Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the healthcare field are crucial in meeting the healthcare needs of a progressively diverse society. In fact, a diverse healthcare workforce enables culturally sensitive care, promotes health equity and enhances the understanding of various needs and patients’ viewpoints, potentially resulting in more effective patient treatment and improved patient outcomes. Despite this, information on the effectiveness of policies or programmes promoting EDI in health institutions is scarce. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effects and outcomes of EDI programmes in healthcare institutions.

We will conduct Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of studies on EDI programmes and describe their effects and outcomes in healthcare institutions. We will search PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases. Selected studies will include randomised control trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cross-sectional studies published either in English or French. Quality appraisal of studies and a narrative synthesis of extracted data will be conducted as well as a meta-analysis if possible. The quality of evidence in this review will be assessed by the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

We anticipate that this systematic review will reveal information on the effect of EDI programmes and their outcomes in healthcare institutions. We expect this information will provide insights that will lead to improvements in designing EDI policies and programmes in healthcare institutions.

No ethical clearance is required for this study as no primary data will be collected. The final manuscript will be submitted to a journal for publication. In addition to this, the results of the study will also be disseminated through conference presentations to inform the research and clinical practice.

This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; registration number CRD42024502781.

Radical chemoradiotherapy represents the gold standard for locally advanced cervical cancer. However, despite significant progress in improving local tumour control, distant relapse continues to impact overall survival. The development of predictive and prognostic biomarkers is consequently important to risk-stratify patients and identify populations at higher risk of poorer treatment response and survival outcomes. Exploratory study of using Magnetic resonance Prognostic Imaging markers for Radiotherapy In Cervix cancer (EMPIRIC) is a prospective exploratory cohort study, which aims to investigate the role of multiparametric functional MRI (fMRI) using diffusion-weighed imaging (DWI), dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) and blood oxygen level-dependent imaging (BOLD) MRI to assess treatment response and predict outcomes in patients undergoing radical chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer.

The study aims to recruit 40 patients across a single-centre over 2 years. Patients undergo multiparametric fMRI (DWI, DCE and BOLD-MRI) at three time points: before, during and at the completion of external beam radiotherapy. Tissue and liquid biopsies are collected at diagnosis and post-treatment to identify potential biomarker correlates against fMRI. The primary outcome is to evaluate sensitivity and specificity of quantitative parameters derived from fMRI as predictors of progression-free survival at 2 years following radical chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer. The secondary outcome is to investigate the roles of fMRI as predictors of overall survival at 2 years and tumour volume reduction across treatment. Statistical analyses using regression models and survival analyses are employed to evaluate the relationships between the derived parameters, treatment response and clinical outcomes.

The EMPIRIC study received ethical approval from the NHS Health Research Authority (HRA) on 14 February 2022 (protocol number RD2021-29). Confidentiality and data protection measures are strictly adhered to throughout the study. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences, aiming to contribute to the growing body of evidence on the use of multiparametric MRI in cervical cancer management.

NCT05532930.

Supervised exercise training is among the first-line therapies for patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Current recommendations for exercise include guidance focusing on claudication pain, programme and session duration, and frequency. However, no guidance is offered regarding exercise training intensity. This study aims to compare the effects of 12-week-long supervised walking exercise training (high-intensity interval training (HIIT) vs moderate-intensity exercise (MOD)) in patients with chronic symptomatic PAD.

This study is a monocentric, interventional, non-blinded randomised controlled trial. 60 patients (30 in each group) will be randomly allocated (by using the random permuted blocks) to 12 weeks (three times a week) of HIIT or MOD. For HIIT, exercise sessions will consist of alternating brief high-intensity (≥85% of the peak heart rate (HR_peak)) periods (≤60 s) of work with periods of passive rest. Patients will be asked to complete 1 and then 2 sets of 5–7 (progressing to 10–15x60 s) walking intervals. For the MOD group, exercise training sessions will consist of an alternation of periods of work performed at moderate intensity (≤76% HR_peak) and periods of passive rest. Interventions will be matched by training load. The primary outcome will be the maximal walking distance. Secondary outcomes will include functional performance, functional capacity, heath-related quality of life, self-perceived walking abilities, physical activity and haemodynamic parameters.

