Feasibility, acceptability and practicality of transcranial stimulation in obsessive compulsive symptoms (FEATSOCS): A randomised controlled crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive form of neurostimulation with potential for development as a self-administered intervention. It has shown promise as a safe and effective treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) in a small number of studies. The two most favourable stimulation targets appear to be the left orbitofrontal cortex (L-OFC) and the supplementary motor area (SMA). We report the first study to test these targets head-to-head within a randomised sham-controlled trial. Our aim was to inform the design of future clinical research studies, by focussing on the acceptability and safety of the intervention, feasibility of recruitment, adherence to and tolerability of tDCS, and the size of any treatment-effect. METHODS: FEATSOCS was a randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled, cross-over, multicentre study. Twenty adults with DSM-5-defined OCD were randomised to treatment, comprising three courses of clinic-based tDCS (SMA, L-OFC, Sham), randomly allocated and delivered in counterbalanced order. Each course comprised four 20-min 2 mA stimulations, delivered over two consecutive days, separated by a 'washout' period of at least four weeks. Assessments were carried out by raters who were blind to stimulation-type. Clinical outcomes were assessed before, during, and up to four weeks after stimulation. Patient representatives with lived experience of OCD were actively involved at all stages. RESULTS: Clinicians showed willingness to recruit participants and recruitment to target was achieved. Adherence to treatment and study interventions was generally good, with only two dropouts. There were no serious adverse events, and adverse effects which did occur were transient and mostly mild in intensity. Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) scores were numerically improved from baseline to 24 h after the final stimulation across all intervention groups but tended to worsen thereafter. The greatest effect size was seen in the L-OFC arm, (Cohen's d = -0.5 [95% CI -1.2 to 0.2] versus Sham), suggesting this stimulation site should be pursued in further studies. Additional significant sham referenced improvements in secondary outcomes occurred in the L-OFC arm, and to a lesser extent with SMA stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: tDCS was acceptable, practicable to apply, well-tolerated and appears a promising potential treatment for OCD. The L-OFC represents the most promising target based on clinical changes, though the effects on OCD symptoms were not statistically significant compared to sham. SMA stimulation showed lesser signs of promise. Further investigation of tDCS in OCD is warranted, to determine the optimal stimulation protocol (current, frequency, duration), longer-term effectiveness and brain-based mechanisms of effect. If efficacy is substantiated, consideration of home-based approaches represents a rational next step. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN17937049. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17937049.

Rationale and design of "Can Very Low Dose Rivaroxaban (VLDR) in addition to dual antiplatelet therapy improve thrombotic status in acute coronary syndrome (VaLiDate-R)" study : A randomised trial modulating endogenous fibrinolysis in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Impaired endogenous fibrinolysis is novel biomarker that can identify patients with ACS at increased cardiovascular risk. The addition of Very Low Dose Rivaroxaban (VLDR) to dual antiplatelet therapy has been shown to reduce cardiovascular events but at a cost of increased bleeding and is therefore not suitable for all-comers. Targeted additional pharmacotherapy with VLDR to improve endogenous fibrinolysis may improve outcomes in high-risk patients, whilst avoiding unnecessary bleeding in low-risk individuals. The VaLiDate-R study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03775746, EudraCT: 2018-003299-11) is an investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, single centre trial comparing the effect of 3 antithrombotic regimens on endogenous fibrinolysis in 150 patients with ACS. Subjects whose screening blood test shows impaired fibrinolytic status (lysis time > 2000s), will be randomised to one of 3 treatment arms in a 1:1:1 ratio: clopidogrel 75 mg daily (Group 1); clopidogrel 75 mg daily plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (Group 2); ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily (Group 3), in addition to aspirin 75 mg daily. Rivaroxaban will be given for 30 days. Fibrinolytic status will be assessed during admission and at 2, 4 and 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the change in fibrinolysis time from admission to 4 weeks follow-up, using the Global Thrombosis Test. If VLDR can improve endogenous fibrinolysis in ACS, future large-scale studies would be required to assess whether targeted use of VLDR in patients with ACS and impaired fibrinolysis can translate into improved clinical outcomes, with reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events in this high-risk cohort.

