The perceptions and experiences of community nurses and patients towards shared decision-making in the home setting: An integrative review.

AIM: To explore patients' and community nurses' perceptions and experiences of shared decision-making in the home. DESIGN: Integrative review. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, British Nursing Index, Psycinfo, Medline and Social Services Abstracts were searched for qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods papers published between 1 December 2001 and 31 October 2023. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was undertaken using defined inclusion criteria. The included papers were appraised for quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. Relevant data were extracted and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Fourteen papers comprising 13 research studies were included. Patients attached great importance to their right to be involved in decision-making and noted feeling valued as a unique individual. Communication and trust between the patient and nurse were perceived as fundamental. However, shared decision-making does not always occur in practice. Nurses described tension in managing patients' involvement in decision-making. CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate that although patients and community nurses appreciate participating in shared decision-making within the home, there are obstacles to achieving a collaborative process. This is especially relevant when there are fundamentally different perspectives on the decision being made. More research is needed to gain further understanding of how shared decision-making plays out in practice and to understand the tensions that patients and nurses may experience. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: This paper argues that shared decision-making is more than the development of a relationship where the patient can express their views (though of course, this is important). Shared decision-making requires acknowledgement that the patient has the right to full information and should be empowered to choose between options. Nurses should not assume that shared decision-making in community nursing is easy to facilitate and should recognize the tensions that might exist when true patient choice is enabled. IMPACT: This paper demonstrates how the idea of shared decision-making needs to be explored in the light of everyday practice so that challenges and barriers can be overcome. In particular, the tensions that arise when patients and nurses do not share the same perspective. This paper speaks to the potential of a gap surrounding shared decision-making in theory and how it plays out in practice. REPORTING METHOD: The reporting of this review was guided by the 2020 guidelines for the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (Page et al., 2021). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This review was carried out as part of a wider study for which service users have been consulted.

Adolescent Asthma Monitoring: A Preliminary Study of Audio and Spirometry Modalities.

Asthma patients' sleep quality is correlated with how well their asthma symptoms are controlled. In this paper, deep learning techniques are explored to improve forecasting of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) by using audio data from participants and test whether auditory sleep disturbances are correlated with poorer asthma outcomes. These are applied to a representative data set of FEV1 collected from a commercially available sprirometer and audio spectrograms collected overnight using a smartphone. A model for detecting nonverbal vocalizations including coughs, sneezes, sighs, snoring, throat clearing, sniffs, and breathing sounds was trained and used to capture nightly sleep disturbances. Our preliminary analysis found significant improvement in FEV1 forecasting when using overnight nonverbal vocalization detections as an additional feature for regression using XGBoost over using only spirometry data.Clinical relevance- This preliminary study establishes up to 30% improvement of FEV1 forecasting using features generated by deep learning techniques over only spirometry-based features.

Reasons for intending to accept or decline kidney cancer screening: thematic analysis of free text from an online survey.

OBJECTIVES: Kidney cancer has been identified as a disease for which screening might provide significant benefit for patients. The aim of this study was to understand in detail the facilitators and barriers towards uptake of a future kidney cancer screening programme, and to compare these across four proposed screening modalities. DESIGN: An online survey including free-text responses. SETTING: UK PARTICIPANTS: 668 adults PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The survey assessed participants' self-reported intention to take-up kidney cancer screening with four different test methods (urine test, blood test, ultrasound scan and low-dose CT). We conducted thematic analysis of 2559 free-text comments made within the survey using an inductive approach. RESULTS: We identified five overarching themes that influenced screening intention: 'personal health beliefs', 'practicalities', 'opinions of the test', 'attitudes towards screening' and 'cancer apprehension'. Overall, participants considered the tests presented as simple to complete and the benefits of early detection to outweigh any drawbacks to screening. Dominant facilitators and barriers varied with patterns of intention to take up screening across the four tests. Most intended to take up screening by all four tests, and for these participants, screening was seen as a positive health behaviour. A significant minority were driven by practicalities and the risks of the tests offered. A smaller proportion intended to reject all forms of screening offered, often due to fear or worry about results and unnecessary medical intervention or a general negative view of screening. CONCLUSIONS: Most individuals would accept kidney cancer screening by any of the four test options presented because of strong positive attitudes towards screening in general and the perceived simplicity of the tests. Providing information about the rationale for screening in general and the potential benefits of early detection will be important to optimise uptake among uncertain individuals.

