The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to invest in care home research infrastructure.

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in catastrophic levels of morbidity and mortality for care home residents. Despite this, research platforms for COVID-19 in care homes arrived late in the pandemic compared with other care settings. The Prophylactic Therapy in Care Homes Trial (PROTECT-CH) was established to provide a platform to deliver multi-centre cluster-randomized clinical trials of investigational medicinal products for COVID-19 prophylaxis in UK care homes. Commencing set-up in January 2021, this involved the design and development of novel infrastructure for contracting and recruitment, remote consent, staff training, research insurance, eligibility screening, prescribing, dispensing and adverse event reporting; such infrastructure being previously absent. By the time this infrastructure was in place, the widespread uptake of vaccination in care homes had changed the epidemiology of COVID-19 rendering the trial unfeasible. While some of the resources developed through PROTECT-CH will enable the future establishment of care home platform research, the near absence of care home trial infrastructure and nationally linked databases involving the care home sector will continue to significantly hamper progress. These issues are replicated in most other countries. Beyond COVID-19, there are many other research questions that require addressing to provide better care to people living in care homes. PROTECT-CH has exposed a clear need for research funders to invest in, and legislate for, an effective care home research infrastructure as part of national pandemic preparedness planning. Doing so would also invigorate care home research in the interim, leading to improved healthcare delivery specific to those living in this sector.

Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers.

BACKGROUND: Air travel might increase the risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). It has been suggested that wearing compression stockings might reduce this risk. This is an update of the review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of wearing compression stockings versus not wearing them for preventing DVT in people travelling on flights lasting at least four hours. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 1 April 2020. We also checked the bibliographies of relevant studies and reviews identified by the search to check for any additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of compression stockings versus no stockings in passengers on flights lasting at least four hours. Trials in which passengers wore a stocking on one leg but not the other, or those comparing stockings and another intervention were also eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. We sought additional information from trialists where necessary. MAIN RESULTS: One new study that fulfilled the inclusion criteria was identified for this update. Twelve randomised trials (n = 2918) were included in this review: ten (n = 2833) compared wearing graduated compression stockings on both legs versus not wearing them; one trial (n = 50) compared wearing graduated compression tights versus not wearing them; and one trial (n = 35) compared wearing a graduated compression stocking on one leg for the outbound flight and on the other leg on the return flight. Eight trials included people judged to be at low or medium risk of developing DVT (n = 1598) and two included high-risk participants (n = 1273). All flights had a duration of more than five hours. Fifty of 2637 participants with follow-up data available in the trials of wearing compression stockings on both legs had a symptomless DVT; three wore stockings, 47 did not (odds ratio (OR) 0.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.25, P < 0.001; high-certainty evidence). There were no symptomless DVTs in three trials. Sixteen of 1804 people developed superficial vein thrombosis, four wore stockings, 12 did not (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.13, P = 0.09; moderate-certainty evidence). No deaths, pulmonary emboli or symptomatic DVTs were reported. Wearing stockings had a significant impact in reducing oedema (mean difference (MD) -4.72, 95% CI -4.91 to -4.52; based on six trials; low-certainty evidence). A further three trials showed reduced oedema in the stockings group but could not be included in the meta-analysis as they used different methods to measure oedema. No significant adverse effects were reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is high-certainty evidence that airline passengers similar to those in this review can expect a substantial reduction in the incidence of symptomless DVT and low-certainty evidence that leg oedema is reduced if they wear compression stockings. The certainty of the evidence was limited by the way that oedema was measured. There is moderate-certainty evidence that superficial vein thrombosis may be reduced if passengers wear compression stockings. We cannot assess the effect of wearing stockings on death, pulmonary embolism or symptomatic DVT because no such events occurred in these trials. Randomised trials to assess these outcomes would need to include a very large number of people.

Glibenclamide and metfoRmin versus stAndard care in gEstational diabeteS (GRACES): a feasibility open label randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Metformin is widely used to treat gestational diabetes (GDM), but many women remain hyperglycaemic and require additional therapy. We aimed to determine recruitment rate and participant throughput in a randomised trial of glibenclamide compared with standard therapy insulin (added to maximum tolerated metformin) for treatment of GDM. METHODS: We conducted an open label feasibility study in 5 UK antenatal clinics among pregnant women 16 to 36 weeks' gestation with metformin-treated GDM. Women failing to achieve adequate glycaemic control on metformin monotherapy were randomised to additional glibenclamide or insulin. The primary outcome was recruitment rate. We explored feasibility with uptake, retention, adherence, safety, glycaemic control, participant satisfaction and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Records of 197 women were screened and 23 women randomised to metformin and glibenclamide (n = 13) or metformin and insulin (n = 10). Mean (SD) recruitment rate was 0.39 (0.62) women/centre/month. 9/13 (69.2%, 95%CI 38.6-90.9%) women adhered to glibenclamide and all provided outcome data (100% retention). There were no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, but metformin and insulin gave superior glycaemic control to metformin and glibenclamide, with fewer blood glucose readings <3.5 mmol/l (median [IQR] difference/woman/week of treatment 0.58 [0.03-1.87]). CONCLUSIONS: A large randomised controlled trial comparing glibenclamide or insulin in combination with metformin for women with GDM would be feasible but is unlikely to be worthwhile, given the poorer glycaemic control with glibenclamide and metformin in this pilot study. The combination of metformin and glibenclamide should be reserved for women with GDM with true needle phobia or inability to use insulin therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov registration number:NCT02080377 February 11th 2014.

ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in 24 neonatal units and associated networks in the south of England: no clustering of ESBL-producing Escherichia coli in units or networks.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to characterize ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae present in 24 neonatal units (NNUs) in eight networks participating in a multicentre probiotic study and to test the hypothesis that specific strains would cluster within individual units and networks. METHODS: We performed analysis of stool samples for the presence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae at 2 weeks post-natal age and 36 weeks post-menstrual age. ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae were characterized and typed using molecular methods. RESULTS: ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae (n = 71) were isolated from 67/1229 (5.5%) infants from whom we received a sample at either sampling time or both sampling times, and from infants in 18 (75%) of the 24 recruiting NNUs. Thirty-three Escherichia coli, 23 Klebsiella spp. and 6 Enterobacter spp. strains were characterized. ESBL-producing E. coli were all distinguishable within individual NNUs by antibiotic resistance genotype, serogroup (O25b), phenotype, phylotype or ST. Ten of the 33 were ST131 and 9 of the 10 ST131 isolates were ciprofloxacin resistant. Seven of the 10 ST131 isolates carried genes encoding CTX-M group 1 enzymes. ST131 isolates were isolated from centres within five of the eight NNU networks. There were clusters of indistinguishable ESBL-producing Klebsiella and Enterobacter isolates associated with specific NNUs. CONCLUSIONS: Strains of E. coli ST131 were distributed across neonatal networks in the south of England. There was no evidence of clustering of clonally related ESBL-producing E. coli strains, by contrast with Klebsiella spp. and Enterobacter spp., which did cluster within units. The possibility that ESBL-producing E. coli strains are spread by vertical transmission requires further investigation.

Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers.

BACKGROUND: Air travel might increase the risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). It has been suggested that wearing compression stockings might reduce this risk. This is an update of the review first published in 2006. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of wearing compression stockings versus not wearing them for preventing DVT in people travelling on flights lasting at least four hours. SEARCH METHODS: For this update the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (10 February 2016). In addition, the CIS searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CENTRAL (2016, Issue 1)). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of compression stockings versus no stockings in passengers on flights lasting at least four hours. Trials in which passengers wore a stocking on one leg but not the other, or those comparing stockings and another intervention were also eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. We sought additional information from trialists where necessary. MAIN RESULTS: One new study that fulfilled the inclusion criteria was identified for this update. Eleven randomised trials (n = 2906) were included in this review: nine (n = 2821) compared wearing graduated compression stockings on both legs versus not wearing them; one trial (n = 50) compared wearing graduated compression tights versus not wearing them; and one trial (n = 35) compared wearing a graduated compression stocking on one leg for the outbound flight and on the other leg on the return flight. Eight trials included people judged to be at low or medium risk of developing DVT (n = 1598) and two included high-risk participants (n = 1273). All flights had a duration of more than five hours.Fifty of 2637 participants with follow-up data available in the trials of wearing compression stockings on both legs had a symptomless DVT; three wore stockings, 47 did not (odds ratio (OR) 0.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.25, P < 0.001; high-quality evidence). There were no symptomless DVTs in three trials. Sixteen of 1804 people developed superficial vein thrombosis, four wore stockings, 12 did not (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.13, P = 0.09; moderate-quality evidence). No deaths, pulmonary emboli or symptomatic DVTs were reported. Wearing stockings had a significant impact in reducing oedema (mean difference (MD) -4.72, 95% CI -4.91 to -4.52; based on six trials; low-quality evidence). A further two trials showed reduced oedema in the stockings group but could not be included in the meta-analysis as they used different methods to measure oedema. No significant adverse effects were reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is high-quality evidence that airline passengers similar to those in this review can expect a substantial reduction in the incidence of symptomless DVT and low-quality evidence that leg oedema is reduced if they wear compression stockings. Quality was limited by the way that oedema was measured. There is moderate-quality evidence that superficial vein thrombosis may be reduced if passengers wear compression stockings. We cannot assess the effect of wearing stockings on death, pulmonary embolism or symptomatic DVT because no such events occurred in these trials. Randomised trials to assess these outcomes would need to include a very large number of people.

