A systematic review of the effectiveness of sleep hygiene in children with ADHD.

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is often accompanied by sleep problems in children. Sleep hygiene is defined as a set of behavioural, environmental, or cognitive modifications to improve sleep, and is routinely clinically utilised as first-line treatment for insomnia in ADHD. The objective of this systematic review of the literature is to evaluate the effectiveness of sleep hygiene interventions for sleep difficulties in children with ADHD. Sixteen relevant articles met the inclusion criteria, involving 1,469 participants, with a mean age of 9.6 years, across 6 countries. Fifteen studies found that sleep hygiene interventions were effective in improving sleep, while one did not show any significant improvement. Definite conclusions on the effectiveness of the interventions are difficult to draw due to the limited number of studies and a high risk of bias. There is growing evidence to support the use of sleep hygiene interventions to improve sleep quality in children with ADHD and sleep disturbance. However, well-conducted clinical trials are required to strengthen the evidence.

Acceptability and barriers to implementation of N-of-1 tests in Ethiopia - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Locally produced generic drugs offer a cost-effective alternative to imported drugs to treat patients in Ethiopia. However, due to a lack of bioequivalence testing, additional assurance tests are needed to build trust in cheaper, locally made drugs. By testing bioequivalence of local drugs to gold standard, N-of-1 tests have the potential to promote patient centred quality use of medicines. METHOD: We sought to assess the acceptability of, and explore barriers to, conducting N-of-1 tests to evaluate local medicines in a resource limited clinical setting. We conducted a descriptive qualitative study, analysing four focus group discussions and five key informant interviews. Participants were senior drug regulatory authority members, institutional review board members, physicians and patients. All interviews were audio taped and transcribed verbatim. Patient interviews were conducted in Amharic and translated to English prior to analysis. Data analysis used an inductive, thematic process. RESULTS: Five major themes were identified; (1) Appropriateness of N-of-1 tests to determine the therapeutic equivalence of local drugs, (2) N-of-1 therapeutic equivalence tests: clinical care or research? (3) Ethical and regulatory requirements (IRB), (4) Potential barriers to implementing N-of-1 tests and (5) Possible solutions to identified challenges. The study demonstrated considerable support for using N-of-1 tests for clinical equivalence studies between local and imported medicines, but important impediments were very likely to impact the feasibility of conducting N-of-1 tests in Ethiopia. Key informants from the regulatory authority did not support additional tests of local drugs. There were also mixed opinions regarding ethical requirements for conducting N-of-1 tests. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) members believed that IRB approval was sufficient to conduct N-of-1 tests, however, the regulatory authority members considered that N-of-1 tests constituted a clinical trial, and required approval at the regulatory level. CONCLUSION: This study showed that there were key uncertainties that could impact the feasiblity of using N-of-1 testing local drugs in Ethiopia. Therefore, a number of protocol amendments to address contextual threats and regulatory challenges, would be needed before progressing to conducting these tests.

Barriers for conducting clinical trials in developing countries- a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials for identification of efficient and effective new diagnostic and treatment modalities are needed to address disproportionately high burden of communicable (e.g., HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria) and non-communicable diseases (e.g., diabetes) in developing countries. However, gross under-representation in global clinical trial platforms contributes to sustained health inequity in these countries. We reviewed the literature on barriers facing clinical researchers in developing countries for conducting clinical trials in their countries. METHODS: Literature indexed in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science, WHO Global Health Library were searched. Grey literature was also searched. Search key words included barriers, challenges, clinical trials and developing countries. Articles within the scope of this review were appraised by two reviewers. RESULTS: Ten studies, which are reported in 15 papers, were included in this review. Following critical review we identified five unifying themes for barriers. Barriers for conducting clinical trials included lack of financial and human capacity, ethical and regulatory system obstacles, lack of research environment, operational barriers and competing demands. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: There were substantial barriers at system, organization and individual level. We propose that to address this problem, instituting a system for wider implementation of local investigator-initiated trials is warranted. These trials are more applicable to local populations because they build on local healthcare knowledge. They are more demand-led, influence policy and responsive to a country's needs because they are driven by a local or national agenda.

Views and perceptions about locally manufactured medicines in Ethiopia: a qualitative study of physicians, patients and regulatory authorities.