The impact of information about different absolute benefits and harms on intention to participate in colorectal cancer screening: A think-aloud study and online randomised experiment.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable heterogeneity in individuals' risk of disease and thus the absolute benefits and harms of population-wide screening programmes. Using colorectal cancer (CRC) screening as an exemplar, we explored how people make decisions about screening when presented with information about absolute benefits and harms, and how those preferences vary with baseline risk, between screening tests and between individuals. METHOD: We conducted two linked studies with members of the public: a think-aloud study exploring decision making in-depth and an online randomised experiment quantifying preferences. In both, participants completed a web-based survey including information about three screening tests (colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and faecal immunochemical testing) and then up to nine scenarios comparing screening to no screening for three levels of baseline risk (1%, 3% and 5% over 15 years) and the three screening tests. Participants reported, after each scenario, whether they would opt for screening (yes/no). RESULTS: Of the 20 participants in the think-aloud study 13 did not consider absolute benefits or harms when making decisions concerning CRC screening. In the online experiment (n = 978), 60% expressed intention to attend at 1% risk of CRC, 70% at 3% and 77% at 5%, with no differences between screening tests. At an individual level, 535 (54.7%) would attend at all three risk levels and 178 (18.2%) at none. The 27% whose intention varied by baseline risk were more likely to be younger, without a family history of CRC, and without a prior history of screening. CONCLUSIONS: Most people in our population were not influenced by the range of absolute benefits and harms associated with CRC screening presented. For an appreciable minority, however, magnitude of benefit was important.

Incorporating a brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change into primary care: a multi-methods pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% of cancers could be prevented if people lived healthier lifestyles. We have developed a theory-based brief intervention to share personalised cancer risk information and promote behaviour change within primary care. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating this intervention into primary care consultations. METHOD: Patients eligible for an NHS Health Check or annual chronic disease review at five general practices were invited to participate in a non-randomised pilot study. In addition to the NHS Health Check or chronic disease review, those receiving the intervention were provided with their estimated risk of developing the most common preventable cancers alongside tailored behaviour change advice. Patients completed online questionnaires at baseline, immediately post-consultation and at 3-month follow-up. Consultations were audio/video recorded. Patients (n = 12) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n = 7) participated in post-intervention qualitative interviews that were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: 62 patients took part. Thirty-four attended for an NHS Health Check plus the intervention; 7 for a standard NHS Health Check; 16 for a chronic disease review plus the intervention; and 5 for a standard chronic disease review. The mean time for delivery of the intervention was 9.6 min (SD 3) within NHS Health Checks and 9 min (SD 4) within chronic disease reviews. Fidelity of delivery of the intervention was high. Data from the questionnaires demonstrates potential improvements in health-related behaviours following the intervention. Patients receiving the intervention found the cancer risk information and lifestyle advice understandable, useful and motivating. HCPs felt that the intervention fitted well within NHS Health Checks and facilitated conversations around behaviour change. Integrating the intervention within chronic disease reviews was more challenging. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating a risk-based intervention to promote behaviour change for cancer prevention into primary care consultations is feasible and acceptable to both patients and HCPs. A randomised trial is now needed to assess the effect on health behaviours. When designing that trial, and other prevention activities within primary care, it is necessary to consider challenges around patient recruitment, the HCP contact time needed for delivery of interventions, and how best to integrate discussions about disease risk within routine care.