2% chlorhexidine gluconate aqueous versus 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol for skin disinfection prior to percutaneous central venous catheterisation: the ARCTIC randomised controlled feasibility trial.

OBJECTIVE: Catheter-related sepsis (CRS) is a major complication with significant morbidity and mortality. Evidence is lacking regarding the most appropriate antiseptic for skin disinfection before percutaneous central venous catheter (PCVC) insertion in preterm neonates. To inform the feasibility and design of a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) of two antiseptic formulations, we conducted the Antiseptic Randomised Controlled Trial for Insertion of Catheters (ARCTIC) feasibility study to assess catheter colonisation, sepsis, and skin morbidity. DESIGN: Feasibility RCT. SETTING: Two UK tertiary-level neonatal intensive care units. PATIENTS: Preterm infants born <34 weeks' gestation scheduled to undergo PCVC insertion. INTERVENTIONS: Skin disinfection with either 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-aqueous or 2% CHG-70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) before PCVC insertion and at removal. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Proportion in the 2% CHG-70% IPA arm with a colonised catheter at removal. MAIN FEASIBILITY OUTCOMES: Rates of: (1) CRS, catheter-associated sepsis (CAS), and CRS/CAS per 1,000 PCVC days; (2) recruitment and retention; (3) data completeness. SAFETY OUTCOMES: Daily skin morbidity scores recorded from catheter insertion until 48 hours post-removal. RESULTS: 116 babies were randomised. Primary outcome incidence was 4.1% (95% confidence interval: 0.9% to 11.5%). Overall catheter colonisation rate was 5.2% (5/97); CRS 2.3/1000 catheter days; CAS 14.8/1000 catheter days. Recruitment, retention and data completeness were good. No major antiseptic-related skin injury was reported. CONCLUSIONS: A definitive comparative efficacy trial is feasible, but the very low catheter colonisation rate would make a large-scale RCT challenging due to the very large sample size required. ARCTIC provides preliminary reassurance supporting potential safe use of 2% CHG-70% IPA and 2% CHG-aqueous in preterm neonates. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN82571474.

CORONIS - International study of caesarean section surgical techniques: the follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: The CORONIS Trial was a 2×2×2×2×2 non-regular, fractional, factorial trial of five pairs of alternative caesarean section surgical techniques on a range of short-term outcomes, the primary outcome being a composite of maternal death or infectious morbidity. The consequences of different surgical techniques on longer term outcomes have not been well assessed in previous studies. Such outcomes include those related to subsequent pregnancy: mode of delivery; abnormal placentation (e.g. accreta); postpartum hysterectomy, as well as longer term pelvic problems: pain, urinary problems, infertility. The Coronis Follow-up Study aims to measure and compare the incidence of these outcomes between the randomised groups at around three years after women participated in the CORONIS Trial. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will assess the following null hypotheses: In women who underwent delivery by caesarean section, no differences will be detected with respect to a range of long-term outcomes when comparing the following five pairs of alternative surgical techniques evaluated in the CORONIS Trial: 1. Blunt versus sharp abdominal entry. 2. Exteriorisation of the uterus for repair versus intra-abdominal repair. 3. Single versus double layer closure of the uterus. 4. Closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum (pelvic and parietal). 5. Chromic catgut versus Polyglactin-910 for uterine repair. The outcomes will include (1) women's health: pelvic pain; dysmenorrhoea; deep dyspareunia; urinary symptoms; laparoscopy; hysterectomy; tubal/ovarian surgery; abdominal hernias; bowel obstruction; infertility; death. (2) Outcomes of subsequent pregnancies: inter-pregnancy interval; pregnancy outcome; gestation at delivery; mode of delivery; pregnancy complications; surgery during or following delivery. DISCUSSION: The results of this follow-up study will have importance for all pregnant women and for health professionals who provide care for pregnant women. Although the results will have been collected in seven countries with limited health care resources (Argentina, Chile, Ghana, India, Kenya, Pakistan, Sudan) any differences in outcomes associated with different surgical techniques are likely to be generalisable throughout the world. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN31089967.