The Herts and Minds study: feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of Mentalization-Based Treatment versus usual care to support the wellbeing of children in foster care.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the efficacy of psychological therapies for children in foster care with emotional and behavioural difficulties. Mentalization-based therapy (MBT) focuses on supporting the carer-child relationship by promoting reflective capacity. This study examined the feasibility and acceptability of an RCT of MBT, delivered in a family-format, for children who are in foster care in the UK. METHOD: Herts and Minds was a phase II, blinded feasibility RCT with follow-up of at 12 and 24 weeks post-randomisation. Participants were children (age 5-16) in foster care referred to a targeted mental health service, who had some level of difficulty as identified by the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). Aims were to assess: the feasibility of recruitment processes and study uptake; capacity to train mental health practitioners to deliver MBT to an acceptable level of treatment integrity; establish acceptability and credibility of MBT as an intervention for children in foster care; establish feasibility and acceptability to participants of conducting an RCT; and estimate the likely treatment efficacy effect size. Participants were randomly allocated to either MBT (n = 15) or Usual Clinical Care (UCC) (n = 21) individually or in sibling groups. A range of qualitative and quantitative data was gathered to assess feasibility. RESULTS: Feasibility was established with regard to: capacity to recruit participants to a study; capacity to train mental health practitioners to deliver MBT to an acceptable level of treatment integrity; acceptability and credibility of MBT; and feasibility and acceptability to participants of conducting an RCT. A number of issues made it difficult to estimate a likely treatment efficacy effect size. CONCLUSION: With modifications, it is feasible to run an RCT of MBT for children in foster care. Both the therapy and research design were acceptable to participants, but modifications may be needed regarding both the timing of assessments and the identification of appropriate primary outcome measures. Given the lack of evidenced based therapies for this population, such a trial would be a significant contribution to the field. Findings may be useful for other groups planning clinical trials of psychological therapies for children in foster care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 90349442 . The trial was retrospectively registered on 6 May 2016.

The Reflective Fostering Programme-improving the wellbeing of children in care through a group intervention for foster carers: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The needs of children in care are a government priority, yet the evidence base for effective interventions to support the emotional wellbeing of children in care is lacking. Research suggests that supporting the carer-child relationship, by promoting the carer's reflective parenting, may be an effective approach to improving the wellbeing of these children. METHODS: The study comprises a definitive, superiority, two-armed, parallel, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial, with embedded process evaluation and economic evaluation, and an internal pilot, to evaluate the effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of the Reflective Fostering Programme. Randomisation is at the individual level using a 1:1 allocation ratio. The study is being conducted in local authority sites across England, and is targeted at foster carers (including kinship carers) looking after children aged 4 to 13. Consenting participants are randomly allocated to the Reflective Fostering Programme (intervention arm) in addition to usual support or usual support alone (control arm). The primary outcome is behavioural and emotional wellbeing of the child 12 months post-baseline, and secondary outcomes include the following: foster carer's level of stress, quality of life, reflective capacity, compassion fatigue and burnout, placement stability, the quality of the child-carer relationship, child's capacity for emotional regulation, and achievement of personalised goals set by the carer. DISCUSSION: A feasibility study has indicated effectiveness of the Programme in improving the child-carer relationship and emotional and behavioural wellbeing of children in care. This study will test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementing the Reflective Fostering Programme as an additional aid to the support already available to local authority foster carers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 70832140 .

Feasibility and acceptability of transcranial stimulation in obsessive-compulsive symptoms (FEATSOCS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).

BACKGROUND: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a neuropsychiatric disorder which often proves refractory to current treatment approaches. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a noninvasive form of neurostimulation, with potential for development as a self-administered intervention, has shown potential as a safe and efficacious treatment for OCD in a small number of trials. The two most promising stimulation sites are located above the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and the supplementary motor area (SMA). METHODS: The aim of this feasibility study is to inform the development of a definitive trial, focussing on the acceptability, safety of the intervention, feasibility of recruitment, adherence and tolerability to tDCS and study assessments and the size of the treatment effect. To this end, we will deliver a double-blind, sham-controlled, crossover randomised multicentre study in 25 adults with OCD. Each participant will receive three courses of tDCS (SMA, OFC and sham), randomly allocated and given in counterbalanced order. Each course comprises four 20-min stimulations, delivered over two consecutive days, separated by at least 4 weeks' washout period. We will collect information about recruitment, study conduct and tDCS delivery. Blinded raters will assess clinical outcomes before, during and up to 4 weeks after stimulation using validated scales. We will include relevant objective neurocognitive tasks, testing cognitive flexibility, motor disinhibition, cooperation and habit learning. DISCUSSION: We will analyse the magnitude of the effect of the interventions on OCD symptoms alongside the standard deviation of the outcome measure, to estimate effect size and determine the optimal stimulation target. We will also measure the duration of the effect of stimulation, to provide information on spacing treatments efficiently. We will evaluate the usefulness and limitations of specific neurocognitive tests to determine a definitive test battery. Additionally, qualitative data will be collected from participants to better understand their experience of taking part in a tDCS intervention, as well as the impact on their overall quality of life. These clinical outcomes will enable the project team to further refine the methodology to ensure optimal efficiency in terms of both delivering and assessing the treatment in a full-scale trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN17937049 . (date applied 08/07/2019). Recruitment (ongoing) began 23rd July 2019 and is anticipated to complete 30th April 2021.