Fidelity of the delivery of NHS Health Checks in general practice: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Health Check programme aims to reduce the risk of common preventable diseases by providing risk information and behaviour change advice. Failure to deliver the consultation appropriately could undermine its efficacy. To date, to the authors' knowledge, there are no published data on the fidelity of delivery of NHS Health Checks. AIM: To assess the fidelity of delivery of NHS Health Checks in general practice. DESIGN & SETTING: Fidelity assessment of video and audio recordings of NHS Health Check consultations conducted in four GP practices across the East of England. METHOD: A secondary analysis of 38 NHS Health Check consultations, which were video or audio recorded as part of a pilot study of introducing discussions of cancer risk into NHS Health Checks. Using a checklist based on the NHS Health Check Best Practice Guidance, fidelity of delivery was assessed as the proportion of key elements completed during the consultations. RESULTS: The mean number of elements of the NHS Health Check completed across all consultations was 14.5/18 (80.6%), with a range of 10 to 17 (55.6% to 94.4%). The mean fidelity for risk assessment, risk communication, and risk management sections was 8.7/10 (87.0%), 4.1/5 (82.0%), and 1.7/3 (56.7%), respectively. Clinically appropriate lifestyle advice was given in 34/38 consultations. Elements with the lowest fidelity were ethnicity assessment (n = 12/38; 31.6%), family history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) assessment (n = 25/38; 65.8%), AUDIT-C communication (n = 13/38; 34.2%), and dementia risk management (n = 6/38; 15.8%). CONCLUSION: Although fidelity of delivery was high overall, important elements of the NHS Health Check were being regularly omitted. Opportunities for behaviour change, particularly relating to alcohol consumption and dementia risk management, may be being missed.

A randomised controlled trial of the effect of providing online risk information and lifestyle advice for the most common preventable cancers.

Few trial data are available concerning the impact of personalised cancer risk information on behaviour. This study assessed the short-term effects of providing personalised cancer risk information on cancer risk beliefs and self-reported behaviour. We randomised 1018 participants, recruited through the online platform Prolific, to either a control group receiving cancer-specific lifestyle advice or one of three intervention groups receiving their computed 10-year risk of developing one of the five most common preventable cancers either as a bar chart, a pictograph or a qualitative scale alongside the same lifestyle advice. The primary outcome was change from baseline in computed risk relative to an individual with a recommended lifestyle (RRI)1 at three months. Secondary outcomes included: health-related behaviours, risk perception, anxiety, worry, intention to change behaviour, and a newly defined concept, risk conviction. After three months there were no between-group differences in change in RRI (p = 0.71). At immediate follow-up, accuracy of absolute risk perception (p < 0.001), absolute and comparative risk conviction (p < 0.001) and intention to increase fruit and vegetables (p = 0.026) and decrease processed meat (p = 0.033) were higher in all intervention groups relative to the control group. The increases in accuracy and conviction were only seen in individuals with high numeracy and low baseline conviction, respectively. These findings suggest that personalised cancer risk information alongside lifestyle advice can increase short-term risk accuracy and conviction without increasing worry or anxiety but has little impact on health-related behaviour. Trial registration: ISRCTN17450583. Registered 30 January 2018.

Risk factors for pediatric cerebral sinovenous thrombosis: A case-control study with case validation.

INTRODUCTION: Cerebral sinovenous thrombosis (CSVT) represents the second most common type of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in children. Current literature includes limited evidence on risk factors for CSVT, particularly in the pediatric population. We sought to determine risk factors for CSVT in pediatric patients through a single-institutional case-control study. In addition, we evaluated thrombophilias, treatments and outcomes in CSVT among cases. METHODS: A case-control study was performed at Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital on patients admitted from March 31, 2006 through April 1, 2018. Cases were identified using diagnostic codes and confirmed based on electronic health record (EHR) and neuroimaging review. Controls were matched in a 2:1 fashion accounting for the month and year of admission. RESULTS: A total of 60 CSVT cases and 120 controls were identified. Median (range) age was 4.8 years (0-21.3 years) for cases and 5.6 years (0-20.0 years) for controls. Factors putatively associated with CSVT in unadjusted analyses were: corticosteroid use, presence of a central venous catheter, mechanical ventilation, systemic infection, head/neck infection, head/neck trauma, and chronic inflammatory disease. In the multivariable model, head/neck infection (OR: 13.8, 95% CI: 4.87-38.7; P < 0.01), head/neck trauma (OR: 12.7, 95% CI: 2.88-56.2; P < 0.01), and mechanical ventilation (OR: 9.32, 95% CI: 2.35-36.9; P = 0.01) remained independent, statistically-significant risk factors. 61% of patients were subacutely treated with anticoagulants and of those, only two developed relevant bleeding after initiation of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This single-institutional case-control study reveals that head/neck infection, head/neck trauma, and mechanical ventilation are independent risk factors for pediatric CSVT. These findings will be further investigated via a cooperative registry of pediatric hospital-acquired VTE, by which a risk model for pediatric CSVT will be developed and validated, in order to inform future preventive strategies in at-risk pediatric patients.