Mechanisms affecting the gut of preterm infants in enteral feeding trials: a nested cohort within a randomised controlled trial of lactoferrin.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of supplemental bovine lactoferrin on the gut microbiome and metabolome of preterm infants. DESIGN: Cohort study nested within a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Infants across different trial arms were matched on several clinical variables. Bacteria and metabolite compositions of longitudinal stool and urine samples were analysed to investigate the impact of lactoferrin supplementation. SETTING: Thirteen UK hospitals participating in a RCT of lactoferrin. PATIENTS: 479 infants born <32 weeks' gestation between June 2016 and September 2017. RESULTS: 10 990 stool and 22 341 urine samples were collected. Analyses of gut microbiome (1304 stools, 201 infants), metabolites (171 stools, 83 infants; 225 urines, 90 infants) and volatile organic compounds (314 stools, 117 infants) were performed. Gut microbiome Shannon diversity at 34 weeks corrected age was not significantly different between infants in the lactoferrin (mean=1.24) or placebo (mean=1.06) groups (p=0.11). Lactoferrin receipt explained less than 1% variance in microbiome compositions between groups. Metabolomic analysis identified six discriminative features between trial groups. Hospital site (16%) and postnatal age (6%) explained the greatest variation in microbiome composition. CONCLUSIONS: This multiomic study identified minimal impacts of lactoferrin but much larger impacts of hospital site and postnatal age. This may be due to the specific lactoferrin product used, but more likely supports the findings of the RCT in which this study was nested, which showed no impact of lactoferrin on reducing rates of sepsis. Multisite mechanistic studies nested within RCTs are feasible and help inform trial interpretation and future trial design.

Frenotomy with breastfeeding support versus breastfeeding support alone for infants with tongue-tie and breastfeeding difficulties: the FROSTTIE RCT.

Background: Tongue-tie can be diagnosed in 3-11% of babies, with some studies reporting almost universal breastfeeding difficulties, and others reporting very few feeding difficulties that relate to the tongue-tie itself, instead noting that incorrect positioning and attachment are the primary reasons behind the observed breastfeeding difficulties and not the tongue-tie itself. The only existing trials of frenotomy are small and underpowered and/or include only very short-term or subjective outcomes. Objective: To investigate whether frenotomy is clinically and cost-effective to promote continuation of breastfeeding at 3 months in infants with breastfeeding difficulties diagnosed with tongue-tie. Design: A multicentre, unblinded, randomised, parallel group controlled trial. Setting: Twelve infant feeding services in the UK. Participants: Infants aged up to 10 weeks referred to an infant feeding service (by a parent, midwife or other breastfeeding support service) with breastfeeding difficulties and judged to have tongue-tie. Interventions: Infants were randomly allocated to frenotomy with standard breastfeeding support or standard breastfeeding support without frenotomy. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome was any breastmilk feeding at 3 months according to maternal self-report. Secondary outcomes included mother's pain, exclusive breastmilk feeding, exclusive direct breastfeeding, frenotomy, adverse events, maternal anxiety and depression, maternal and infant NHS health-care resource use, cost-effectiveness, and any breastmilk feeding at 6 months of age. Results: Between March 2019 and November 2020, 169 infants were randomised, 80 to the frenotomy with breastfeeding support arm and 89 to the breastfeeding support arm from a planned sample size of 870 infants. The trial was stopped in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic due to withdrawal of breastfeeding support services, slow recruitment and crossover between arms. In the frenotomy with breastfeeding support arm 74/80 infants (93%) received their allocated intervention, compared to 23/89 (26%) in the breastfeeding support arm. Primary outcome data were available for 163/169 infants (96%). There was no evidence of a difference between the arms in the rate of breastmilk feeding at 3 months, which was high in both groups (67/76, 88% vs. 75/87, 86%; adjusted risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.16). Adverse events were reported for three infants after surgery [bleeding (n = 1), salivary duct damage (n = 1), accidental cut to the tongue and salivary duct damage (n = 1)]. Cost-effectiveness could not be determined with the information available. Limitations: The statistical power of the analysis was extremely limited due to not achieving the target sample size and the high proportion of infants in the breastfeeding support arm who underwent frenotomy. Conclusions: This trial does not provide sufficient information to assess whether frenotomy in addition to breastfeeding support improves breastfeeding rates in infants diagnosed with tongue-tie. Future work: There is a clear lack of equipoise in the UK concerning the use of frenotomy, however, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the procedure still need to be established. Other study designs will need to be considered to address this objective. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN 10268851. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (project number 16/143/01) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder had no role in study design or data collection, analysis and interpretation. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Many mothers and babies experience difficulties in establishing breastfeeding. In some babies it is thought that their difficulties may be linked to a condition called tongue-tie, in which a piece of skin tightly joins the middle part of the underside of the tongue to the base of the baby's mouth. This can be treated by an operation to divide the tight part/skin in the middle of the underneath of the tongue. We planned to carry out a trial of 870 babies to find out whether an operation together with breastfeeding support helps more mothers and babies with tongue-tie to continue breastfeeding until the baby is 3 months old compared to breastfeeding support on its own and whether the costs were different between the two groups of mothers and babies. We were only able to recruit 169 babies as the trial was stopped because of slow recruitment, changes to services in the COVID-19 pandemic and a high proportion of the babies in the breastfeeding support group going on to have an operation. There were no differences in the rate of breastfeeding at 3 months between the babies in the group who had an operation straightaway and those in the group that had breastfeeding support alone, or had an operation later. More than four in every five babies in both groups were still breastmilk feeding at 3 months. Three babies who had an operation, around 1 in 50 babies, had a complication of the operation (bleeding, scarring or a cut to the tube that makes saliva). Because of the small size of the study, we cannot say whether an operation to divide a tongue-tie along with breastfeeding support helps babies with tongue-tie and breastfeeding difficulties or has different costs. We will need to try different types of research to answer the question.