The Angiof-HIIT Study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Canton de Vaud (study number: 2022-01752). Written consent is mandatory prior to enrolment and randomisation. The results will be disseminated via national and international scientific meetings, scientific peer-reviewed journals and social media.

NCT05612945.

Diagnostic testing is an important tool to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, yet access to and uptake of testing vary widely 3 years into the pandemic. The WHO recommends the use of COVID-19 self-testing as an option to help expand testing access. We aimed to calculate the cost of providing COVID-19 self-testing across countries and distribution modalities.

We estimated economic costs from the provider perspective to calculate the total cost and the cost per self-test kit distributed for three scenarios that differed by costing period (pilot, annual), the number of tests distributed (actual, planned, scaled assuming an epidemic peak) and self-test kit costs (pilot purchase price, 50% reduction).

We used data collected between August and December 2022 in Brazil, Georgia, Malaysia, Ethiopia and the Philippines from pilot implementation studies designed to provide COVID-19 self-tests in a variety of settings—namely, workplace and healthcare facilities.

Across all five countries, 173 000 kits were distributed during pilot implementation with the cost/test distributed ranging from $2.44 to $12.78. The cost/self-test kit distributed was lowest in the scenario that assumed implementation over a longer period (year), with higher test demand (peak) and a test kit price reduction of 50% ($1.04–3.07). Across all countries and scenarios, test procurement occupied the greatest proportion of costs: 58–87% for countries with off-site self-testing (outside the workplace, for example, home) and 15–50% for countries with on-site self-testing (at the workplace). Staffing was the next key cost driver, particularly for distribution modalities that had on-site self-testing (29–35%) versus off-site self-testing (7–27%).

Our results indicate that it is likely to cost between $2.44 and $12.78 per test to distribute COVID-19 self-tests across common settings in five heterogeneous countries. Cost-effectiveness analyses using these results will allow policymakers to make informed decisions on optimally scaling up COVID-19 self-test distribution programmes across diverse settings and evolving needs.

To compare vaccination willingness before rollout and 1 year post-rollout uptake among the general population and under-resourced communities in high-income countries.

A realist review.

Embase, PubMed, Dimensions ai and Google Scholar.

High-income countries.

We defined vaccination willingness as the proportion of participants willing or intending to receive vaccines prior to availability. We defined vaccine uptake as the real proportion of the population with complete vaccination as reported by each country until November 2021.

We included data from 62 studies and 18 high-income countries. For studies conducted among general populations, the proportion of vaccination willingness was 67% (95% CI 62% to 72%). In real-world settings, the overall proportion of vaccine uptake among those countries was 73% (95% CI 69% to 76%). 17 studies reported pre-rollout willingness for under-resourced communities. The summary proportion of vaccination willingness from studies reporting results among people from under-resourced communities was 52% (95% CI 0.46% to 0.57%). Real-world evidence about vaccine uptake after rollout among under-resourced communities was limited.

Our review emphasises the importance of realist reviews for assessing vaccine acceptance. Limited real-world evidence about vaccine uptake among under-resourced communities in high-income countries is a call to context-specific actions and reporting.

Physical restraint (PR) is prescribed in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) to avoid unplanned removal of medical devices. However, it is associated with an increased risk of delirium. We hypothesise that a restrictive use of PR, as compared with a systematic use, could reduce the duration of delirium in ICU patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.

The Restrictive use of Restraints and Delirium Duration in ICU (R2D2-ICU) study is a national multicentric, parallel-group, randomised (1:1) open-label, controlled, superiority trial, which will be conducted in 10 ICUs. A total of 422 adult patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for an expected duration of at least 48 hours and eligible for prescription of PR will be randomly allocated within 6 hours from intubation to either the restrictive PR use group or the systematic PR use group, until day 14, ICU discharge or death, whichever comes first. In both groups, PR will consist of the use of wrist straps. The primary endpoint will be delirium or coma-free days, defined as the number of days spent alive in the ICU without coma or delirium within the first 14 days after randomisation. Delirium will be assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method-ICU twice daily. Key secondary endpoints will encompass agitation episodes, opioid, propofol, benzodiazepine and antipsychotic drug exposure during the 14-day intervention period, along with a core outcome set of measures evaluated 90 days postrandomisation.

