Improving primary care identification of familial breast cancer risk using proactive invitation and decision support.

Family history of breast cancer is a key risk factor, accounting for up to 10% of cancers. We evaluated the proactive assessment of familial breast cancer (FBC) risk in primary care. Eligible women (30 to 60 years) were recruited from eight English general practices. Practices were trained on FBC risk assessment. In four randomly-assigned practices, women were invited to complete a validated, postal family history questionnaire, which practice staff inputted into decision support software to determine cancer risk. Those with increased risk were offered specialist referral. Usual care was observed in the other four practices. In intervention practices, 1127/7012 women (16.1%) returned family history questionnaires, comprising 1105 (98%) self-reported white ethnicity and 446 (39.6%) educated to University undergraduate or equivalent qualification, with 119 (10.6%) identified at increased breast cancer risk and offered referral. Sixty-seven (56%) women recommended referral were less than 50 years old. From 66 women attending specialists, 26 (39.4%) were confirmed to have high risk and recommended annual surveillance (40-60 years) and surgical prevention; while 30 (45.5%) were confirmed at moderate risk, with 19 offered annual surveillance (40-50 years). The remaining 10 (15.2%) managed in primary care. None were recommended chemoprevention. In usual care practices, only ten women consulted with concerns about breast cancer family history. This study demonstrated proactive risk assessment in primary care enables accurate identification of women, including many younger women, at increased risk of breast cancer. To improve generalisability across the population, more active methods of engagement need to be explored.Trial registration: CRUK Clinical Trials Database 11779.

Earlier diagnosis of lung cancer in a randomised trial of an autoantibody blood test followed by imaging.

The EarlyCDT-Lung test is a high-specificity blood-based autoantibody biomarker that could contribute to predicting lung cancer risk. We report on the results of a phase IV biomarker evaluation of whether using the EarlyCDT-Lung test and any subsequent computed tomography (CT) scanning to identify those at high risk of lung cancer reduces the incidence of patients with stage III/IV/unspecified lung cancer at diagnosis compared with the standard clinical practice at the time the study began.The Early Diagnosis of Lung Cancer Scotland (ECLS) trial was a randomised controlled trial of 12 208 participants at risk of developing lung cancer in Scotland in the UK. The intervention arm received the EarlyCDT-Lung test and, if test-positive, low-dose CT scanning 6-monthly for up to 2 years. EarlyCDT-Lung test-negative and control arm participants received standard clinical care. Outcomes were assessed at 2 years post-randomisation using validated data on cancer occurrence, cancer staging, mortality and comorbidities.At 2 years, 127 lung cancers were detected in the study population (1.0%). In the intervention arm, 33 out of 56 (58.9%) lung cancers were diagnosed at stage III/IV compared with 52 out of 71 (73.2%) in the control arm. The hazard ratio for stage III/IV presentation was 0.64 (95% CI 0.41-0.99). There were nonsignificant differences in lung cancer and all-cause mortality after 2 years.ECLS compared EarlyCDT-Lung plus CT screening to standard clinical care (symptomatic presentation) and was not designed to assess the incremental contribution of the EarlyCDT-Lung test. The observation of a stage shift towards earlier-stage lung cancer diagnosis merits further investigations to evaluate whether the EarlyCDT-Lung test adds anything to the emerging standard of low-dose CT.

Lung cancer screening: does pulmonary nodule detection affect a range of smoking behaviours?

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer mortality by 20%. Screen-detected abnormalities may provide teachable moments for smoking cessation. This study assesses impact of pulmonary nodule detection on smoking behaviours within the first UK trial of a novel auto-antibody test, followed by chest x-ray and serial CT scanning for early detection of lung cancer (Early Cancer Detection Test-Lung Cancer Scotland Study). METHODS: Test-positive participants completed questionnaires on smoking behaviours at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Logistic regression compared outcomes between nodule (n = 95) and normal CT groups (n = 174) at 3 and 6 months follow-up. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the nodule and normal CT groups for any smoking behaviours and odds ratios comparing the nodule and normal CT groups did not vary significantly between 3 and 6 months. There was some evidence the nodule group were more likely to report significant others wanted them to stop smoking than the normal CT group (OR across 3- and 6-month time points: 3.04, 95% CI: 0.95, 9.73; P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Pulmonary nodule detection during lung cancer screening has little impact on smoking behaviours. Further work should explore whether lung cancer screening can impact on perceived social pressure and promote smoking cessation.