Lithium plus valproate combination therapy versus monotherapy for relapse prevention in bipolar I disorder (BALANCE): a randomised open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Lithium carbonate and valproate semisodium are both recommended as monotherapy for prevention of relapse in bipolar disorder, but are not individually fully effective in many patients. If combination therapy with both agents is better than monotherapy, many relapses and consequent disability could be avoided. We aimed to establish whether lithium plus valproate was better than monotherapy with either drug alone for relapse prevention in bipolar I disorder. METHODS: 330 patients aged 16 years and older with bipolar I disorder from 41 sites in the UK, France, USA, and Italy were randomly allocated to open-label lithium monotherapy (plasma concentration 0.4-1.0 mmol/L, n=110), valproate monotherapy (750-1250 mg, n=110), or both agents in combination (n=110), after an active run-in of 4-8 weeks on the combination. Randomisation was by computer program, and investigators and participants were informed of treatment allocation. All outcome events were considered by the trial management team, who were masked to treatment assignment. Participants were followed up for up to 24 months. The primary outcome was initiation of new intervention for an emergent mood episode, which was compared between groups by Cox regression. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 55261332. FINDINGS: 59 (54%) of 110 people in the combination therapy group, 65 (59%) of 110 in the lithium group, and 76 (69%) of 110 in the valproate group had a primary outcome event during follow-up. Hazard ratios for the primary outcome were 0.59 (95% CI 0.42-0.83, p=0.0023) for combination therapy versus valproate, 0.82 (0.58-1.17, p=0.27) for combination therapy versus lithium, and 0.71 (0.51-1.00, p=0.0472) for lithium versus valproate. 16 participants had serious adverse events after randomisation: seven receiving valproate monotherapy (three deaths); five lithium monotherapy (two deaths); and four combination therapy (one death). INTERPRETATION: For people with bipolar I disorder, for whom long-term therapy is clinically indicated, both combination therapy with lithium plus valproate and lithium monotherapy are more likely to prevent relapse than is valproate monotherapy. This benefit seems to be irrespective of baseline severity of illness and is maintained for up to 2 years. BALANCE could neither reliably confirm nor refute a benefit of combination therapy compared with lithium monotherapy. FUNDING: Stanley Medical Research Institute; Sanofi-Aventis.

Parental experiences of being approached to join multiple neonatal clinical trials: qualitative study (PARENT).

OBJECTIVE: To explore parents' perceptions and experience of being approached for enrolment of their preterm infant in more than one trial or study. DESIGN: A qualitative study involving 17 in-depth semistructured interviews, with parents who had been approached for multiple studies and who subsequently consented for their infant(s) to join at least one. Parents who declined all studies were not approached. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Parents of preterm infants receiving care at one of three neonatal intensive care units in the north of England. FINDINGS: Most parents did not view concurrent participation in multiple trials or studies as a significant issue within the wider context of their infant's care. Most parents did not feel pressured into enrolling their infant into more than one study, but some suggested that participation in several provided justification for the subsequent refusal to join others, articulating feeling of guilt at saying 'no', and others appeared fatigued by multiple approaches. Parents focused on the perceived risks and benefits of each individual study and, while acknowledging that making a fully informed decision was not possible, largely agreed due to their belief in the benefits of research, trust in the health professionals caring for their baby and a range of complex personal motivations. CONCLUSIONS: Parents valued the autonomy to make decisions about participation and felt, with hindsight, that their decisions were right. Research teams could be more aware of parental feelings of guilt or gratitude that may motivate them to give consent. Similarly, the capacity of parents to fully remember details of multiple studies when they are stressed, and their infant is sick, should be taken into consideration, and continued efforts should be made to ensure ongoing consent to participation.