The R2D2-ICU study has been approved by the Comité de Protection des Personnes (CPP) ILE DE FRANCE III—PARIS (CPP19.09.06.37521) on June 10th, 2019). Participant recruitment started on 25 January 2021. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals and presented at conferences.

NCT04273360.

Pre-eclampsia (PE) affects about 5% of Chinese pregnant women and is a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. The first trimester screening model developed by the Fetal Medicine Foundation, which uses the Bayes theorem to combine maternal characteristics and medical history together with measurements of biomarkers, has been proven to be effective and has superior screening performance to that of the traditional risk factor-based approach for the prediction of PE. Prophylactic use of low-dose aspirin in women at risk for PE has resulted in a lower incidence of preterm-PE. However, there is no consensus on the preferred aspirin dosage for the prevention of preterm-PE. Evidence has also suggested that metformin has the potential benefit in preventing PE in pregnant women who are at high risk of the disorder.

We present a protocol (V.2.0, date 17 March 2022) for the AVERT trial, which is a multicentre, double-blinded, 3-arm randomised controlled trial (RCT) that uses an effective PE screening programme to explore the optimal dosage of aspirin and the role of metformin for the prevention of PE among high-risk pregnant women in China. We intend to recruit 66 000 singleton pregnancies without treatment of low-dose aspirin and metformin at 11–13 weeks’ gestation and all eligible women attending for their first trimester routine scan will be invited to undergo screening for preterm-PE by the combination of maternal factors, mean arterial pressure and placental growth factor. Women found to be at high risk of developing preterm-PE will be invited to take part in the RCT. This study will compare the incidence of preterm-PE with delivery at

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Joint Chinese University of Hong Kong–New Territories East Cluster Clinical Research Ethics Committee (CREC Ref. No. 2021.406) in Hong Kong and the Ethics Committee of each participating hospital in Mainland China. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. The results of the AVERT trial will be disseminated at international academic conferences and published in high-impact factor journals.

NCT05580523.

We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of colchicine treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to January 2023.

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of colchicine treatment in patients with COVID-19 as compared with placebo or standard of care were included. There were no language restrictions. Studies that used colchicine prophylactically were excluded.

We extracted all information relating to the study characteristics, such as author names, location, study population, details of intervention and comparator groups, and our outcomes of interest. We conducted our meta-analysis by using RevMan V.5.4 with risk ratio (RR) and mean difference as the effect measures.

We included 23 RCTs (28 249 participants) in this systematic review. Colchicine did not decrease the risk of mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I²=0%; 20 RCTs, 25 824 participants), with the results being consistent among both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. There were no significant differences between the colchicine and control groups in other relevant clinical outcomes, including the incidence of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; p=0.22; I²=40%; 8 RCTs, 13 262 participants), intensive care unit admission (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.22; p=0.27; I²=0%; 6 RCTs, 961 participants) and hospital admission (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; p=0.19; I²=70%; 3 RCTs, 8572 participants).

The results of this meta-analysis do not support the use of colchicine as a treatment for reducing the risk of mortality or improving other relevant clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, RCTs investigating early treatment with colchicine (within 5 days of symptom onset or in patients with early-stage disease) are needed to fully elucidate the potential benefits of colchicine in this patient population.

CRD42022369850.

This study aims to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) of statins and foster healthy lifestyle promotion in cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention in low-risk patients. To this end, we will compare the effectiveness and feasibility of several de-implementation strategies developed following the structured design process of the Behaviour Change Wheel targeting key determinants of the clinical decision-making process in CVD prevention.

A cluster randomised implementation trial, with an additional control group, will be launched, involving family physicians (FPs) from 13 Integrated Healthcare Organisations (IHOs) of Osakidetza-Basque Health Service with non-zero incidence rates of PIP of statins in 2021. All FPs will be exposed to a non-reflective decision assistance strategy based on reminders and decision support tools. Additionally, FPs from two of the IHOs will be randomly assigned to one of two increasingly intensive de-implementation strategies: adding a decision information strategy based on knowledge dissemination and a reflective decision structure strategy through audit/feedback. The target population comprises women aged 45–74 years and men aged 40–74 years with moderately elevated cholesterol levels but no diagnosed CVD and low cardiovascular risk (REGICOR

The study was approved by the Basque Country Clinical Research Ethics Committee and was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04022850). Results will be disseminated in scientific peer-reviewed journals.

