international journals.

ISRCTN97250704.

To evaluate the willingness of healthcare providers to perform population-based screening in primary healthcare institutions in China.

Healthcare providers of 262 primary healthcare institutions in Tianjin were invited to fill out a questionnaire consisting of demographic characteristics, workload, and knowledge of, attitude towards and willingness to perform breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening. Willingness to screen was the primary outcome. Multilevel logistic regression models were conducted to analyse the determinants of healthcare providers’ willingness to screen. ORs and 95% CIs were estimated.

A total of 554 healthcare providers from 244 institutions answered the questionnaire. 67.2%, 72.1% and 74.3% were willing to perform breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening, respectively. A negative attitude towards screening was associated with a low willingness for cervical (OR=0.27; 95% CI 0.08, 0.94) and colorectal (OR=0.08; 95% CI 0.02, 0.30) cancer screening, while this was not statistically significant for breast cancer screening (OR=0.30; 95% CI 0.08, 1.12). For breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening, 70.1%, 63.8% and 59.0% of healthcare providers reported a shortage of staff dedicated to screening. A perceived reasonable manpower allocation was a determinant of increased willingness to perform breast (OR=2.86; 95% CI 1.03, 7.88) and colorectal (OR=2.70; 95% CI 1.22, 5.99) cancer screening. However, this was not significant for cervical cancer screening (OR=1.76; 95% CI 0.74, 4.18).

In China, healthcare providers with a positive attitude towards screening have a stronger willingness to contribute to cancer screening, and therefore healthcare providers’ attitude, recognition of the importance of screening and acceptable workload should be optimised to improve the uptake of cancer screening.

Young adults (YAs) with serious illnesses report wanting choices in their end-of-life care.1–3 Where YAs would prefer to die is highly personal, though some studies have reported that many YAs prefer home-based palliative care and death.2 3 Yet, many YAs experience high-intensity, inpatient care at the end of their lives,4 with approximately half of YAs with cancer dying in hospital.4 Factors influencing these patterns of care—and the extent to...

To assess the creative potential of surgeons and surgeon trainees, as measured by divergent thinking. The secondary objectives were to identify factors associated with divergent thinking, assess confidence in creative problem-solving and the perceived effect of surgical training on creative potential, and explore the value of creativity in surgery.

We used a mixed-methods design, conducting a survey of divergent thinking ability using a validated questionnaire followed by two semi-structured interviews with top-scoring participants.

Surgeons and surgeon trainees in the Department of Surgery at McMaster University.

The primary outcome was divergent thinking, assessed with the Abbreviated Torrance Test for Adults. Participants also self-assessed their confidence in creative problem-solving and the effect of surgical training on their creative potential. We performed descriptive analyses and multivariable linear regression to identify factors associated with divergent thinking. We conducted a thematic analysis of the interview responses.

82 surgeons and surgeon trainees were surveyed; 43 were junior trainees and 28 were senior trainees. General surgery, orthopaedic surgery and plastic surgery represented 71.9% of the participants. The median participant age was 28 years (range 24–73), 51.2% of whom were female. Participants demonstrated levels of divergent thinking that were higher but not meaningfully different from the adult norm (62.39 (95% CI 61.25, 63.53), p

The divergent thinking ability among surgeons and surgeon trainees was not meaningfully different from the adult normative score; however, their ability to generate original ideas was below average.

To characterise subphenotypes of self-reported symptoms and outcomes (SRSOs) in postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC).

Prospective, observational cohort study of subjects with PASC.

Academic tertiary centre from five clinical referral sources.

Adults with COVID-19 ≥20 days before enrolment and presence of any new self-reported symptoms following COVID-19.

We collected data on clinical variables and SRSOs via structured telephone interviews and performed standardised assessments with validated clinical numerical scales to capture psychological symptoms, neurocognitive functioning and cardiopulmonary function. We collected saliva and stool samples for quantification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA via quantitative PCR.

Description of PASC SRSOs burden and duration, derivation of distinct PASC subphenotypes via latent class analysis (LCA) and relationship with viral load.

We analysed baseline data for 214 individuals with a study visit at a median of 197.5 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. Participants reported ever having a median of 9/16 symptoms (IQR 6–11) after acute COVID-19, with muscle-aches, dyspnoea and headache being the most common. Fatigue, cognitive impairment and dyspnoea were experienced for a longer time. Participants had a lower burden of active symptoms (median 3 (1–6)) than those ever experienced (p

We identified three distinct PASC subphenotypes. We highlight that although most symptoms progressively resolve, specific PASC subpopulations are impacted by either high burden of constitutional symptoms or persistent olfactory/gustatory dysfunction, requiring prospective identification and targeted preventive or therapeutic interventions.

Previous studies have suggested that fibrates and glitazones may have a role in brain tumour prevention. We examined if there is support for these observations using primary care records from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD).

We conducted two nested case–control studies using primary and secondary brain tumours identified within CPRD between 2000 and 2016. We selected cases and controls among the population of individuals who had been treated with any anti-diabetic or anti-hyperlipidaemic medication to reduce confounding by indication.