Effect of a Skin Self-monitoring Smartphone Application on Time to Physician Consultation Among Patients With Possible Melanoma: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Melanoma is among the most lethal skin cancers; it has become the fifth most common cancer in the United Kingdom, and incidence rates are rising. Population approaches to reducing incidence have focused on mass media campaigns to promote earlier presentation and potentially improve melanoma outcomes; however, interventions using smartphone applications targeting those with the greatest risk could promote earlier presentation to health care professionals for individuals with new or changing skin lesions. Objective: To study the effect of a commercially available skin self-monitoring (SSM) smartphone application among individuals with increased risk of melanoma on their decision to seek help for changing skin lesions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted in 12 family practices in Eastern England between 2016 and 2017. A total of 238 participants, aged 18 to 75 years and with an increased risk of melanoma, were identified using a real-time melanoma risk assessment tool in family practice waiting rooms. Analysis was intention to treat. Participants were observed for 12 months, and data analysis was conducted from January to August 2018. Intervention: The intervention and control groups received a consultation with standard written advice on sun protection and skin cancer detection. The intervention group had an SSM application loaded on their smartphone and received instructions for use and monthly self-monitoring reminders. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary outcomes were skin consultation rates with family practice physicians and patient intervals, measured as the time between noticing a skin change and consulting with a family practice clinician. Follow-up questionnaires were sent at 6 and 12 months, and consultation rates were extracted from family practice records. Secondary outcomes included skin self-examination benefits and barriers, self-efficacy for consulting without delay, perceived melanoma risk, sun protection habits, and potential harms. Results: A total of 238 patients were randomized (median [interquartile range] age, 55 [43-65] years, 131 [55.0%] women, 227 [95.4%] white British; 119 [50.0%] randomized to the intervention group). Overall, 51 participants (21.4%) had consultations regarding skin changes during the 12 months of follow-up, and 157 participants (66.0%) responded to at least 1 follow-up questionnaire. There were no significant differences in skin consultation rates (adjusted risk ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.66; P = .89), measures of SSM (adjusted mean difference, 0.08; 95% CI, -0.83 to 1.00; P = .86), or psychological harm (eg, Melanoma Worry Scale: adjusted mean difference, -0.12; 95% CI, -0.56 to 0.31; P = .58). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, recruitment, retention, and initial delivery of the intervention were feasible, and this research provided no evidence of harm from the SSM smartphone application. However, no evidence of benefit on skin self-examination or health care consulting was found, and there is no reason at this stage to recommend its implementation in this population at increased risk of melanoma. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16061621.