NCT04022850.

EndoTrac is a line-attached sheath-type traction device that enables us to control the direction and the force of traction during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The efficacy of EndoTrac for gastric ESD has not been fully verified.

The G-Trac study is a multicentre (nine general hospitals and two university hospitals in Japan) collaborative trial assessing the efficacy of EndoTrac for gastric ESDs. Patients with superficial gastric neoplasms will be enrolled and randomly assigned to undergo either conventional ESD or EndoTrac ESD. Allocation will be stratified according to tumour location, operator experience and tumour diameter at an allocation rate of 1:1. The type of endoknife used will be confirmed before randomisation. The primary outcome, procedure time, will be compared between the groups in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. The efficacy-related, safety-related and device-related outcomes will be assessed in the secondary analysis. The planned sample size of the 142 patients in the two groups will enable us to detect a difference with a power of 80% by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test, assuming an effect size of 0.54, asymptotic relative efficiency of 0.864 and a two-sided type 1 error rate of 5%.

This trial was approved by the certified review board of Kobe University (22 December 2022). The results from this trial will be disseminated through peer-review journals, presentations at national and international conferences, and data sharing with other researchers.

jRCT1052220166.

To investigate how demographic, contractual and organisational factors are related to the retention of hospital workers in the English NHS. The study will specifically examine the trends in age-retention profiles.

A double retrospective cross-cohort study using administrative data on senior and specialty doctors, nurses and midwives who were included in the 2009 and 2014 payrolls of all English NHS hospital Trusts. These individuals were tracked over time until 2019 to examine the associations between sociodemographic characteristics and the retention of hospital workers in each cohort. Logistic regressions were estimated at the individual worker level to analyse the data. Additionally, a multilevel panel regression was performed using linked payroll-survey data to investigate the association between hospital organisation characteristics and the retention of clinical staff.

Secondary acute and mental healthcare NHS hospital Trusts in England.

70 777 senior doctors (specialty and specialist doctors and hospital consultants) aged 30–70, and a total of 448 568 between nurses and midwives of any grade aged 20–70, employed by English NHS Trusts.

Employee retention, measured through binary indicators for stayers and NHS leavers, at 1-year and 5-year horizons.

Minority doctors had lower 1-year retention rates in acute care than white doctors, while minority nurses and midwives saw higher retention. Part-time roles decreased retention for doctors but improved it for nurses. Fixed-term contracts negatively impacted both groups’ retention. Trends diverged for nurses and doctors from 2009 to 2014—nurses’ retention declined while doctors’ 5-year retention slightly rose. Engagement boosted retention among clinical staff under 51 years of age in acute care. For nurses over 50, addressing their feedback was positively associated with retention.

Demographic and contractual factors appear to be stronger predictors of hospital staff retention than organisational characteristics.

Carpal tunnel syndrome is a common disorder affecting a substantial portion of the general population. Surgical intervention is often deemed necessary, with the median nerve release being one of the most frequent operations. Optimising all the aspects of this procedure can enhance patient satisfaction with the treatment.

We aim to determine the differences in the aesthetic outcome of the scar as well as the pain experienced during the healing process between the use of absorbable and non-absorbable sutures. The primary outcome measure will be the patients’ subjective satisfaction with the aesthetic appearance of the scar 1 year after the operation. Secondary outcomes will include a similar evaluation of the aesthetics performed by a blinded outcome assessor, as well as pain experienced by the patients during the 2 weeks postoperatively. The severity and improvement of the patients’ symptoms will also be measured by a Finnish version of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. Costs will be evaluated for both groups. Safety of the wound closure will be followed and reported.

This protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Northern Savo Hospital District (2319/2021). The trial will be conducted in accordance with the principles of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals.

NCT05503719.