Dexmedetomidine is a promising pharmaceutical strategy to minimise opioid use during surgery. Despite its growing use, it is uncertain whether dexmedetomidine can improve patient-centred outcomes such as quality of recovery and pain.

We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis following the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. We will search MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science and CINAHL approximately in October 2023. We will include randomised controlled trials evaluating the impact of systemic intraoperative dexmedetomidine on patient-centred outcomes. Patient-centred outcome definition will be based on the consensus definition established by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative (StEP-COMPAC). Our primary outcome will be the quality of recovery after surgery. Our secondary outcomes will be patient well-being, function, health-related quality of life, life impact, multidimensional assessment of postoperative acute pain, chronic pain, persistent postoperative opioid use, opioid-related adverse events, hospital length of stay and adverse events. Two reviewers will independently screen and identify trials and extract data. We will evaluate the risk of bias of trials using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2.0). We will synthesise data using a random effects Bayesian model framework, estimating the probability of achieving a benefit and its clinical significance. We will assess statistical heterogeneity with the tau-squared and explore sources of heterogeneity with meta-regression. We have involved patient partners, clinicians, methodologists, and key partner organisations in the development of this protocol, and we plan to continue this collaboration throughout all phases of this systematic review.

Our systematic review does not require research ethics approval. It will help inform current clinical practice guidelines and guide development of future randomised controlled trials. The results will be disseminated in open-access peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and shared among collaborators and networks.

CRD42023439896.

Nutrition education is the cornerstone to maintain optimal pregnancy outcomes including gestational weight gain (GWG). Nevertheless, default for appointments is common and often lead to suboptimal achievement of GWG, accompanied with unfavourable maternal and child health outcomes. While mobile health (mHealth) usage is increasing and helps minimising barriers to clinic appointments among pregnant mothers, its effectiveness on health outcomes has been inconclusive. Therefore, this study aimed to address the gap between current knowledge and clinical care, by exploring the effectiveness of mHealth on GWG as the primary outcome, hoping to serve as a fundamental work to achieve optimal health outcomes with the improvement of secondary outcomes such as physical activity, psychosocial well-being, dietary intake, quality of life and sleep quality among pregnant mothers.

A total of 294 eligible participants will be recruited and allocated into 3 groups comprising of mHealth intervention alone, mHealth intervention integrated with personal medical nutrition therapy and a control group. Pretested structured questionnaires are used to obtain the respondents’ personal information, anthropometry data, prenatal knowledge, physical activity, psychosocial well-being, dietary intake, quality of life, sleep quality and GWG. There will be at least three time points of data collection, with all participants recruited during their first or second trimester will be followed up prospectively (after 3 months or/and after 6 months) until delivery. Generalised linear mixed models will be used to compare the mean changes of outcome measures over the entire study period between the three groups.

Ethical approvals were obtained from the ethics committee of human subjects research of Universiti Putra Malaysia (JKEUPM-2022-072) and medical research & ethics committee, Ministry of Health Malaysia: NMRR ID-22-00622-EPU(IIR). The results will be disseminated through journals and conferences targeting stakeholders involved in nutrition research.

Clinicaltrial.gov ID: NCT05377151.

Sciatica can be very painful and, in most cases, is due to pressure on a spinal nerve root from a disc herniation with associated inflammation. For some patients, the pain persists, and one management option is a spinal epidural steroid injection (ESI). The aim of an ESI is to relieve leg pain, improve function and reduce the need for surgery. ESIs work well in some patients but not in others, but we cannot identify these patient subgroups currently. This study aims to identify factors, including patient characteristics, clinical examination and imaging findings, that help in predicting who does well and who does not after an ESI. The overall objective is to develop a prognostic model to support individualised patient and clinical decision-making regarding ESI.

POiSE is a prospective cohort study of 439 patients with sciatica referred by their clinician for an ESI. Participants will receive weekly text messages until 12 weeks following their ESIand then again at 24 weeks following their ESI to collect data on leg pain severity. Questionnaires will be sent to participants at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 weeks after their ESI to collect data on pain, disability, recovery and additional interventions. The prognosis for the cohort will be described. The primary outcome measure for the prognostic model is leg pain at 6 weeks. Prognostic models will also be developed for secondary outcomes of disability and recovery at 6 weeks and additional interventions at 24 weeks following ESI. Statistical analyses will include multivariable linear and logistic regression with mixed effects model.

The POiSE study has received ethical approval (South Central Berkshire B Research Ethics Committee 21/SC/0257). Dissemination will be guided by our patient and public engagement group and will include scientific publications, conference presentations and social media.