An evaluation of a combined psychological and parenting intervention for HIV-positive women depressed in the perinatal period, to enhance child development and reduce maternal depression: study protocol for the Insika Yomama cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The combination of poverty, HIV and depression in the perinatal period represents a major public health challenge in many Southern African countries. In some areas, up to a third of HIV-positive women experience perinatal depression. Perinatal depression is associated with negative effects on parenting and key domains of child development including cognitive, behavioural and growth, especially in socio-economically disadvantaged communities. Several studies have documented the benefits of psychological interventions for perinatal depression in low- and middle-income countries, but none have evaluated an integrated psychological and parenting intervention for HIV-positive women using task-sharing. This randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate the effect of a home-based intervention, combining a psychological treatment for depression and a parenting programme for perinatally depressed HIV-positive women. METHODS: This study is a cluster randomised controlled trial, consisting of 48-60 geospatial clusters. A total of 528 pregnant HIV-positive women aged ≥ 16 years who meet the criteria for depression on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS, score ≥ 9)) are recruited from antenatal clinics in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The geospatial clusters are randomised on an allocation ratio of 1:1 to either the intervention or Enhanced Standard of Care (ESoC). The intervention group receives 10 home-based counselling sessions by a lay counsellor (4 antenatal and 6 postnatal sessions) and a booster session at 16 months. The intervention combines behavioural activation for depression with a parenting programme, adapted from the UNICEF/WHO Care for Child Development programme. The ESoC group receives two antenatal and two postnatal counselling support and advice telephone calls. In addition, measures have been taken to enhance the routine standard of care. The co-primary outcomes are child cognitive development at 24 months assessed on the cognitive subscale of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Third Edition and maternal depression at 12 months measured by the EPDS. ANALYSIS: The primary analysis will be a modified intention-to-treat analysis. The primary outcomes will be analysed using mixed-effects linear regression. DISCUSSION: If this treatment is successful, policymakers could use this model of mental healthcare delivered by lay counsellors within HIV treatment programmes to provide more comprehensive services for families affected by HIV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry # 11284870 (14/11/2017) and SANCTR DOH-27-102020-9097 (17/11/2017).

Economic evaluation alongside the Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial (SIFT).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two rates of enteral feed advancement (18 vs 30 mL/kg/day) in very preterm and very low birth weight infants. DESIGN: Within-trial economic evaluation alongside a multicentre, two-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial (Speed of Increasing milk Feeds Trial). SETTING: 55 UK neonatal units from May 2013 to June 2015. PATIENTS: Infants born <32 weeks' gestation or <1500 g, receiving less than 30 mL/kg/day of milk at trial enrolment. Infants with a known severe congenital anomaly, no realistic chance of survival, or unlikely to be traceable for follow-up, were ineligible. INTERVENTIONS: When clinicians were ready to start advancing feed volumes, infants were randomised to receive daily increments in feed volume of 30 mL/kg (intervention) or 18 mL/kg (control). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost per additional survivor without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months of age corrected for prematurity. RESULTS: Average costs per infant were slightly higher for faster feeds compared with slower feeds (mean difference £267, 95% CI -6928 to 8117). Fewer infants achieved the principal outcome of survival without moderate to severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months in the faster feeds arm (802/1224 vs 848/1246). The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis showed a likelihood of worse outcomes for faster feeds compared with slower feeds. CONCLUSIONS: The stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis shows faster feeds are broadly equivalent on cost grounds. However, in terms of outcomes at 24 months age (corrected for prematurity), faster feeds are harmful. Faster feeds should not be recommended on either cost or effectiveness grounds to achieve the primary outcome.

Safety and efficacy of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate aqueous versus 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol for skin disinfection prior to percutaneous central venous catheter insertion in preterm neonates: the ARCTIC randomised-controlled feasibility trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Catheter-related sepsis is one of the most dangerous complications of neonatal intensive care and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Use of catheter-care 'bundles' has reduced the incidence of catheter-related sepsis, although individual components have not been well studied. Better evidence is needed to guide selection of the most appropriate antiseptic solution for skin disinfection in preterm neonates. This study will inform the feasibility and design of the first randomised controlled trial to examine the safety and efficacy of alcohol-based versus aqueous-based chlorhexidine antiseptic formulations for skin disinfection prior to percutaneous central venous catheterisation in preterm neonates. The antiseptics to be compared are 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) aqueous and 2% CHG in 70% isopropyl alcohol. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Antiseptic Randomised Controlled Trial for Insertion of Catheters (ARCTIC) is a two-centre randomised-controlled feasibility trial. At least 100 preterm infants born at <34 weeks' gestation and due to undergo percutaneous insertion of a central venous catheter will be randomly allocated to receive prior skin disinfection with one of the two antiseptic solutions. Outcomes include: i) recruitment and retention rates; ii) completeness of data collection; iii) numbers of enrolled infants meeting case definitions for definite catheter-related sepsis, catheter-associated sepsis and catheter colonisation and iv) safety outcomes of skin morbidity scores recorded daily from catheter insertion until 48 hours post removal. The key feasibility metrics will be reported as proportions with 95% CIs. Estimated prevalence of catheter colonisation will allow calculation of sample size for the large-scale trial. The data will inform whether it will be feasible to progress to a large-scale trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: ARCTIC has been approved by the National Health Service Health Research Authority National Research Ethics Service Committee East of England (Cambridge South) (IRAS ID 163868), was adopted onto the National Institute of Health Research Clinical Research Network portfolio (CPMS ID 19899) and is registered with an International Standard Randomised Control Trials Number (ISRCTN: 82571474; Pre-results) and European Clinical Trials Database number 2015-000874-36. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications and sharing of the findings with parents via the support of Bliss baby charity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN82571474; Pre-results.