Optimal treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder: a randomized controlled feasibility study of the clinical-effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and their combination in the management of obsessive compulsive disorder.

Established treatments for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) include cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) medication. Combined treatment may outperform monotherapy, but few studies have investigated this. A total of 49 community-based adults with OCD were randomly assigned to CBT, SSRI, or SSRI+CBT. Sertraline (50-200 mg/day) was given as the SSRI for 52 weeks. A 16-h-manualized individual CBT was delivered over 8 weeks with four follow-up sessions. Assessors were 'blinded' to treatment allocation. A preliminary health economic evaluation was conducted. At week 16, combined treatment (n=13) was associated with the largest improvement, sertraline (n=7) the next largest and CBT (n=9) the smallest on the observed case analysis. The effect size (Cohen's d) comparing the improvement in Yale Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale on CBT versus combined treatment was -0.39 and versus sertraline was -0.27. Between 16 and 52 weeks, the greatest clinical improvement was seen with sertraline, but participant discontinuation prevented reliable analysis. Compared with sertraline, the mean costs were higher for CBT and for combined treatment. The mean Quality Adjusted Life Year scores for sertraline were 0.1823 (95% confidence interval: 0.0447-0.3199) greater than for CBT and 0.1135 (95% confidence interval: -0.0290-0.2560), greater than for combined treatment. Combined treatment appeared the most clinically effective option, especially over CBT, but the advantages over SSRI monotherapy were not sustained beyond 16 weeks. SSRI monotherapy was the most cost-effective. A definitive study can and should be conducted.

The Herts and minds study: evaluating the effectiveness of mentalization-based treatment (MBT) as an intervention for children in foster care with emotional and/or behavioural problems: a phase II, feasibility, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of children in the social care system in England present with mental health problems, with the majority experiencing some form of emotional and behavioural difficulties. The most effective treatments for these children are currently unknown, partly due to a lack of robust, controlled studies. Researchers have identified a number of obstacles to conducting well-designed research with this population, making the need to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial especially important. METHODS/DESIGN: This protocol outlines a two-arm, randomised control feasibility trial to explore the acceptability and credibility of mentalization-based treatment (MBT) as a treatment for reducing emotional and behavioural difficulties in looked after children and to test the possibility of addressing a number of methodological challenges to conducting high-quality research with this population. MBT is a relatively new intervention which, in the adaptation of the model tested here, includes many of the features of therapy identified in NICE guidelines as necessary to support children in care. The two arms are MBT and usual clinical care (UCC). The study will take place in Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust with follow-up at 12 and 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: This study will aim to ascertain whether it is worthwhile and feasible to progress to testing the intervention in a full-scale definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT). This study therefore has the potential to improve our understanding of the obstacles to conducting high-quality research with this very vulnerable population, and in the medium term, could help to improve the stability of foster placements and the emotional well-being of children in care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN90349442.

The use of needle biopsy for assessment of placental gene expression.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that placental samples that are obtained by needle aspiration ex vivo are useful for the determination of villus gene expression. STUDY DESIGN: Placental biopsy was performed with a spinal needle after uncomplicated deliveries. Villi were inspected microscopically, and RNA was extracted and analyzed with capillary electrophoresis. Gene expression was determined with quantitative polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: We obtained more placental villous fragments per aspiration using a 20-gauge needle (5.2 +/- 1.8 fragments) than with a 22-gauge needle (3.3 +/- 1.6 fragments; P < .01). RNA quality was adequate, based on the 28S and 18S recombinant RNA bands, with a mean 260/280 ratio of 1.88. The amount of extracted RNA correlated with the number of villous fragments per aspirate. Importantly, the expression of NDRG1 and hPL, both markedly altered in hypoxia, was consistent between villi that were obtained by either needle or standard biopsy. CONCLUSION: Placental samples that are obtained by ex vivo needle aspiration are useful for the extraction of RNA and for the determination of villous gene expression.