BACKGROUND: Because of their cost, the use of locally produced, bioequivalent, generic drugs is universally recommended. In Ethiopia. while the government is committed to raising the market share and use of locally produced drugs, the process is hampered by the lack of a bioequivalence testing centre to strengthen the regulatory environment and deliver quality-assured local medicines. The purpose of this study is to assess the views and perceptions of key regulatory stakeholders, physicians and patients about locally produced generic medicines. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative study, using focus group discussions and key informant interviews, was conducted. Five key informant interviews (two senior regulatory authority members and 3 institutional review board members) as well as 4 focus group discussions (2 with physicians and 2 with patients) were held. Data were analysed using an inductive, thematic process. RESULTS: Four major themes emerged: awareness of lack of bioequivalence profiles associated with local medicines, perceptions about the quality and effectiveness of local medicines, quality and efficacy of imported medicines from developing countries and quality and efficacy of cheaper medicines. All institutional review board members were aware of bioequivalence issues. However, many physicians lacked detailed knowledge about bioequivalence, its clinical relevance and the lack of bioequivalence data for local medicines. All institutional review board members, physicians and male patients, but not female patients, were concerned about the quality and effectiveness of local medicines. Female patients were more confident about the locally produced drugs. In addition, some physicians and patients were not confident about the quality and effectiveness of cheaper drugs and drugs imported from developing countries. Government officials believed that local drugs are reliable. CONCLUSION: The success of promoting the use of inexpensive local medicines and changing the perception of the community depends not only on increasing the domestic market share held by local companies, but also on the capacity of the regulatory environment and companies to produce quality assured medicines and to overcome misconceptions. Among other initiatives, establishing an accredited bioequivalence centre in the country needs to be addressed urgently.

Sun protective behaviors at an outdoor entertainment event in Australia.

An observational study was conducted to examine the use of sun protective hats, clothing, and sunglasses of people attending an outdoor entertainment event in an area of high-to-extreme ultraviolet radiation in New South Wales, Australia. Armidale is unique, as it is a highly-elevated area, almost 1000 m above sea level, and temperatures are often mild with very high-to-extreme levels of ultraviolet radiation. Four trained data collectors observed attendees as they entered the event, and recorded their use of sun protective hats, clothing, and sunglasses. While more than half of the attendees wore sun protective hats, only 14% wore sun protective clothing. Broad-brimmed hats were considered sun protective, while sun protective clothing was defined by shirts with at least three-quarter-length sleeves. Females were more likely to wear both a sun protective hat and clothing than males, and children were less protected than adults. Legislative changes are required to ensure that organizers of outdoor events have a legal responsibility to provide a safe environment for attendees, including strategies to help reduce ultraviolet radiation exposure.

Management of Whiplash Associated Disorders in Australian general practice.

BACKGROUND: Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD) are common and costly, and are usually managed initially by general practitioners (GPs). How GPs manage WAD is largely unstudied, though there are clinical guidelines. Our aim was to ascertain the rate of management (percentage of encounters) of WAD among patients attending Australian general practice, and to review management of these problems, including imaging, medications and other treatments. METHODS: We analysed data from 2013 to 2016 collected by different random samples of approximately 1000 general practitioners (GPs) per year. Each GP collected data about 100 consecutive consultations for BEACH (Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health), an Australian national study of general practice encounters. Main outcome measures were: the proportion of encounters involving management of WAD; management including imaging, medications and other treatments given; appropriateness of treatment assessed against published clinical guidelines. RESULTS: Of 291,100 encounters from 2919 GP participants (a nationally representative sample), WAD were managed at 137 encounters by 124 GPs (0.047%). Management rates were 0.050% (females) and 0.043% (males). For 63 new cases (46%), 19 imaging tests were ordered, most commonly neck/cervical spine x-ray (52.6% of tests for new cases), and neck/cervical spine CT scan (31.6%). One or more medications were prescribed/supplied for 53.3% of WAD. NSAIDs (11.7 per 100 WAD problems) and compound analgesics containing paracetamol and opioids (10.2 per 100 WAD problems) were the commonest medications used by GPs overall. Paracetamol alone was used in 8 per 100 WAD problems. The most frequent clinical/procedural treatments for WAD were physical medicine/rehabilitation (16.1 per 100 WAD problems), counselling (6.6), and general advice/education (5.8). CONCLUSIONS: GPs refer about 30% of new cases for imaging (possibly overutilising imaging), and prescribe a range of drugs, approximately 22% of which are outside clinical guidelines. These findings suggest a need for further education of GPs, including indications for imaging after whiplash injury, identification of those more likely to develop chronic WAD, and medication management guidelines. WAD carry a large personal and economic burden, so the impact of improvements in GP management is potentially significant.

