Clinical research in emergency and critical care is vital, but recruitment and consent are complex. Research may be conducted without prior consent when patients are critically ill, and interventions are time critical. Some patients may die before research participation can be discussed with relatives, leaving the bereaved unaware of their involvement. This study explored potential communication strategies for informing bereaved relatives when a patient has died following enrolment into an emergency or critical care study without prior consent.

A mixed-methods study using a telephone survey and semi-structured interviews conducted simultaneously. The survey was conducted within a National Health Service Trust in North West England with relatives of deceased study participants. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with bereaved relatives and research and clinical staff across the UK, and medical examiner (ME)/ME officers based in England and Wales. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Data were synthesised using a constant comparison approach.

11 bereaved relatives completed the survey. 53 individuals (21 research and clinical staff, 18 relatives and 14 MEs/officers) participated in semi-structured interviews.

Although many trials do not include a process for notifying bereaved relatives about research participation, most relatives valued the opportunity to learn about their family member’s participation, emphasising the importance of transparency and trust. However, some raised concerns over the potential burden of automatic disclosure by the ME service. Offering bereaved relatives the option to receive sensitively worded information about research involvement at an appropriate time, soon after death, was recommended.

Bereaved relatives should have the choice to be informed about research participation without prior consent. Our findings support the need for transparent and sensitive communication and will contribute to future guidance for the design and conduct of adult emergency and critical care studies.

Nigeria has the highest number of maternal deaths globally, and maternal peripartum sepsis is one of the leading causes of maternal mortality. A single oral dose of azithromycin (AZM; 2 g) is safe and effectively reduces 33%–60% of maternal sepsis during planned vaginal birth in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, the clinical and cost-effectiveness of oral AZM during vaginal birth in Nigeria remains unknown in the context of poor antimicrobial stewardship practices, significant antimicrobial resistance and healthcare financing. Evidence is also lacking on the standard care for the prevention of maternal sepsis among pregnant women undergoing vaginal births in Nigeria. The AZIN-V trial is a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation trial to determine the safety, clinical and cost-effectiveness of intrapartum oral AZM versus usual care in the prevention of peripartum maternal sepsis. The trial will also examine the impact of implementation strategies in enhancing adherence to the oral AZM protocol during planned vaginal births and identify effective strategies to improve adherence (fidelity) to the protocol in real-world LMIC settings.

This is a multicentre hybrid type 2 trial conducted in six Nigerian states: Ebonyi, Edo, Gombe, Kano, Kwara and Lagos. The study aims to simultaneously test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of AZM (clinical trial) and the impact of implementation strategies (implementation research) in Nigeria’s unique healthcare context. The clinical trial is a two-arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial conducted across 48 health facilities, randomly assigned (1:1) to either intrapartum administration of oral AZM (intervention group) or usual care—the current routine practice (control group). A total of 5040 study participants (2520 in each group) will be enrolled in the clinical trial. The implementation trial is a two-arm cluster non-randomised controlled trial conducted in 12 health facilities (1:1) allocated to either a bottom-up approach using the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle or a usual top-down approach with a one-time training workshop and distribution of clinical guidelines, with both arms administering oral AZM during vaginal birth while assessing fidelity (primary outcome).

For the clinical trial, data will be analysed using intention-to-treat statistical methods. The cost-effectiveness outcome will be analysed using the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio. Implementation outcomes will be analysed using descriptive statistics and a thematic approach.

This study has been approved by the National Health Research Ethics Committee, Nigeria (NHREC/01/01/2007-30/09/2024), the ethics committees of the participating health institutions (Lagos University Teaching Hospital Research Ethics Committee: ADM/DSCST/HREC/APP/6325; University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital Health Research Ethics Committee: ERC/PAN/2025/03/0581; University of Benin Teaching Hospital Health Research Ethics Committee: ADM/E22/A/VOL. VII/483117141; Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital Research Ethics Committee: AKTH/MAC/SUB/12 A/P-3/VI/2509 and Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital Research Ethics Committee: ISTH/HREC/20241507/605), the Ministries of Health of the six states and the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control. Written informed consent will be obtained from all eligible study participants before enrolment. Results will be shared with communities and policy stakeholders and through peer-reviewed journals and will be presented at conferences.

ISRCTN16415327.

Diagnostic errors in primary care are common, particularly in the interpretation and follow-up of abnormal haemoglobin (Hgb) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) results. These errors frequently result in missed or delayed diagnoses of serious conditions such as anaemia and chronic kidney disease. This protocol describes a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial designed to evaluate a novel, evidence-based, team-based intervention aimed at improving diagnostic safety and efficiency.

