There are global concerns about the rise in opioid prescribing. Patients undergoing potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) are at high risk of adverse outcomes from opioid-related complications, including delayed discharge and adjuvant chemotherapy, long-term opioid use and reduced cancer-free survival. We aimed to develop a set of actionable quality indicators for opioid stewardship for patients undergoing CRC surgery, and an implementation toolkit to support professional behaviour change to improve appropriateness of perioperative opioid prescribing.

A five-round modified RAND consensus process was conducted in 2021–2024.

14 secondary care trusts across the UK Yorkshire and Humber region.

Consultant anaesthetists and national perioperative opioid stewardship experts (expert panel) and patient and public panel.

Potential indicators were identified from a literature review, guideline search and expert panel. All potential indicators were rated on relevance and actionability (online survey, expert panel) and importance to patient care (online meeting, patient panel). A hybrid consensus meeting involving a patient representative and the expert panel discussed and rerated the indicators. An online expert survey identified potential barriers to implementation. An actionable toolkit was developed using implementation strategies and supporting resources developed where appropriate.

73 potential indicators were identified. All indicators remained in the process through the online survey and patient panel. After the final meeting, four indicators remained: (1) hospital trust presence of an opioid stewardship protocol; (2) inpatient functional post-operative pain assessments; (3) patient education and discharge leaflet; and (4) senior clinician review of ‘strong’ opioids on discharge (British National Formulary definition). The number of barriers identified ranged from 8 to 22 per indicator. 49 different implementation strategies were identified for the toolkit (range 32–45 per indicator).

We identified four actionable quality indicators and developed an implementation toolkit that represents consensus in defining quality of care in opioid stewardship for CRC surgery.

Carers of people with non-memory-led dementias such as posterior cortical atrophy (PCA), primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) face unique challenges. Yet, little evidence-based support and guidance are available for this population. To address this gap in services, we have developed a novel, web-based educational programme: the Better Living with Non-memory-led Dementia programme (BELIDE). BELIDE was co-designed with people with lived experience of non-memory-led dementia and a previous pilot study confirmed its feasibility as an online intervention. This protocol outlines the randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of BELIDE.

This is a parallel-group, single-blind, RCT of 238 unpaid caregivers of people diagnosed with PCA, PPA or bvFTD recruited internationally among members of the UK-based organisation Rare Dementia Support. The intervention (BELIDE programme) consists of six structured online educational modules tailored to each phenotype, a virtual onboarding session, real-life practice tasks and up to two follow-up facilitation sessions. The group receiving the intervention will be given access to the programme, while the control group will receive treatment as usual and be placed on a wait-list to receive access to the programme once they complete their participation in the trial. The allocation ratio will be 1:1 stratified by dementia diagnosis and gender. The primary outcome is reduction in caregiver depressive symptoms. Secondary outcomes include stress, anxiety, self-efficacy, quality of life and caregiver-patient relationship quality. Data will be collected online via Qualtrics surveys at baseline, 8 weeks and 6 months post-randomisation. A mixed-method process evaluation with a subgroup of intervention participants will explore barriers and facilitators for engagement. A health economics evaluation will also be conducted to assess cost-effectiveness. If effective, this programme could improve access to caregiver support for non-memory-led dementias by providing scalable, tailored education.

Ethical approval has been granted by University College London Research Ethics Committee (8545/007). The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, conferences, stakeholder events and open-access resources.

This trial has been registered prospectively on the Clinical Trials registry, first posted on 5 February 2024 under registration number NCT06241287.

To measure the perceived autonomy level in managing lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) among paediatric residents and to compare perceived autonomy with the assessments by tutors who directly supervise and evaluate residents

A survey on managing LRTIs was distributed among all Italian paediatric residents and tutors via Google Forms between January 1 and 31, 2024.

Participants, residents and tutors were classified according to their training year and clinical setting: primary care paediatrics (PCP), emergency department (ED) and hospital ward (HW).

Perceived autonomy of paediatric residents in managing LRTI in different settings; overall perceived autonomy and interest in employment.

A total of 391 questionnaires were returned, with 273 completed by residents and 118 by tutors. Among residents, 3% in their first year felt fully capable of managing LRTIs without supervision in both ED and HW settings. This percentage remained below 25% until the third year and increased to 72% in ED and 83% in HW by the fifth year. In PCP settings, autonomy ranged from 15% in the first year to 96% in the final year. No differences were found between residents’ self-evaluations and tutors’ assessments. Confidence in skills showed no regional differences across Italy.

Most residents did not feel ready to manage winter respiratory infections in children without supervision, especially in the ED compared with the HW; however, self-confidence was higher in the PCP setting. Tutors shared similar perceptions. The location did not affect the response pattern. These findings caution against employing residents to work autonomously, particularly in emergency settings.