The WHEAT pilot trial-WithHolding Enteral feeds Around packed red cell Transfusion to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in preterm neonates: a multicentre, electronic patient record (EPR), randomised controlled point-of-care pilot trial.

INTRODUCTION: Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) is a potentially devastating neonatal disease. A temporal association between red cell transfusion and NEC is well described. Observational data suggest that withholding enteral feeds around red cell transfusions may reduce the risk of NEC but this has not been tested in randomised trials; current UK practice varies. Prevention of NEC is a research priority but no appropriately powered trials have addressed this question. The use of a simplified opt-out consent model and embedding trial processes within existing electronic patient record (EPR) systems provide opportunities to increase trial efficiency and recruitment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will undertake a randomised, controlled, multicentre, unblinded, pilot trial comparing two care pathways: continuing milk feeds (before, during and after red cell transfusions) and withholding milk feeds (for 4 hours before, during and for 4 hours after red cell transfusions), with infants randomly assigned with equal probability. We will use opt-out consent. A nested qualitative study will explore parent and health professional views. Infants will be eligible if born at <30+0 gestational weeks+days. Primary feasibility outcomes will be rate of recruitment, opt-out, retention, compliance, data completeness and data accuracy; clinical outcomes will include mortality and NEC. The trial will recruit in two neonatal networks in England for 9 months. Data collection will continue until all infants have reached 40+0 corrected gestational weeks or neonatal discharge. Participant identification and recruitment, randomisation and all trial data collection will be embedded within existing neonatal EPR systems (BadgerNet and BadgerEPR); outcome data will be extracted from routinely recorded data held in the National Neonatal Research Database. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study holds Research Ethics Committee approval to use an opt-out approach to consent. Results will inform future EPR-embedded and data-enabled trials and will be disseminated through conferences, publications and parent-centred information. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN62501859; Pre-results.

Prophylactic antibiotics for the prevention of infection following operative vaginal delivery (ANODE): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is one of the most important causes of maternal death and severe morbidity worldwide. Studies conducted both in the UK and US have documented an additional risk associated with operative vaginal delivery. However, a Cochrane review, updated in 2017, identified only one small trial of prophylactic antibiotics following operative vaginal delivery, which included a total of 393 women. Given the small size of that trial, it recommended that further robust evidence is needed. Operative vaginal delivery rates vary worldwide, but typically 5-10% of women have operative vaginal births. A conservative estimated incidence of maternal infection following operative vaginal delivery is 4%, based on the one previous trial. There is, therefore, considerable scope for direct patient benefit from an effective preventive strategy. METHODS/DESIGN: This protocol describes a multicentre, randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trial aiming to recruit 3424 participants from over 20 hospital sites in the UK. Women who have undergone an operative vaginal delivery at 36+0 weeks or greater gestation with no indication for ongoing antibiotics in the postpartum period and no contra-indications to prophylactic co-amoxiclav, will be randomised to receive a single intravenous dose of co-amoxiclav or placebo. The primary outcome will be confirmed or suspected maternal infection within 6 weeks of delivery, as defined by one of (a) a new prescription of antibiotics for presumed perineal wound-related infection, endometritis or uterine infection, urinary tract infection with systemic features or other systemic infection, (b) systemic infection confirmed with a culture or (c) endometritis as defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outcome information will be collected by a single telephone interview and questionnaire, with clinical data collected from medical records or the hospital laboratory if necessary, at 6 weeks post-delivery. DISCUSSION: This randomised trial will investigate whether a prophylactic dose of antibiotic following operative vaginal delivery can reduce the incidence of infection and sepsis. If shown to be effective, this could lead to a change in recommended practice and the prevention of infection. Conversely, if there is no significant difference between the two arms, then this could contribute to a reduction in antibiotic use and improved antimicrobial stewardship. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11166984 . Registered on 23 September 2015.