The study will be conducted across 12 University of Texas Physicians (UTPs) primary care clinics in Houston, Texas, USA. Adult patients (≥18 years) with newly identified abnormal Hgb or eGFR results will be eligible for inclusion. The intervention integrates automated tracking of abnormal laboratory results, nurse navigators to support patient follow-up and engagement, and clinical pathologists to provide diagnostic guidance to primary care providers. The primary outcome is diagnostic safety, defined as the proportion of patients who receive a correct diagnosis within 6 months. Secondary outcomes include diagnostic efficiency, appropriate test utilisation, cost-effectiveness, patient activation and implementation metrics such as acceptability, fidelity and sustainability. The study will also explore barriers and facilitators to successful implementation using mixed-methods evaluation.

This trial has been approved by the Institutional Review Board at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, and findings will be reported to UTP leadership to inform potential system-wide implementation.

NCT05735314.

A growing number of national diagnostic reference levels based on clinical indications (NDRL_ci) in CT have been implemented worldwide since the International Commission on Radiological Protection’s 2017 recommendation. This study aims to compare NDRL_ci practices, identify influencing factors and propose evidence-based recommendations for NDRL_ci development, based on the literature published between 1996 and 2025.

Systematic review.

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus from 1996 to 24 august 2025. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis framework was followed to report the study selection process in this review. Joanna Briggs Institute’s critical appraisal tools were used to evaluate the articles critically.

Adult patients undergoing CT scans for various clinical indications.

Clinical indication-based CT protocols with reported NDRL_ci values as CT dose index volume and dose length product (DLP).

The primary outcomes were NDRL_ci values reported for various clinical indications. The secondary outcomes were CT technology, protocol parameters and patient characteristics influencing NDRL_ci.

A total of 4146 articles were identified. 410 full texts were examined and 11 studies were included in the systematic review. 25 clinical indications across seven anatomical regions were identified across 11 included studies. The NDRL_ci for urinary stones and cerebrovascular accident had the highest number of references, while flank pain and occlusion had the lowest number. The highest NDRL_ci in DLP was found for total body CT in severe trauma (3830 mGy cm) and the lowest for sinusitis (70 mGy cm).

Several factors contribute to dose discrepancies for the same clinical indications in CT imaging, including kilovolt peak and milliampere-second, scan length, number of phases, patient size, reconstruction algorithm, CT scanner age and specifications, underscoring the need for standardised and optimised CT protocols. This review highlighted several challenges, which emphasise the importance of international organisations to standardise the development of NDRL_ci to improve comparability across countries.

CRD42024603574.

Older people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer or other marginalised sexualities and gender identities (LGBTQ+) still face significant barriers and inequalities when accessing adult social care services. Little is known about the preparedness of the care workforce to support older LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly within home care services. While a few previous reviews have examined the perspectives of older LGBTQ+ people on the preparedness of the home care workforce, none have included the perspectives of the workforce itself or compared both perspectives. This is a protocol for a rapid review that aims to explore what is known about the preparedness and practice needs of the home care workforce to support older LGBTQ+ people, with a particular focus on workforce perspectives.

A rapid review method was selected to expedite the review process to support further study development and dissemination. Two electronic databases, SCOPUS and Web of Science, will be searched, as well as six subject-specific databases, including Social Care Institute for Excellence, Skills for Care, Social Care Wales, Homecare Association, Stonewall UK, LGBT Foundation UK and SAGE US. There are no search date restrictions. Study quality will be assessed using the Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations considerations will be used to consider certainty of evidence. Data will be synthesised using narrative synthesis, including a descriptive summary of included studies and their methodological quality. All preferred reporting items for review protocols have been included, as recorded by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol.

Ethical approval is not required for the protocol and review. Manuscripts for the protocol and completed review will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, and findings will be shared in webinars for the home care workforce and at academic conferences.

CRD420251038242.

Shared decision-making is widely advocated in policy and practice, but how it is to be applied in a high-stakes clinical decision such as major lower limb amputation due to chronic limb-threatening ischaemia or diabetic foot is unclear. The aim of this study was to explore the communication, consent, risk prediction and decision-making process in relation to major lower limb amputation.

A qualitative study (done as part of a broader mixed-methods study) using semi-structured interviews. Interview transcriptions were analysed using thematic analysis.

Vascular centres in three large National Health Service hospitals in Wales and England, UK, between 1 October 2020 and 30 September 2022.

