Structured medicines reviews in HIV outpatients: a feasibility study (The MOR Study).

OBJECTIVES: Polypharmacy in people living with HIV (PLWH) increases the risks of medicine-related problems (events or circumstances involving drug therapy that actually or potentially interfere with desired health outcomes). We aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a Medicines Management Optimisation Review (MOR) toolkit in HIV outpatients. METHODS: This was a multi-centre randomized controlled study across four HIV centres. In all, 200 PLWH on combination antiretroviral therapy, either > 50 years old or < 50 years with other comorbidities, were enrolled to have a MOR or received standard pharmaceutical care. The primary outcome was the difference in the number of medicine-related problems (MRPs) between intervention and standard care groups at baseline and 6 months. Acceptability, cost of the intervention and health-related quality of life were also examined. RESULTS: In all, 164 patients were analysed: 70 in the intervention group and 94 in the standard care group. A significant number of MRPs were detected in those patients receiving MOR compared with the standard care group at baseline (93 vs. 2; p = 0.001, z = -8.6, r = 0.6) and 6 months (33 vs. 3; p = 0.001, z = -5.7, r = 0.4). A significant reduction in the number of new MRPs at 6 months in the intervention group versus baseline was also observed (p = 0.001, Z = -3.7, r = 0.2); 44% of MRPs were fully resolved at baseline and 51% at 6 months. No changes in health-related quality of life following MOR or between MOR and standard care groups were observed. The MORs were highly acceptable among patients and healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS: The MOR toolkit was feasible and acceptable, suggesting that HIV outpatient services might consider implementing MOR for targeted populations under their care.

Evaluation of a Combined HIV and Geriatrics Clinic for Older People Living with HIV: The Silver Clinic in Brighton, UK.

As life expectancy in people living with HIV (PLWH) has increased, the focus of management has shifted to preventing and treating chronic illnesses, but few services exist for the assessment and management of these individuals. Here, we provide an initial description of a geriatric service for people living with HIV and present data from a service evaluation undertaken in the clinic. We conducted an evaluation of the first 52 patients seen in the clinic between 2016 and 2019. We present patient demographic data, assessment outcomes, diagnoses given, and interventions delivered to those seen in the clinic. The average age of attendees was 67. Primary reasons for referral to the clinic included management of complex comorbidities, polypharmacy, and suspected geriatric syndrome (falls, frailty, poor mobility, or cognitive decline). The median (range) number of comorbidities and comedications (non-antiretrovirals) was 7 (2-19) and 9 (1-15), respectively. All attendees had an undetectable viral load. Geriatric syndromes were observed in 26 (50%) patients reviewed in the clinic, with frailty and mental health disease being the most common syndromes. Interventions offered to patients included combination antiretroviral therapy modification, further health investigations, signposting to rehabilitation or social care services, and in-clinic advice. High levels of acceptability among patients and healthcare professionals were reported. The evaluation suggests that specialist geriatric HIV services might play a role in the management of older people with HIV with geriatric syndromes.

Correction to: The U&I study: study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial of a pre-cognitive behavioural therapy digital 'informed choice' intervention to improve attitudes towards uptake and implementation of CBT for psychosis.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported a typing mistake in the spelling of author Iain O'Leary. The original article has been corrected.

The U&I study: study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial of a pre-cognitive behavioural therapy digital 'informed choice' intervention to improve attitudes towards uptake and implementation of CBT for psychosis.

BACKGROUND: At least 40% of people with psychosis have persistent distressing symptoms despite optimal medication treatment. Cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis (CBTp) is the only NICE-recommended individual therapy for psychosis, with effects on symptoms, distress and quality of life. Yet <10% of service-users receive it and 94% of trusts struggle to provide it. Of those offered it, 22-43% refuse or do not attend. We have developed a new pre-CBTp informed choice intervention to address knowledge and attitudes that influence uptake and implementation and now want to test it in a feasibility trial. METHODS: The design is a two-arm, feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT), with 1:1 randomisation, stratified by participant group and site. Participants are 40 psychosis patients and 40 clinicians, who are ambivalent towards uptake or implementation of CBTp. Sites are community and inpatient services in Sussex and London. The intervention is a pre-CBT digital psychoeducation intervention designed to address identified knowledge and attitudinal barriers to uptake and implementation of CBTp, incorporating behaviour change mechanisms, and supported by animated introductory, patient and clinician stories. The comparator is the NHS choices website for CBT. The primary aim is to assess clinical feasibility (recruitment, randomisation, acceptability, use, delivery, outcome measurement, retention). A secondary aim is a preliminary evaluation of efficacy. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, post intervention, and one-month follow-up (blind to treatment arm). The primary efficacy outcome is likelihood of offering/taking up CBTp. Secondary outcomes include knowledge and attitudes towards CBTp, illness perceptions, empowerment, psychological wellbeing (patients only) and CBTp implementation (clinicians only). Use of the intervention and CBT behaviours during the follow-up period will be recorded and captured in a feedback questionnaire. Use, acceptability and experience of outcome assessment will be explored in qualitative interviews with participants (n = 6 per group). The efficacy evaluation will report descriptive data, key model parameters and 95% highest probability density intervals in a Bayesian growth model. DISCUSSION: This is the first feasibility trial of a digital 'informed choice' decision aid for the implementation of CBTp. If the trial proves feasible and demonstrates preliminary evidence of efficacy, a large multi-site trial will be warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN53107879 . Registered prospectively on 2 August 2017.