A blinded randomised placebo-controlled trial investigating the efficacy of morphine analgesia for procedural pain in infants: Trial protocol.

Infant pain has both immediate and long-term negative consequences, yet in clinical practice it is often undertreated. To date, few pain-relieving drugs have been tested in infants. Morphine is a potent analgesic that provides effective pain relief in adults, but there is inconclusive evidence for its effectiveness in infants. The purpose of this study is to establish whether oral morphine provides effective analgesia for procedural pain in infants. A blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group randomized, phase II, clinical trial will be undertaken to determine whether morphine sulphate administered orally prior to clinically-required retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening and heel lancing provides effective analgesia. 156 infants between 34 and 42 weeks' gestational age who require a clinical heel lance and ROP screening on the same test occasion will be included in the trial. Infants will be randomised to receive either a single dose of morphine sulphate (100 µg/kg) or placebo. Each infant will be monitored for 48 hours and safety data will be collected during the 24 hours following drug administration. The primary outcome will be the Premature Infant Pain Profile-revised (PIPP-R) score 30 seconds after ROP screening. The co-primary outcome will be the magnitude of nociceptive-specific brain activity evoked by a clinically-required heel lance. Infant clinical stability will be assessed by comparing the number of episodes of bradycardia, tachycardia, desaturation and apnoea, and changes in respiratory support requirements in the 24-hour periods before and after the clinical intervention. In addition, drug safety will be assessed by considering the occurrence of apnoeic and hypotensive episodes requiring intervention in the 24-hour period following drug administration. This study has been published as an Accepted Protocol Summary by The Lancet.

A 3-month, randomized, placebo-controlled, neuroleptic discontinuation study in 100 people with dementia: the neuropsychiatric inventory median cutoff is a predictor of clinical outcome.

BACKGROUND: Although few placebo-controlled neuroleptic discontinuation studies have been conducted in people with dementia, such studies are essential to inform key clinical decisions. METHOD: A 3-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled, neuroleptic discontinuation study (June 2000 to June 2002) was completed in 100 care-facility residents with probable or possible Alzheimer's disease (according to National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Diseases and Stroke/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association criteria) who had no severe behavioral disturbances and had been taking neuroleptics for longer than 3 months. The Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) was used to measure changes in behavioral and psychiatric symptoms. Quality of life was evaluated using Dementia Care Mapping. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients completed the 1-month assessment (36 placebo, 46 active). The number of participants withdrawing overall (N = 14 [30%] placebo, N = 14 [26%] active treatment) and because of exacerbation of behavioral symptoms (N = 6 [13%] placebo, N = 5 [9%] active treatment) was similar in the neuroleptic- and placebo-treated patients. As hypothesized, patients with baseline NPI scores at or below the median (< or = 14) had a particularly good outcome, with a significantly greater reduction of agitation in the patients receiving placebo (Mann-Whitney U test, z = 2.4, p =.018), while patients with higher baseline NPI scores were significantly more likely to develop marked behavioral problems if discontinued from neuroleptics (chi(2) = 6.8, p =.009). There was no overall difference in the change of quality of life parameters between groups. DISCUSSION: A standardized evaluation with an instrument such as the NPI may be a clinical indicator of which people with dementia are likely to benefit from discontinuation of neuroleptic treatment.

Distant past exercise in women: measures may be reliable, but are they valid?

INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE: Methods to measure lifetime physical activity have been described together with evidence suggesting that they are reliable. We present study findings that challenge the validity of such measures. METHODS: One hundred twenty-seven women aged 50-70 interviewed (31 cases, 96 controls) during a pilot case-control study about risk factors for osteoarthritis of the knee. Interviews used a life course approach with visual cues. Information obtained on past physical activity: (i) Total METs for a large range of activities within each decade between age 10 and age 50, (ii) 10-point rating scales representing level of physical activity during each decade between age 10 and age 50, and (iii) lifetime hours' participation in competitive sports. RESULTS: Any statistical correspondence between METs and activity rating scales was best in relation to women's activity when in their teens (Spearman rank correlation r = 0.40). The highest correlation thereafter related to the most recent decade (r = 0.25), which was low, but there was little or no linear association between MET values and the activity ratings when women were in their 20s or 30s. Around one fifth (20.4%) of women who reported no competitive sports participation during their teens and 18.5% who reported none during their 20s also reported total METs corresponding to the top quartile of physical activity during those periods of their lives. CONCLUSION: Retrospective reports from women of distant past activity levels will likely yield different information depending on the form of questioning. It is unclear which method, if any, is accurate and unbiased. The validity of each method is therefore also questionable.