Development and usability testing of a very brief intervention for personalised cancer risk assessment to promote behaviour change in primary care using normalisation process theory.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Lifestyle choices play an important role in the aetiology of cancer with up to 4 in 10 cases potentially preventable. Interventions delivered by healthcare professionals (HCPs) that incorporate risk information have the potential to promote behaviour change. Our aim was to develop a very brief intervention incorporating cancer risk, which could be implemented within primary care. METHODS: Guided by normalisation process theory (NPT), we developed a prototype intervention using literature reviews, consultation with patient and public representatives and pilot work with patients and HCPs. We conducted focus groups and interviews with 65 HCPs involved in delivering prevention activities. Findings were used to refine the intervention before 22 HCPs completed an online usability test and provided further feedback via a questionnaire incorporating a modified version of the NoMAD checklist. RESULTS: The intervention included a website where individuals could provide information on lifestyle risk factors view their estimated 10-year risk of developing one or more of the five most common preventable cancers and access lifestyle advice incorporating behaviour change techniques. Changes incorporated from feedback from the focus groups and interviews included signposting to local services and websites, simplified wording and labelling of risk information. In the usability testing, all participants felt it would be easy to collect the risk information. Ninety-one percent felt the intervention would enable discussion about cancer risk and believed it had potential to be easily integrated into National Health Service (NHS) Health Checks. However, only 36% agreed it could be delivered within 5 min. CONCLUSIONS: With the use of NPT, we developed a very brief intervention that is acceptable to HCPs in primary care and could be potentially integrated into NHS Health Checks. However, further work is needed to assess its feasibility and potential effectiveness.

Quality Improvement Initiative: The Administration of Early Nutrition Following Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Placement in Children.

It is common practice for providers to wait up to 24 hours to begin enteral feedings using a newly placed gastrostomy tube in children. As a quality improvement initiative, guidelines were developed to begin early enteral nutrition 4 hours following gastrostomy tube placement. These patient care guidelines standardized electronic ordering, dosing, and feeding administration instructions. Healthcare professionals from the departments of gastroenterology, case management, and nutrition were asked to evaluate the new process by completing a questionnaire. Changes were made to the quality improvement initiative on the basis of the feedback received from the questionnaires. The early feeding initiative aimed to improve patient outcomes and enhance the quality of care received following the child's gastrostomy procedure. These guidelines will then be used in a prospective clinical trial to evaluate the validity of the quality improvement initiative.

Comparison of Tolerance and Complication Rates Between Early and Delayed Feeding After Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement in Children.

BACKGROUND: Enteral nutrition is commonly initiated 24 hours after percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in children. Adult studies report safe refeeding within 1 to 6 hours of PEG, and these findings have been cautiously applied to children. Comparative studies assessing early versus next-day refeeding in children are currently lacking. This study evaluates feeding tolerance and complications following early versus next-day refeeding in children. METHODS: This is a single-center, pre-post study. In June 2015 our clinical practice changed to begin refeeding within 6 hours of PEG. Children receiving early refeeding from December 2015 to August 2017 were included. A retrospective cohort from February 2013 to April 2015 was used for comparison. RESULTS: Forty-six children received early refeeding after PEG and 37 received next-day refeeding. Gender distribution was similar in the 2 groups. Early refeeding patients were slightly older (3.5 vs 2.2 years) and heavier (15.5 vs 11.5 kg) at PEG placement compared to next-day refeeding patients. Early refeeding patients experienced greater postprocedural nausea and/or vomiting (19% vs 8%, P < 0.001) and leakage, irritation, and infection around the stoma (19% vs 0.0%, P < 0.001). Compared to early refeeders, next-day refeeding patients experienced higher occurrence of fever (35% vs 13%, P = 0.021), longer nutritional disruption (24.6 vs 3.7 hours, P < 0.001), and longer length of stay (51 vs 27 hours; P < 0.001). One next-day refeeding patient experienced peritonitis. One early refeeding patient experienced cellulitis requiring hospitalization and a second experienced gastrostomy tube migration into the peritoneal cavity requiring removal. CONCLUSION: Early refeeders experienced higher rates of postprocedural nausea or vomiting and irritation, leakage, or infection around the stoma; but experienced lower rates of postoperative fever. Early refeeding resulted in reduced nutritional interruption and hospital length of stay.

Rural competencies in emerging medical practitioners: Beyond clinical skills.