A purposive sample of 18 patients for whom major lower limb amputation was considered as a treatment option/carried out, with interviews conducted before or within 4 months of amputation and 4–6 months after amputation. A further purposive sample of 20 healthcare professionals (including eight surgeons) involved in supporting or conducting major lower limb amputation decision-making.

Five major categories were identified that highlighted the challenges of ensuring shared decision-making associated with major lower limb amputation: (i) patients’ limited understanding, (ii) variable patient attitudes to decision-making, (iii) healthcare professionals’ perceived challenges to sharing decision-making, (iv) surgeons’ paternalism and (v) patients’ and healthcare professionals’ decisional regret/possible consequences of challenges.

Amputation is a life-changing decision for both patients and healthcare professionals, with huge consequences. Despite being considered the gold standard, our findings highlight several challenges to effective shared decision-making for major lower limb amputation. Shared decision-making training for healthcare professionals is paramount if these limitations are to be addressed and patients are to feel confident in being adequately informed about the treatment decisions that they make.

NCT04903756.

We conducted a pilot randomised controlled trial (the PHaCT study), including a process evaluation to assess the acceptability of a housing-led Critical Time Intervention (CTI) for prison leavers and the use of a trial design. This paper presents the process evaluation findings.

To explore the acceptability of both the intervention and the trial design to participants and those delivering the intervention, and to assess whether the intervention was delivered with fidelity.

A process evaluation following Medical Research Council guidelines. Data collection included semi-structured interviews with participants and CTI caseworkers and observations of intervention delivery. A thematic analysis of interviews and observations was conducted to understand the intervention’s implementation and contextual factors as well as the trial process acceptability.

Participants for the pilot trial were recruited from three prisons in England and Wales where the intervention was being delivered.

While 28 out of 34 trial participants consented to interviews, only one was completed. Seven caseworkers were interviewed.

A housing-led CTI to support people leaving prison at risk of homelessness, involving phased, time-limited support from caseworkers, starting prerelease and continuing postrelease, to help secure stable housing and build independence, without directly providing housing.

The intervention’s acceptability was primarily reflected through the positive feedback and success stories shared by CTI caseworkers, as well as observational data indicating high acceptance among service users. The trial design’s acceptability was challenged by concerns about randomisation and equipoise, with staff viewing randomisation as unethical due to limited support for vulnerable populations. The fidelity to the CTI intervention housing-led approach was adhered to as best as possible; stable housing was prioritised for service users before addressing other needs. Despite these efforts, both sites encountered significant challenges due to limited housing availability and complex systems for securing social housing, particularly for single men leaving prison.

This wider study faced significant challenges which impacted the process evaluation. Despite these issues, the evaluation provides important insights into the challenges of conducting trials on interventions for people leaving prison. The challenges experienced should inform future study designs with similar populations and in similar settings.

ISRCTN46969988.

To determine whether a full-scale randomised control trial (RCT) assessing the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a housing led Critical Time Intervention (CTI) is feasible and acceptable.

Pilot parallel two-arm individual level RCT, including process evaluation and embedded exploratory health economic evaluation.

Four prisons for men across England and Wales, UK.

Men leaving prison at risk of homelessness and intervention delivery staff.

CTI has four components: (1) pre-engagement phase: assessing the needs of the client and implementing a plan pre-discharge; (2) transition to community: forming relationships and goal setting; (3) try out: encouraging problem-solving and managing practical issues and (4) transfer of care: developing long-term goals and transferring responsibilities to community providers.

Progression criteria: recruitment, retention, acceptability of the processes (CTI and trial method) and fidelity of intervention delivery. We also assessed the completeness of primary, secondary and exploratory outcome measures and estimated intervention costs.

The recruitment progression criterion was met, with 92% (34/37) of approached individuals consenting to participate (target: 50%). However, the overall recruitment target of 80 was not achieved, and retention was low, only 18% (6/34) provided follow-up data, well below the 60% threshold. Retention was hindered by systemic challenges, including changes to prison release policies and reduced probation support. While the CTI model was acceptable to staff and service users, the trial design, particularly randomisation, was not. Intervention fidelity met the progression criteria. Baseline data collection for health economics and resource use was feasible, and intervention costs were estimated.

This pilot trial identified significant challenges to conducting a full-scale RCT of CTI in this context, particularly around retention, trial acceptability and systemic instability. While CTI remains a promising model, a traditional RCT design may not be viable in this setting without substantial structural and ethical adaptations.

ISRCTN46969988.