The Single-Case Reporting Guideline In BEhavioural Interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 Statement.

We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016 ) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts. SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012 ). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008 ) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioural sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015 ; Vohra et al., 2015 ), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioural sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016 ) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.

Amphetamines for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common psychiatric conditions affecting children and adolescents. Amphetamines are among the most commonly prescribed medications to manage ADHD. There are three main classes of amphetamines: dexamphetamine, lisdexamphetamine and mixed amphetamine salts, which can be further broken down into short- and long-acting formulations. A systematic review assessing their efficacy and safety in this population has never been conducted. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of amphetamines for ADHD in children and adolescents. SEARCH METHODS: In August 2015 we searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses, and the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, and checked the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews identified by the searches. No language or date restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Parallel-group and cross-over randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing amphetamine derivatives against placebo in a pediatric population (< 18 years) with ADHD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data on participants, settings, interventions, methodology, and outcomes for each included study. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) and for dichotomous outcomes we calculated the risk ratio (RR). Where possible, we conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model. We also performed a meta-analysis of the most commonly reported adverse events in the primary studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included 23 trials (8 parallel-group and 15 cross-over trials), with 2675 children aged three years to 17 years. All studies compared amphetamines to placebo. Study durations ranged from 14 days to 365 days, with the majority lasting less than six months. Most studies were conducted in the United States; three studies were conducted across Europe. We judged 11 included studies to be at a high risk of bias due to insufficient blinding methods, failing to account for dropouts and exclusions from the analysis, and failing to report on all outcomes defined a priori. We judged the remaining 12 studies to be at unclear risk of bias due to inadequate reporting.Amphetamines improved total ADHD core symptom severity according to parent ratings (SMD -0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.86 to -0.27; 7 studies; 1247 children/adolescents; very low quality evidence), teacher ratings (SMD -0.55; 95% CI -0.83 to -0.27; 5 studies; 745 children/adolescents; low quality evidence), and clinician ratings (SMD -0.84; 95% CI -1.32 to -0.36; 3 studies; 813 children/adolescents; very low quality evidence). In addition, the proportion of responders as rated by the Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) scale was higher when children were taking amphetamines (RR 3.36; 95% CI 2.48 to 4.55; 9 studies; 2207 children/adolescents; very low quality evidence).The most commonly reported adverse events included decreased appetite, insomnia/trouble sleeping, abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, headaches, and anxiety. Amphetamines were associated with a higher proportion of participants experiencing decreased appetite (RR 6.31; 95% CI 2.58 to 15.46; 11 studies; 2467 children/adolescents), insomnia (RR 3.80; 95% CI 2.12 to 6.83; 10 studies; 2429 children/adolescents), and abdominal pain (RR 1.44; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.00; 10 studies; 2155 children/adolescents). In addition, the proportion of children who experienced at least one adverse event was higher in the amphetamine group (RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.44; 6 studies; 1742 children/adolescents; low quality evidence).We performed subgroup analyses for amphetamine preparation (dexamphetamine, lisdexamphetamine, mixed amphetamine salts), amphetamine release formulation (long acting versus short acting), and funding source (industry versus non industry). Between-group differences were observed for proportion of participants experiencing decreased appetite in both the amphetamine preparation (P < 0.00001) and amphetamine release formulation (P value = 0.008) subgroups, as well as for retention in the amphetamine release formulation subgroup (P value = 0.03). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Most of the included studies were at high risk of bias and the overall quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low on most outcomes. Although amphetamines seem efficacious at reducing the core symptoms of ADHD in the short term, they were associated with a number of adverse events. This review found no evidence that supports any one amphetamine derivative over another, and does not reveal any differences between long-acting and short-acting amphetamine preparations. Future trials should be longer in duration (i.e. more than 12 months), include more psychosocial outcomes (e.g. quality of life and parent stress), and be transparently reported.

The Single-Case Reporting Guideline In BEhavioural Interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 Statement.

Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist, and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioral sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015; Vohra et al., 2015), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioral sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In Behavioral interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.

Testing pilocarpine drops for dry mouth in advanced cancer using n-of-1 trials: A feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Dry mouth is a common and troublesome symptom in palliative care. Pilocarpine is a cholinergic agent that promotes salivation. AIM: This study aimed to test the feasibility of using n-of-1 trials to test pilocarpine drops compared to placebo, for patients of palliative care units with advanced cancer, who experienced dry mouth. DESIGN: This was an N-of-1 study, in which each participant was offered three cycles of pilocarpine drops 4% (6 mg tds) (3 days) and placebo drops (3 days) in random order. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants were patients of specialist palliative care services with advanced cancer assessed as having a dry mouth, defined as having a score of ⩾ 3 on an 11-point self-rated xerostomia numerical rating scale, from any cause. Patients self-completed a diary using validated symptom and quality-of-life scores. The randomisation order was unmasked at the end of each person's trial by a clinician independent of the trial to allow a treatment decisions for individual patients to be made. RESULTS: Nine patients completed at least 1 cycle; 33 cycles of data were completed in total, comprising 438 doses of pilocarpine. Four patients completed the trial: two responded and two did not. Most withdrawals related to deteriorating condition, unacceptable toxicity, non-compliance with study procedures or withdrawal of consent. Many issues contributed to slow recruitment and high withdrawal rate. CONCLUSION: The formulation of pilocarpine drops proved unacceptable to most participants. More work is required to determine an appropriate formulation, dose and method of delivery and then a retest of pilocarpine drops for this symptom.

The potential of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for addressing sleep difficulties in children with autism - A brief communication.

Sleep difficulties can co-occur with autistic traits and have been frequently reported in children diagnosed with autism. Thus, sleep difficulties may impact neural development, cognition, and behavioural functioning in children with autism. Interventions, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), that target aberrant neural structures underpinning autistic traits and sleep difficulties in children could have beneficial effects. The rTMS effects on the pathophysiological pathways hypothesised to underpin autism and sleep difficulties are well-established in the literature; however, clinical evidence of its potential to improve sleep difficulties in children with autism is limited. While the preliminary data is promising, further robust rTMS studies are warranted to encourage its use in clinical practices.

Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder stimulant trial in children: an N-of-1 pilot trial to compare stimulant to placebo (FASST): protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by alcohol exposure during pregnancy. FASD is associated with neurodevelopmental deviations, and 50%-94% of children with FASD meet the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-fifth edition diagnostic criteria for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). There is a paucity of evidence around medication efficacy for ADHD symptoms in children with FASD. This series of N-of-1 trials aims to provide pilot data on the feasibility of conducting N-of-1 trials in children with FASD and ADHD. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A pilot N-of-1 randomised trial design with 20 cycles of stimulant and placebo (four cycles of 2-week duration) for each child will be conducted (n=20) in Melbourne, Australia.Feasibility and tolerability will be assessed using recruitment and retention rates, protocol adherence, adverse events and parent ratings of side effects. Each child's treatment effect will be determined by analysing teacher ADHD ratings across stimulant and placebo conditions (Wilcoxon rank). N-of-1 data will be aggregated to provide an estimate of the cohort treatment effect as well as individual-level treatment effects. We will assess the sample size and number of cycles required for a future trial. Potential mediating factors will be explored to identify variables that might be associated with treatment response variability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/74678/MonH-2021-269029), Monash (protocol V6, 25 June 2023).Individual outcome data will be summarised and provided to participating carers and practitioners to enhance care. Group-level findings will be presented at a local workshop to engage stakeholders. Findings will be presented at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. All results will be reported so that they can be used to inform prior information for future trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04968522.