PROBLEM: Recruitment and retention of rural doctors remains a challenge in Australia. The Queensland Rural Generalist Program was developed to address this challenge and provides a range of tailored professional development opportunities to support rural medical training, recruitment and retention. The Rural Generalist Vocational Preparation Workshop was developed to maintain connection with trainees during a known attrition risk period and address a gap in training that focused on competencies required for rural practice. DESIGN: The Rural Generalist Vocational Preparation Workshop, designed using adult learning principles, includes an optimal balance between theory, scenario-based learning and facilitated group discussions. A cross-sectional survey design was employed to evaluate the workshops delivered between 2015 and 2017. SETTING: The workshops were attended by Queensland Rural Generalist Program trainees in the year prior to undertaking a vocational training position in a rural hospital or general practice. Participants were from 10 Hospital and Health Services in the Queensland public health sector at the time of attendance. KEY MEASURES FOR IMPROVEMENT: An evaluation survey captured participant feedback about the workshop, its value, impact and their intention to implement changes in practice. STRATEGIES FOR CHANGE: Fifty-one trainees attended the workshops across four locations. EFFECTS OF CHANGE: Eight-eight per cent of participants reported intentions to implement changes to practice in: pursuit of career options and enhanced team work, leadership skills and networking. LESSONS LEARNT: Evaluation results indicated that Rural Generalist Vocational Preparation Workshop was a highly valued opportunity. It provided future rural medical practitioners with professional support and networking opportunities, promoted identity formation and stimulated rural career planning.

Understanding implementation and usefulness of electronic clinical decision support (eCDS) for melanoma in English primary care: a qualitative investigation.

BACKGROUND: Timely diagnosis of the serious skin cancer melanoma can improve patient outcomes. Clinical guidelines suggest that GPs use checklists, such as the 7-point checklist (7PCL), to assess pigmented lesions. In 2016, the 7PCL was disseminated by EMIS as an electronic clinical decision support (eCDS) tool. AIM: To understand GP and patient perspectives on the implementation and usefulness of the eCDS. DESIGN & SETTING: Semi-structured interviews with GPs and patients were undertaken. The interviews took place in four general practices in the south east of England following consultations using the eCDS for suspicious pigmented lesions. METHOD: Data were collected from semi-structured face-to-face interviews with GPs and from telephone interviews with patients. They were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) underpinned the analysis using thematic approaches. RESULTS: A total of 14 interviews with GPs and 14 interviews with patients were undertaken. Most GPs reported that, as the eCDS was embedded in the medical record, it was useful, easy to use, time-efficient, and could facilitate patient-GP communication. They were less clear that it could meet policy or patient needs to improve early diagnosis, and some felt that it could lead to unnecessary referrals. Few felt that it had been sufficiently implemented at practice level. More felt confident with their own management of moles, and that the eCDS could be most useful for borderline decision-making. No patients were aware that the eCDS had been used during their consultation. CONCLUSION: Successful implementation of a new tool, such as eCDS for melanoma, requires GPs to perceive its value and understand how it can best be integrated into clinical practice. Disseminating a tool without such explanations is unlikely to promote its adoption into routine practice.

A randomised controlled trial of the effect of providing online risk information and lifestyle advice for the most common preventable cancers: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Prevention is recognised by many, including the World Health Organization, to offer the most cost-effective long-term strategy for the control of cancer. One approach that focuses on individuals is the provision of personalised risk information. However, whether such information motivates behaviour change and whether the effect is different with varying formats of risk presentation is unclear. We aim to assess the short-term effect of providing information about personalised risk of cancer in three different formats alongside lifestyle advice on health-related behaviours, risk perception and risk conviction. METHODS: In a parallel group, randomised controlled trial 1000 participants will be recruited through the online platform Prolific. Participants will be allocated to either a control group receiving cancer-specific lifestyle advice alone or one of three intervention groups receiving the same lifestyle advice alongside their estimated 10-year risk of developing one of the five most common preventable cancers, calculated from self-reported modifiable behavioural risk factors, in one of three different formats (bar chart, pictograph or qualitative scale). The primary outcome is change from baseline in computed risk relative to an individual with a recommended lifestyle at three months. Secondary outcomes include: perceived risk of cancer; anxiety; cancer-related worry; intention to change behaviour; and awareness of cancer risk factors. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence on the short-term effect of providing online information about personalised risk of cancer alongside lifestyle advice on risk perception and health-related behaviours and inform the development of interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN17450583. Registered 30 January 2018.