Adults older than 18 years registered with a general practitioner in the UK contributing data to CPRD.

We identified 7496 individuals with any brain tumour (4471 primary; 3025 secondary) in total. After restricting cases and controls to those prescribed any anti-diabetic or anti-hyperlipidaemic medication, there were 1950 cases and 7791 controls in the fibrate and 480 cases with 1920 controls in the glitazone analyses. Longer use of glitazones compared with all other anti-diabetic medications was associated with a reduced risk of primary (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.89 per year, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98), secondary (aOR 0.87 per year, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.99) or combined brain tumours (aOR 0.88 per year, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95). There was little evidence that fibrate exposure was associated with risk of either primary or secondary brain tumours.

Longer exposure to glitazones was associated with reduced primary and secondary brain tumour risk. Further basic science and population-based research should explore this finding in greater detail, in terms of replication and mechanistic studies.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative benefits and harms of opioids and cannabis for medical use for chronic non-cancer pain.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, Cannabis-Med, Epistemonikos and the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) from inception to March 2021.

Randomised trials comparing any type of cannabis for medical use or opioids, against each other or placebo, with patient follow-up ≥4 weeks.

Paired reviewers independently extracted data. We used Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence and communicate our findings.

Ninety trials involving 22 028 patients were eligible for review, among which the length of follow-up ranged from 28 to 180 days. Moderate certainty evidence showed that opioids provide small improvements in pain, physical functioning and sleep quality versus placebo; low to moderate certainty evidence supported similar effects for cannabis versus placebo. Neither was more effective than placebo for role, social or emotional functioning (all high to moderate certainty evidence). Moderate certainty evidence showed there is probably little to no difference between cannabis for medical use and opioids for physical functioning (weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.47 on the 100-point 36-item Short Form Survey physical component summary score, 95% credible interval (CrI) –1.97 to 2.99), and cannabis resulted in fewer discontinuations due to adverse events versus opioids (OR 0.55, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.83). Low certainty evidence suggested little to no difference between cannabis and opioids for pain relief (WMD 0.23 cm on a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), 95% CrI –0.06 to 0.53) or sleep quality (WMD 0.49 mm on a 100 mm VAS, 95% CrI –4.72 to 5.59).

Cannabis for medical use may be similarly effective and result in fewer discontinuations than opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.

CRD42020185184.

Standard treatment for patients with intermediate or locally advanced rectal cancer is (chemo)radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery. In recent years, organ preservation aiming at improving quality of life has been explored. Patients with a complete clinical response to (chemo)radiotherapy can be managed safely with a watch-and-wait approach. However, the optimal organ-preserving treatment strategy for patients with a good, but not complete clinical response remains unclear. The aim of the OPAXX study is to determine the rate of organ preservation that can be achieved in patients with rectal cancer with a good clinical response after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy by additional local treatment options.

The OPAXX study is a Dutch multicentre study that investigates the efficacy of two additional local treatments aiming at organ preservation in patients with a good, but not complete response to neoadjuvant treatment (ie near-complete response or a small residual tumour mass

The trial protocol has been approved by the medical ethics committee of the Netherlands Cancer Institute (METC20.1276/M20PAX). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The trial results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.

NCT05772923.

Little research exists on how risk scores are used in counselling. We examined (a) how Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) scores are presented during counselling; (b) how women react and (c) discuss them afterwards.

Consultations were video-recorded and participants were interviewed after the consultation as part of the NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Decision-Making Project 1 (NSABP DMP-1).

Two NSABP DMP-1 breast cancer care centres in the USA: one large comprehensive cancer centre serving a high-risk population and an academic safety-net medical centre in an urban setting.

Thirty women evaluated for breast cancer risk and their counselling providers were included.

Participants who were identified as at increased risk of breast cancer were recruited to participate in qualitative study with a video-recorded consultation and subsequent semi-structured interview that included giving feedback and input after viewing their own consultation. Consultation videos were summarised jointly and inductively as a team.tThe interview material was searched deductively for text segments that contained the inductively derived themes related to risk assessment. Subgroup analysis according to demographic variables such as age and Gail score were conducted, investigating reactions to risk scores and contrasting and comparing them with the pertinent video analysis data. From this, four descriptive categories of reactions to risk scores emerged. The descriptive categories were clearly defined after 19 interviews; all 30 interviews fit principally into one of the four descriptive categories.

Risk scores were individualised and given meaning by providers through: (a) presenting thresholds, (b) making comparisons and (c) emphasising or minimising the calculated risk. The risk score information elicited little reaction from participants during consultations, though some added to, agreed with or qualified the provider’s information. During interviews, participants reacted to the numbers in four primary ways: (a) engaging easily with numbers; (b) expressing greater anxiety after discussing the risk score; (c) accepting the risk score and (d) not talking about the risk score.

Our study highlights the necessity that patients’ experiences must be understood and put into relation to risk assessment information to become a meaningful treatment decision-making tool, for instance by categorising patients’ information engagement into types.

NCT01399359.