Central nervous system stimulants for secondary attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder after paediatric traumatic brain injury: a rationale and protocol for single patient (n-of-1) multiple cross-over trials.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 22,800 children were living with an Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) (0.6% of children aged under 15 years) in Australia during 2003. Many children after a traumatic brain injury will experience difficulties with attention and concentration; a condition termed secondary Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder. There is conflicting evidence on whether treatment with stimulant therapy with medications such as methylphenidate or dexamphetamine will improve the attention and behavior of children with this condition. METHODS/DESIGN: Single patient trials (n-of-1s or SPTs) evaluate the effect of titrated doses of psychostimulants methylphenidate or dexamphetamine compared to placebo on attention and behavior, in children with TBI and secondary ADHD. The aggregation of multiple SPTs will produce a population estimate of the benefit. Forty-two children will be registered into the trial through rehabilitation services at three large children's hospitals in Australia. Patients will complete up to 3 cycles of treatment. Each cycle is 2 weeks long comprising seven days each of treatment and placebo, with the first two days of each cycle considered a washout period and the data not analysed. The order of treatment and placebo is randomly allocated for each cycle. The Conners' Parent Rating Scales long forms will be employed to measure change in attention-deficit/hyperactivity and related problems of the child, and the primary outcome measure is the Conners' Global Index Parent Version. Secondary outcomes include the teacher and child (if aged > 12 years) Conners' Rating Scales, the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function among other measures. This study will provide high-level evidence using a novel methodological approach to inform clinicians about the most appropriate treatment for individual children. Through aggregation of individual trials, a population estimate of treatment effect will be provided to guide clinical practice in the treatment of children with secondary ADHD after a traumatic brain injury. DISCUSSION: This study employs an innovative methodological approach on the effectiveness of CNS stimulants for secondary ADHD from a brain injury. The findings will both guide clinicians on treatment recommendations, and inform the concept and acceptance of SPTs in paediatric research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. ACTRN12609000873224.

Do pilocarpine drops help dry mouth in palliative care patients: a protocol for an aggregated series of n-of-1 trials.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 39,000 Australians die from malignant disease yearly. Of these, 60% to 88% of advanced cancer patients suffer xerostomia, the subjective feeling of mouth dryness. Xerostomia has significant physical, social and psychological consequences which compromise function and quality of life. Pilocarpine is one treatment for xerostomia. Most studies have shown some variation in individual response to pilocarpine, in terms of dose used, and timing and extent of response.We will determine a population estimate of the efficacy of pilocarpine drops (6 mg) three times daily compared to placebo in relieving dry mouth in palliative care (PC) patients. A secondary aim is to assess individual patients' response to pilocarpine and provide reports detailing individual response to patients and their treating clinician. METHODS/DESIGN: Aggregated n-of-1 trials (3 cycle, double blind, placebo-controlled crossover trials using standardized measures of effect). Individual trials will identify which patients respond to the medication. To produce a population estimate of a treatment effect, the results of all cycles will be aggregated. DISCUSSION: Managing dry mouth with treatment supported by the best possible evidence will improve functional status of patients, and improve quality of life for patients and carers. Using n-of-1 trials will accelerate the rate of accumulation of high-grade evidence to support clinical therapies used in PC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Number: 12610000840088.

Using aggregated single patient (N-of-1) trials to determine the effectiveness of psychostimulants to reduce fatigue in advanced cancer patients: a rationale and protocol.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 29% of deaths in Australia are caused by malignant disease each year and can be expected to increase with population ageing. In advanced cancer, the prevalence of fatigue is high at 70-90%, and can be related to the disease and/or the treatment. The negative impact of fatigue on function (physical, mental, social and spiritual) and quality of life is substantial for many palliative patients as well as their families/carers. METHOD/DESIGN: This paper describes the design of single patient trials (n-of-1 s or SPTs) of a psychostimulant, methylphenidate hydrochloride (MPH) (5 mg bd), compared to placebo as a treatment for fatigue, with a population estimate of the benefit by the aggregation of multiple SPTs. Forty patients who have advanced cancer will be enrolled through specialist palliative care services in Australia. Patients will complete up to 3 cycles of treatment. Each cycle is 6 days long and has 3 days treatment and 3 days placebo. The order of treatment and placebo is randomly allocated for each cycle. The primary outcome is a reduction in fatigue severity as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-fatigue subscale (FACIT-F). Secondary outcomes include adverse events, quality of life, additional fatigue assessments, depression and Australian Karnovsky Performance Scale. DISCUSSION: This study will provide high-level evidence using a novel methodological approach about the effectiveness of psychostimulants for cancer-related fatigue. If effective, the findings will guide clinical practice in reducing this prevalent condition to improve function and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12609000794202.

The effectiveness of aerobic versus strengthening exercise therapy in individuals with chronic whiplash-associated disorder: a randomised single case experimental design study.