Effect of interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information on intentions and behaviour: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive review of the impact on intention to change health-related behaviours and health-related behaviours themselves, including screening uptake, of interventions incorporating information about cancer risk targeted at the general adult population. DESIGN: A systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO from 1 January 2000 to 1 July 2017. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of interventions including provision of a personal estimate of future cancer risk based on two or more non-genetic variables to adults recruited from the general population that include at least one behavioural outcome. RESULTS: We included 19 studies reporting 12 outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes between studies. There is evidence that interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information do not affect intention to attend or attendance at screening (relative risk 1.00 (0.97-1.03)). There is limited evidence that they increase smoking abstinence, sun protection, adult skin self-examination and breast examination, and decrease intention to tan. However, they do not increase smoking cessation, parental child skin examination or intention to protect skin. No studies assessed changes in diet, alcohol consumption or physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions incorporating personalised cancer risk information do not affect uptake of screening, but there is limited evidence of effect on some health-related behaviours. Further research, ideally including objective measures of behaviour, is needed before cancer risk information is incorporated into routine practice for health promotion in the general population.

Cost-effectiveness of Humanitarian Pediatric Cardiac Surgery Programs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Importance: Endorsement of global humanitarian interventions is based on either proven cost-effectiveness or perceived public health benefits. The cost-effectiveness and long-term benefits of global humanitarian pediatric cardiac surgery are unknown, and funding for this intervention is insufficient. Objectives: To determine the cost-effectiveness of the intervention (multiple 2-week-long humanitarian pediatric cardiac surgery program assistance trips to various low- and middle-income countries [LMICs]) and to produce a measure of the long-lasting effects of global humanitarian programs. Design, Setting, and Participants: International, multicenter cost-effectiveness analysis of a cohort of children (aged <16 years) undergoing surgical treatment of congenital heart disease during 2015 in LMICs, including China, Macedonia, Honduras, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, and Ukraine. The study also assessed estimated improvement in the United Nations Human Development Indicators (life expectancy, years of schooling, and gross national income) for each individual survivor, as a proxy for long-term benefits of the intervention. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was cost-effectiveness of the intervention. The secondary outcomes were potential gains in life expectancy, years of schooling, and gross national income per capita for each survivor. Results: During 2015, 446 patients (192 [43%] female; mean [SD] age, 3.7 [5.4] years) were served in 10 LMICs at an overall cost of $3 210 873. Of them, 424 were children. The cost-effectiveness of the intervention was $171 per disability-adjusted life-year averted. Each survivor in the cohort (390 of 424) potentially gained 39.9 disability-adjusted life-years averted, 3.5 years of schooling, and $159 533 in gross national income per capita during his or her extended lifetime at purchasing power parity and 3% discounting. Conclusions and Relevance: Humanitarian pediatric cardiac surgery in LMICs is highly cost-effective. It also leaves behind a lasting humanitarian footprint by potentially improving individual development indices.

Protocol for the melatools skin self-monitoring trial: a phase II randomised controlled trial of an intervention for primary care patients at higher risk of melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Melanoma is the fifth most common cancer in the UK. Incidence rates have quadrupled over the last 30 years and continue to rise, especially among younger people. As routine screening of the general population is not currently recommended in the UK, a focus on secondary prevention through early detection and prompt treatment in individuals at increased risk of melanoma could make an important contribution to improve melanoma outcomes. This paper describes the protocol for a phase II, multisite, randomised controlled trial, in the primary care setting, for patients at increased risk of melanoma. A skin self-monitoring (SSM) smartphone 'App' was used to improve symptom appraisal and encourage help seeking in primary care, thereby promoting early presentation with skin changes suspicious of melanoma. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We aim to recruit 200 participants from general practice waiting rooms in the East of England. Eligible patients are those identified at higher melanoma risk (using a real-time risk assessment tool), without a personal history of melanoma, aged 18 to 75 years. Participants will be invited to a primary care nurse consultation, and randomised to the intervention group (standard written advice on skin cancer detection and sun protection, loading of an SSM 'App' onto the participant's smartphone and instructions on use including self-monitoring reminders) or control group (standard written advice alone). The primary outcomes are consultation rates for changes to a pigmented skin lesion, and the patient interval (time from first noticing a skin change to consultation). Secondary outcomes include patient sun protection behaviours, psychosocial outcomes, and measures of trial feasibility and acceptability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: NHS ethical approval has been obtained from Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire research ethics committee (REC reference 16/EE/0248). The findings from the MelaTools SSM Trial will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISCTRN16061621.

