To determine whether a novel urine collection device (the ‘Pee-in-Pot (PiP)’) produces the same rates of reportable urine culture results as standard of care (SOC) urine collection. To determine whether the PiP produces comparable microscopy results to SOC urine collection. To estimate the carbon footprint of the PiP compared to SOC urine collection.

A prospectively designed, single-centre, paired comparison study.

A district general hospital in Southwest England, including antenatal clinical, accident and emergency, medical and surgical ward environments.

Adults aged 18 or over.

Urine passed through the PiP device before being decanted into a 10 mL boric acid tube for microscopy and culture, compared with the same urine contained only in a sterile plastic vessel before being decanted into a boric acid tube for microscopy and culture.

The proportion of positive urine culture results.

The proportion of heavy mixed growth culture results. Comparison of particle counts: all small particles, bacteria, red blood cells and white blood cells.

Microscopy was performed for 1353 paired samples, of which 808 paired samples both underwent culture. Overall, urine cultures were positive in 9.3% (75/808) and 10.0% (81/808) of PiP and control cases, respectively. Overall matching between PiP and control arms for reportable positive culture results was 98.5% (796/808), with a Cohen’s Kappa test coefficient () of 0.9149 (almost perfect agreement). There was no significant difference in the rate of positive urine culture results between testing arms for any organisms (margin of non-inferiority prospectively defined as ±2.5% for Escherichia coli positive cultures). For microscopy, there was agreement in meeting culture thresholds for 1308 of 1353 paired samples with a difference in culturing rates of 0.00517 (95% CI –0.0045 to 0.015, ie, high level of agreement). The estimated base case carbon footprint of PiP testing was 95g CO2e compared to 270g CO2e for SOC testing.

This study found the PiP to be non-inferior for routine urine microscopy and culture testing and to have a lower carbon footprint compared with SOC urine testing.

Outcomes for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) patients are limited by delayed and missed diagnoses, driven in part by poor professional awareness. Despite DCM being the most common cause of adult spinal cord injury, it remains under-recognised and undertaught in clinical education. Lessons from other common pathology like stroke and acute myocardial infarction highlight the potential of education to improve early diagnosis. This study will develop a professional education strategy to improve early DCM diagnosis. It will define key audiences and identify an effective delivery method, laying the groundwork for a sustained, targeted intervention.

The study aims to define who needs to know about DCM, what they need to know and how they can learn it. This will be carried out in three phases: phase 1—who and what: to establish the target population and to define core competencies for the educational intervention; phase 2—how: to create and review the educational intervention; phase 3—evaluation: to test whether the framework is an improvement to existing strategies.

Ethical approval is in place from the University of Cambridge (HBREC.2024.24). Results from the study will be disseminated through scientific publication, conference presentation, blog posts and podcasts.

CRD42023461838

Metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) can lead to substantial fat-free mass loss (FFML) due to malnutrition, decreased protein intake and insufficient physical activity. Disproportional FFML has been associated with an increased risk for adverse health outcomes. Resistance training (RT) combined with protein intake contributes to maintenance and increase of fat-free mass (FFM) in healthy individuals. However, it is unclear whether RT and protein supplementation can prevent FFML after MBS.

In the EffectiveNess of pRotein supplementatIon Combined witH resistance Exercise training to counteract Disproportional fat-free mass loss following metabolic bariatric surgery (ENRICHED) randomised controlled trial, 400 patients scheduled to undergo MBS will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to the ENRICHED perioperative care programme (intervention group) or the standard perioperative care programme of the Dutch Obesity Clinic (control group). The study is currently recruiting participants at two centres in the Netherlands: Nieuwegein and Amsterdam. The postoperative standard programme consists of 13 group sessions spread over a period of 18 months. As part of the ENRICHED programme, RT and protein supplementation will be added 3 weeks after MBS. Additional whole-body RT consists of home-based training sessions two to three times a week, and supervised RT sessions of 45–60 min once weekly, performed at 60–75% of one-repetition maximum (1-RM). Protein supplementation will start by adding 20 g of whey protein to the daily intake. The supplementation will be gradually increased with 20 g every 4 weeks until a total of 60 g whey protein a day is reached. After 12 weeks of protein supplementation, the focus shifts towards incorporating protein-rich food products into the daily dietary intake. The primary endpoint is the prevalence of disproportional FFM loss, defined as FFML/total weight loss ≥30%, at 3 months post-MBS. Secondary endpoints are differences in body composition, muscle strength and function, cardiorespiratory fitness, (cardio)metabolic health, health-related quality of life, gastrointestinal discomfort, cost-effectiveness of the intervention and treatment satisfaction. Outcomes will be assessed preoperatively and at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

The study protocol V.2.0 was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee Oost-Nederland (NL-OMON57119) on 9 April 2025. All participants will provide written informed consent prior to enrolment. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Insights gained in this study will provide evidence for a patient-tailored intervention that could be implemented in clinical practice.

NCT07156552.

To assess the comparative effectiveness of educational interventions in neurological disease for healthcare workers and students.

Systematic review.

Medline, Embase and Cochrane through to 1 June 2025.

Studies evaluating neurological disease educational interventions with a comparator group (observational cohort/randomised controlled trial (RCT)) were included.