PURPOSE: Recent RCTs and meta-analyses compare the effectiveness of different types of exercise for chronic whiplash associated disorder (WAD). This study aimed to verify whether the results of these studies translate to statistically significant and clinically meaningful effects in individual participants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A series of replicated randomised single case experimental design studies (SCEDs) with A-B design (A: baseline, B: intervention). Eight participants with chronic WAD (8 female, mean [SD] age 47 [10] years) were randomised into one of four baseline durations (5, 8, 11, and 14 days) and to one of two eight-week exercise interventions (aerobic or strengthening). Daily measures of pain intensity, bothersomeness, and interference were collected during the baseline phase and the intervention phase. RESULTS: Visual analyses indicated that three participants in the aerobic exercise group meaningfully improved. No improvements were found in the strengthening group. Effect sizes favoured the aerobic exercise group, yet randomisation tests of pooled effects did not show a difference in between-intervention effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Contrary to our expectations, three out of four participants were nearly pain-free at the end of the aerobic exercise intervention, whereas none of the participants in the strengthening group improved meaningfully. This suggests that aerobic exercise may be favourable for WAD.Implications for RehabilitationOur results suggest that aerobic exercises are favourable over strengthening exercises and may be the preferred option for patients with chronic WAD.We found substantial variability in self-reported outcomes within participants, clinicians should be aware of this in the judgement of treatment effectiveness.

Evaluation of a physical activity promotion intervention for adults with whiplash associated disorders: a single-case experimental design study.

PURPOSE: There is considerable variation in the physical and psychological presentations of people with whiplash-associated disorder (WAD). Optimal treatment continues to be a challenge. This research evaluated the efficacy of a community-located, theory-based intervention designed to promote physically active behaviour in people with persistent WAD, and thereby improve perceptions of pain interference and confidence completing activities in the presence of neck pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multiple-baseline, single-case experimental design was used to evaluate the 16-week intervention across six participants. RESULTS: Weighted Tau-U showed significantly increased accelerometer-measured physical activity in three participants with large effect sizes (>0.5), with increased confidence in one participant (ES > 0.5), and reduced pain interference in another participant (ES > 0.7). Changes in other behaviours included clinically important improvements in quality of life for five participants and, in those participants with baseline symptom levels outside threshold levels, improvements in pain catastrophizing and pain self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in a theory-based intervention resulted in significant improvements in physical and psychological health for five of six participants. Providing this type of community-located physical activity promotion strategy, to individuals with persistent WAD, may help address physical impairments and psychological distress commonly experienced in WAD. Trial registration: The trial was registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN: ACTRN12617001261303p) and ClinicalTrials.gov (Protocol Number: 2018000349/2017/743).Implications for rehabilitationRehabilitation professionals should consider recommending theory-based physical activity promotion strategies to reduce physical impairments and psychological distress in individuals with persistent WAD.Individually tailored physical activity promotion strategies may help individuals with persistent WAD become more physically active thereby reducing their risk of diseases associated with inactivity which may compound the effects of WADImprovements in physical and psychological health may occur independently of increasing habitual physical activity.Rehabilitation professionals may find that other community-located strategies which aim to promote physically active behaviour confer similar benefits for individuals with persistent WAD.

Exploring Symptom Fluctuations and Triggers in Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Using Novel Patient-Centred N-of-1 Observational Designs: A Protocol for a Feasibility and Acceptability Study.

BACKGROUND: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a chronic condition of unknown aetiology associated with a range of disabling symptoms, including post-exertional malaise, chronic fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, orthostatic intolerance, unrefreshing sleep, and cognitive dysfunction. ME/CFS is a heterogeneous disorder, with significant variation in symptom type and severity between individuals, as well as within individuals over time. The diversity of ME/CFS symptom presentation makes management challenging; treatments supported by data from randomised controlled trials may not work for all individuals due to the variability in experienced symptoms. Studies using quantitative N-of-1 observational designs involve repeated outcome measurements in an individual over time and can generate rigorous individual-specific conclusions about symptom patterns and triggers in individuals with ME/CFS. This study aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of using novel patient-centred N-of-1 observational designs to explore symptom fluctuations and triggers in ME/CFS at the individual level. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Individuals with a medical diagnosis of ME/CFS will be recruited through ME/CFS patient organisations to participate in a series of patient-centred N-of-1 observational studies. Using a wrist-worn electronic diary, participants will complete ecological momentary assessments of fatigue, stress, mood, and cognitive demand, three times per day for a period of 6-12 weeks. Personally relevant symptoms and triggers will also be incorporated into the questionnaire design. Physical activity will be objectively measured via an integrated accelerometer. Feasibility and acceptability outcomes will be assessed including the percentage of diary entries completed, as well as recruitment and retention rate, feasibility of analysing and interpreting the data collected, and participant views about participation elicited via a post-study semi-structured interview. DISCUSSION: This study will assess the feasibility and acceptability of patient-centred N-of-1 observational studies to assess diseases with complex presentations such as ME/CFS, as well as provide individual-level evidence about fluctuations and triggers of ME/CFS symptoms that may aid self-management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618001898246. Registered on 22 November 2018.