Views of commissioners, managers and healthcare professionals on the NHS Health Check programme: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise data concerning the views of commissioners, managers and healthcare professionals towards the National Health Service (NHS) Health Check programme in general and the challenges faced when implementing it in practice. DESIGN: A systematic review of surveys and interview studies with a descriptive analysis of quantitative data and thematic synthesis of qualitative data. DATA SOURCES: An electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, PsycInfo, Web of Science, OpenGrey, the Cochrane Library, NHS Evidence, Google Scholar, Google, ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry from 1 January 1996 to 9 November 2016 with no language restriction and manual screening of reference lists of all included papers. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Primary research reporting views of commissioners, managers or healthcare professionals on the NHS Health Check programme and its implementation in practice. RESULTS: Of 18 524 citations, 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. There was evidence from both quantitative and qualitative studies that some commissioners and general practice (GP) healthcare professionals were enthusiastic about the programme, whereas others raised concerns around inequality of uptake, the evidence base and cost-effectiveness. In contrast, those working in pharmacies were all positive about programme benefits, citing opportunities for their business and staff. The main challenges to implementation were: difficulties with information technology and computer software, resistance to the programme from some GPs, the impact on workload and staffing, funding and training needs. Inadequate privacy was also a challenge in pharmacy and community settings, along with difficulty recruiting people eligible for Health Checks and poor public access to some venues. CONCLUSIONS: The success of the NHS Health Check Programme relies on engagement by those responsible for its commissioning, management and delivery. Recognising and addressing the challenges identified in this review, in particular the concerns of GPs, are important for the future of the programme.

Understanding symptom appraisal and help-seeking in people with symptoms suggestive of pancreatic cancer: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Pancreatic cancer has poor survival rates due to non-specific symptoms leading to later diagnosis. Understanding how patients interpret their symptoms could inform approaches to earlier diagnosis. This study sought to explore symptom appraisal and help-seeking among patients referred to secondary care for symptoms suggestive of pancreatic cancer. DESIGN: Qualitative analysis of semistructured in-depth interviews. Data were analysed iteratively and thematically, informed by the Model of Pathways to Treatment. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Pancreatic cancer occurs rarely in younger adults, therefore patients aged ≥40 years were recruited from nine hospitals after being referred to hospital with symptoms suggestive of pancreatic cancer; all were participants in a cohort study. Interviews were conducted soon after referral, and where possible, before diagnosis. RESULTS: Twenty-six interviews were conducted (cancer n=13 (pancreas n=9, other intra-abdominal n=4), non-cancer conditions n=13; age range 48-84 years; 14 women). Time from first symptoms to first presentation to healthcare ranged from 1 day to 270 days, median 21 days. We identified three main themes. Initial symptom appraisal usually began with intermittent, non-specific symptoms such as tiredness or appetite changes, attributed to diet and lifestyle, existing gastrointestinal conditions or side effects of medication. Responses to initial symptom appraisal included changes in meal type or frequency, or self-medication. Symptom changes such as alterations in appetite and enjoyment of food or weight loss usually prompted further appraisal. Triggers to seek help included a change or worsening of symptoms, particularly pain, which was often a 'tipping point'. Help-seeking was often encouraged by others. We found no differences in symptom appraisal and help-seeking between people diagnosed with cancer and those with other conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Greater public and healthcare professional awareness of the combinations of subtle and intermittent symptoms, and their evolving nature, is needed to prompt timelier help-seeking and investigation among people with symptoms of pancreatic cancer.