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review was conducted (PROSPERO: CRD42023461838). Knowledge acquisition and educational methodologies were collected from each study. Study outcomes were classified using the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick four-level model (learner reaction, knowledge acquisition, behavioural change, clinical outcome).¹ Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomised studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs.^{2 3}

A total of 67 studies involving 4728 participants were included. Of these, 36 were RCTs, and 31 were observational studies. Virtual interventions were the most common (67.2%, n=45 studies), primarily targeting either medical students (46.3%, n=31 studies) or specialists (40.3%, n=27 studies). Overall, 70.1% (n=47) of studies demonstrated outcomes in favour of the intervention. However, few studies used K&K level 3/4 outcomes, with two studies evaluating behaviour change (level 3) and three assessing clinical outcomes (level 4 combined with other levels). No study exclusively assessed level 4 outcomes. Meta-analysis of 22 RCTs with calculable standardised mean differences (SMDs) (n=1748) showed a significant benefit of interventions (SMD 0.75, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.27, p=0.0056).

This review highlights a growing body of research particularly focusing on virtual techniques, specialist audiences and treatment-oriented content. Few studies assessed changes in practice or patient care. Non-specialists remain underrepresented. Future studies should prioritise assessing the clinical impact of educational interventions within non-specialist audiences.

The global prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) is expected to rise as the population ages, leading to increased physical impairments that often reduce physical activity. Knee OA, in particular, is a leading cause of chronic pain and disability in people over 40. OA progression varies among individuals, with factors such as higher age and body mass index contributing to a more rapid progression. However, research suggests that engaging in physical activity such as hiking and running may help alleviate pain and slow OA progression. However, current literature on the relationship between physical activity and knee OA is largely retrospective, lacks comparative analyses across different physical activity types and rarely considers the intensity of physical activity. To address these gaps, the LoaD study was designed as a prospective cohort study aimed at examining how different physical activity types (ie, hiking, running, cycling and tennis) and their intensities relate to knee OA progression over 24 months in physically active individuals with early signs of the condition.

This prospective cohort study will include 300 participants (75 per physical activity group), who will be followed for 24 months. Eligible participants are aged 45–65, meet the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criteria for clinical knee OA and engage in a minimum weekly activity level for either running (60 min), cycling (120 min), playing tennis (60 min) or hiking (1 hike of 10 km). Baseline and follow-up assessments will include MRI, physical examination (eg, biometrics, lower extremity strength) and blood sampling for molecular biomarker assessment (eg, genetics, inflammatory biomarkers). Participants will receive monthly online questionnaires (eg, demographics, lifestyle, general health, history of knee injuries) and their physical activities will be tracked continuously by global positioning system data from wearable devices. The study’s primary outcomes focus on knee OA progression and symptom changes. These will be assessed through (1) structural progression of knee OA, measured using the MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score (MOAKS) and (2) clinical symptom progression evaluated by (a) the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score sport and recreation function subscale and (b) Visual Analogue Scale for pain during an activity nominated by the participant to be the most aggravating for knee pain in the past month (VASNA, 0–10). Differences between groups on the primary outcomes will be analysed using mixed-effects models to determine the impact of activity type and intensity on knee OA progression.

The study is approved by the Erasmus MC Medical Research and Ethics Committee (MREC) (MEC-2022-0420). The results of this study will be made publicly available through peer-reviewed international open-access scientific journals and national and international conferences. Participants will be informed about the results as soon as they are published.

In high-income countries, the prevalence of frailty ranges from 10% to 37%. However, data from low- and middle-income countries remain largely unavailable, and no information is currently available on the prevalence of frailty or cognitive impairment in the Georgian population. Preoperative frailty is a known risk factor for postoperative delirium and neurocognitive disorders, which can be life-threatening in the population of older adults.

This protocol describes a prospective, single-centre observational cohort study investigating preoperative frailty and postoperative neurocognitive disorders in older adults presenting for surgery in Georgia. The study will include 230 participants. Patients will be enroled after their cognitive health is evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test. Frailty and neuropsychological tests are conducted at baseline, discharge, 30 days, 3 months and 12 months postoperatively. Additionally, IL-6 levels are measured in blood samples to assess systemic inflammatory levels preoperatively. Participants will be followed up for 1 year.

Our trial has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the LTD ‘New Hospitals’ clinic (Approval No. 23/01). Patient recruitment began in April 2023 in Tbilisi, Georgia, and will continue until 2026. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, publication in peer-reviewed journals, engagement with stakeholders and outreach through popular media.

NCT06700291.

Primary care electronic health records provide a rich source of information for inequalities research. However, the reliability and validity of the research derived from these records depend on the completeness and resolution of the codelists (ie, collections of medical terms/codes) used to identify populations of interest. The aim of this project was to develop comprehensive codelists for identifying people from ethnic minority groups, people with learning disabilities (LDs), people with severe mental illness (SMI) and people who are transgender.

We followed a three-stage process to define and extract relevant codelists. First, groups of interest were defined a priori. Next, relevant clinical codes, relating to the groups, were identified by searching Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) publications, codelist repositories and the CPRD Code Browser. Relevant codelists were extracted and merged according to group, and duplicates were removed. Finally, the remaining codes were reviewed by two general practitioners (GPs).

The curated codelists were compared using a representative sample in the UK. The frequencies of individuals identified using the curated codelists were assessed and compared with widely used alternative codelists.

Comprehensiveness was assessed in a representative CPRD population of 10 966 759 people.

After removal of duplicates and GP review, codelists were finalised with 325 unique codes for ethnicity, 558 for LD, 499 for SMI and 38 for transgender. Compared with comparator codelists, an additional 48 017 (76.6%), 52 953 (68.9%) and 508 (36.9%) people with LD, SMI or transgender code were identified. The proportions identified for ethnicity, meanwhile, were consistent with expectations for the UK (eg, 6.50% Asian, 2.66% black and 1.44% mixed).

The curated codelists are more sensitive than those widely used in practice and research. Discrepancies between national estimates and primary care records suggest potential record/retention issues. Resolving these requires further investigation and could lead to improved data quality for research.