Pregabalin vs placebo to prevent chronic pain after whiplash injury in at-risk individuals: results of a feasibility study for a large randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: There are few effective treatments for acute whiplash-associated disorders (WADs). Early features of central sensitisation predict poor recovery. The effect of pregabalin on central sensitisation might prevent chronic pain after acute whiplash injury. This double blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial examined feasibility and potential effectiveness of pregabalin compared with placebo for people with acute WAD. Twenty-four participants with acute WAD (<48 hours) and at risk of poor recovery (pain ≥5/10) were recruited from hospital emergency departments in Queensland, Australia, and randomly assigned by concealed allocation to either pregabalin (n = 10) or placebo (n = 14). Pregabalin was commenced at 75 mg bd, titrated to 300 mg bd for 4 weeks, and then weaned over 1 week. Participants were assessed at 5 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months. Feasibility issues included recruitment difficulties and greater attrition in the placebo group. For the primary clinical outcome of neck pain intensity, attrition at 5 weeks was pregabalin: 10% and placebo: 36% and at 12 months was pregabalin: 10% and placebo: 43%. Pregabalin may be more effective than placebo for the primary clinical outcome of neck pain intensity at 3 months (mean difference: -4.0 [95% confidence interval -6.2 to -1.7]) on an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale. Effects were maintained at 6 months but not 12 months. There were no serious adverse events. Minor adverse events were more common in the pregabalin group. A definitive large randomised controlled trial of pregabalin for acute whiplash injury is warranted. Feasibility issues would need to be addressed with modifications to the protocol.

N-of-1 Trials in Neurology: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of published N-of-1 trials (e.g., single patient crossover trials) in neurologic disorders, including an assessment of methodologic quality and reporting. METHODS: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase from inception date to the December 1, 2019, for reports on N-of-1 trials in neurologic disorders. Basic trial information on design, disease, intervention, analysis, and treatment success was extracted. Strengths and weaknesses of the N-of-1 trials were assessed with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension for N-of-1 trials (CENT) 2015 criteria checklist and the Jadad score as measures of quality and reporting. RESULTS: We retrieved 40 reports of N-of-1 trials in neurologic disorders (19 individual N-of-1 trials, 21 series of N-of-1 trials). Most N-of-1 trials were performed in neuromuscular and neurodegenerative/movement disorders. Unlike the majority of trials that studied the main symptom(s) of a chronic stable condition, 9 N-of-1 trials studied a stable chronic symptom of a progressive or acute neurologic disorder. Besides pharmacologic interventions, electric stimulation protocols and nutritional products were studied. A mean total CENT score of 20.88 (SD 9.10, range 0-43) and mean total Jadad score of 2.90 (SD 2.15, range 0-5) were found as methodologic measures of quality and reporting across all N-of-1 trials. DISCUSSION: N-of-1 trials have been reported in numerous neurologic disorders, not only in chronic stable disorders, but also in progressive or acute disorders with a stable symptom. This indicates the emerging therapeutic area of N-of-1 trials in neurology. Methodologic quality and reporting of N-of-1 trials were found to be suboptimal and can easily be improved in future trials by appropriately describing the methods of blinding and randomization and following CENT guidelines. Because most N-of-1 trials remain unreported in medical literature, this systematic review probably represents only the tip of the iceberg of conducted N-of-1 trials in neurologic disorders. In addition to conventional trial designs, N-of-1 trials can help to bridge the gap between research and clinical care by providing an alternative, personalized level 1 evidence base for suitable treatments.