To understand the lived experience of adults with overweight/obesity and early type 2 diabetes in a modern urban environment, and the interrelations among the various aspects of these experiences and participants’ attitudes to weight management.

Qualitative inductive approach to analysing data thematically from semistructured interviews and interpreted from a socioecological perspective.

Primary care clinics located in northern and central Singapore.

21 patients between 29 and 59 years old who are living with overweight/obese (Body Mass Index of 25.3–44.0kg/m²) and type 2 diabetes for 6 years or less.

The main themes – everyday life, people around me and within me – pointed to a combination of barriers to weight and health management for participants. These included environmental factors such as easy physical and digital access to unhealthy food, and high-stress work environments; social factors such as ambiguous family support and dietary practices of peers; and individual factors such as challenges with self-regulation, prioritising work, dealing with co-existing medical conditions and the emotional significance of food. While lack of motivation and cultural dietary practices are hard to change, a problem-solving attitude, and presence of role models, may enable behaviour change.

An exploration of the lifeworld of patients with overweight/obese and early type 2 diabetes revealed that work demands, dietary practices in the workplace and at home, and the easy availability of calorie-dense foods afforded by a technology-infused environment hindered the individual’s efforts at maintaining a healthy weight and lifestyle. Policy and initiatives promoting work-life balance as well as individualised interventions can support participants’ stress management, and problem-solving capability for behaviour change. These barriers stemmed from the various domains of the environmental, interpersonal and intrapersonal but were interrelated. They underscored the need for an integrated approach to weight and diabetes management.

Incisional hernia (IH) is a prevalent and potentially dangerous complication of abdominal surgery, especially in high-risk groups. Mesh reinforcement of the abdominal wall has been studied as a potential intervention to prevent IHs. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that prophylactic mesh reinforcement after abdominal surgery, in general, is effective and safe. In patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), prophylactic mesh reinforcement after open repair has not yet been recommended in official guidelines, because of relatively small sample sizes in individual trials. Furthermore, the identification of subgroups that benefit most from prophylactic mesh placement requires larger patient numbers. Our primary aim is to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of the use of a prophylactic mesh after open AAA surgery to prevent IH by performing an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA). Secondary aims include the evaluation of postoperative complications, pain and quality of life, and the identification of potential subgroups that benefit most from prophylactic mesh reinforcement.

We will conduct a systematic review to identify RCTs that study prophylactic mesh placement after open AAA surgery. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection and Google Scholar will be searched from the date of inception onwards. RCTs must directly compare primary sutured closure with mesh closure in adult patients who undergo open AAA surgery. Lead authors of eligible studies will be asked to share individual participant data (IPD). The risk of bias (ROB) for each included study will be assessed using the Cochrane ROB tool. An IPDMA will be performed to evaluate the efficacy, with the IH rate as the primary outcome. Any signs of heterogeneity will be evaluated by Forest plots. Time-to-event analyses are performed using Cox regression analysis to evaluate risk factors.

No new data will be collected in this study. We will adhere to institutional, national and international regulations regarding the secure and confidential sharing of IPD, addressing ethics as indicated. We will disseminate findings via international conferences, open-source publications in peer-reviewed journals and summaries posted online.

CRD42022347881.

Managing older adults with multimorbidity may be challenging due to the conflicting benefits and harms of multiple treatments. Thus, it is important to identify patients’ health outcome priorities to align treatment goals with their health preferences. This study aimed to use the Outcome Prioritisation Tool (OPT) to describe the health outcome priorities of older adults with multimorbidity and determine the factors associated with these priorities. Additionally, it aimed to assess the ease of completing the OPT in Singapore’s primary care population.

Cross-sectional study conducted from January to March 2022.

A public primary care centre in Singapore.

65 years and older with multimorbidity.

Primary outcome measure was the most important health outcome priorities on the OPT. Secondary outcome measures were factors affecting these priorities and ease of completing the OPT.

We enrolled 180 participants (mean age: 73.2±6.1 years). Slightly more than half (54.4%) prioritised ‘staying alive’, while the remainder (45.6%) prioritised ‘maintaining independence’ (25.6%), ‘relieving pain’ (10.6%) and ‘relieving other symptoms’ (9.4%). Participants with six or more chronic conditions were three times (OR 3.03 (95% CI1.09 to 8.42)) more likely to prioritise ‘staying alive’ compared with participants with three conditions. Most participants (69.4%) agreed that the OPT was easy to complete, and the mean time taken to complete the OPT was 3.8±1.6 minutes.

‘Staying alive’ was the most important health outcome priority, especially for older adults with six or more chronic conditions. The OPT was easily completed among older adults with multimorbidity in primary care. Further qualitative studies can be conducted to understand the factors influencing patients’ priorities and explore the relevance of the OPT in guiding treatment decisions.

Approximately 10% of chronic pain patients who receive opioids develop an opioid use disorder (OUD). Tapering programmes for these patients show high drop-out rates. Insight into chronic pain patients’ experiences with tapering programmes for prescription OUD could help improve such programmes. Therefore, we investigated the perspectives of chronic pain patients with prescription OUD to identify facilitators and barriers to initiate and complete a specialised OUD tapering programme.

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews on experiences with initiation and completion of opioid tapering was audio recorded, transcribed and subject to directed content analysis.

This study was conducted in two facilities with specialised opioid tapering programmes in the Netherlands.

Twenty-five adults with chronic pain undergoing treatment for prescription OUD participated.

Participants indicated that tapering is a personal process, where willingness and motivation to taper, perceived (medical) support and pain coping strategies have an impact on the tapering outcome. The opportunity to join a medical-assisted tapering programme, shared decision-making regarding tapering pace, tapering location, and receiving medical and psychological support facilitated completion of an opioid tapering programme.

According to patients, a successful treatment of prescription OUD requires a patient-centred approach that combines personal treatment goals with shared decision-making on opioid tapering. Referral to a specialised tapering programme that incorporates opioid rotation, non-judgmental attitudes, and psychological support can create a safe and supportive environment, fostering successful tapering and recovery.

Pembrolizumab is a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor used to treat advanced patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumour proportion score (TPS) ≥50. Further sub-division of TPS-based stratification has not been evaluated in the UK, although smoking-induced tumour mutational burden and the immunogenic effects of prior radiotherapy are suggested to improve response.

To investigate if PD-L1 TPS ≥80%, smoking status or radiotherapy before or within 2 months of treatment influenced progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with NSCLC treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy.

PD-L1 TPS, smoking status and radiotherapy exposure were compared in patients with NSCLC in National Health Service (NHS) Tayside (n=100) treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy between 1 November 2017 and 18 February 2022. Survival estimates were compared using log-rank analysis, and Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to investigate the influence of potential confounding factors, including tumour stage and performance status.

PFS was not significantly different (log-rank HR=0.330, p=0.566) comparing patients with PD-L1 TPS 50–79% and PD-L1 TPS ≥80%. Smokers had significantly improved PFS (log-rank HR=4.867, p=0.027), while patients receiving radiotherapy had significantly decreased PFS (log-rank HR=6.649, p=0.012). A Cox regression model confirmed that both radiotherapy (p=0.022) and performance status (p=0.009) were independent negative predictors of PFS.

More rigorous PD-L1 TPS stratification did not influence survival outcomes. Smoking history improved PFS, although it was not an independent response predictor, while radiotherapy and performance status independently influenced clinical response. We suggest that further stratification of PD-L1 TPS is not warranted, while performance status and radiotherapy treatment may be additional clinically useful biomarkers of response to pembrolizumab in patients with NSCLC.