Determinants of motivation to quit in smokers screened for the early detection of lung cancer: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The promotion of smoking cessation within lung cancer screening could lead to benefits for smoking-related disease and improve cost-effectiveness of screening. Little is known about how smokers respond to lung cancer screening and how this impacts smoking behaviour. We aimed to understand how lung cancer screening influences individual motivations about smoking, including in those who have stopped smoking since screening. METHODS: Thirty one long-term smokers aged 51-74 took part in semi-structured interviews about smoking. They had been screened with the EarlyCDT-Lung Test (13 positive result; 18 negative) as part of the Early Cancer Detection Test Lung Cancer Scotland Study. They were purposively sampled for interview based on their self-reported post-screening smoking behaviour. Eleven participants had stopped smoking since screening. Verbatim interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Two key overarching themes were interpretations of screening test results and emotional responses to those interpretations. Participants' understanding of the risk implied by their test result was often inaccurate, for example a negative result interpreted as an 'all-clear' from lung cancer and a positive result as meaning lung cancer would definitely develop. Those interpretations led to emotional responses (fear, shock, worry, relief, indifference) influencing motivations about smoking. Other themes included a wake-up call causing changes in perceived risk of smoking-related disease, a feeling that now is the time to stop smoking and family influences. There was no clear pattern in smoking motivations in those who received positive or negative test results. Of those who had stopped smoking, some cited screening experiences as the sole motivation, some cited screening along with other coinciding factors, and others cited non-screening reasons. Cues to change were experienced at different stages of the screening process. Some participants indicated they underwent screening to try and stop smoking, while others expressed little or no desire to stop. CONCLUSIONS: We observed complex and individualised motivations about smoking following lung cancer screening. To be most effective, smoking cessation support in this context should explore understanding of screening test results and may need to be highly tailored to individual emotional responses to screening.

Lung cancer CT screening: Psychological responses in the presence and absence of pulmonary nodules.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the psychological response (thoughts, perceptions and affect) to a diagnosis of pulmonary nodules following a novel antibody blood test and computed tomography (CT) scans within a UK population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was nested within a randomised controlled trial of a blood test (Early CDT®-Lung test), followed by a chest x-ray and serial CT-scanning of those with a positive blood test for early detection of lung cancer (ECLS Study). Trial participants with a positive Early CDT®-Lung test were invited to participate (n = 338) and those agreeing completed questionnaires assessing psychological outcomes at 1, 3 and 6 months following trial recruitment. Responses of individuals with pulmonary nodules on their first CT scan were compared to those without (classified as normal CT) at 3 and 6 months follow-up using random effects regression models to account for multiple observations per participant, with loge transformation of data where modelling assumptions were not met. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the nodule and normal CT groups in affect, lung cancer worry, health anxiety, illness perceptions, lung cancer risk perception or intrusive thoughts at 3 or 6 months post-recruitment. The nodule group had statistically significantly fewer avoidance symptoms compared to the normal CT group at 3 months (impact of events scale avoidance (IES-A) difference between means -1.99, 95%CI -4.18, 0.21) than at 6 months (IES-A difference between means 0.88, 95%CI -1.32, 3.08; p-value for change over time = 0.003) with similar findings using loge transformed data. CONCLUSION: A diagnosis of pulmonary nodules following an Early CDT®-Lung test and CT scan did not appear to result in adverse psychological responses compared to those with a normal CT scan.

Detection in blood of autoantibodies to tumour antigens as a case-finding method in lung cancer using the EarlyCDT®-Lung Test (ECLS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer related death worldwide. The majority of cases are detected at a late stage when prognosis is poor. The EarlyCDT®-Lung Test detects autoantibodies to abnormal cell surface proteins in the earliest stages of the disease which may allow tumour detection at an earlier stage thus altering prognosis. The primary research question is: Does using the EarlyCDT®-Lung Test to identify those at high risk of lung cancer, followed by X-ray and computed tomography (CT) scanning, reduce the incidence of patients with late-stage lung cancer (III & IV) or unclassified presentation (U) at diagnosis, compared to standard practice? METHODS: A randomised controlled trial of 12 000 participants in areas of Scotland targeting general practices serving patients in the most deprived quintile of the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. Adults aged 50-75 who are at high risk of lung cancer and healthy enough to undergo potentially curative therapy (Performance Status 0-2) are eligible to participate. The intervention is the EarlyCDT®-Lung Test, followed by X-ray and CT in those with a positive result. The comparator is standard clinical practice in the UK. The primary outcome is the difference, after 24 months, between the rates of patients with stage III, IV or unclassified lung cancer at diagnosis. The secondary outcomes include: all-cause mortality; disease specific mortality; a range of morbidity outcomes; cost-effectiveness and measures examining the psychological and behavioural consequences of screening. Participants with a positive test result but for whom the CT scan does not lead to a lung cancer diagnosis will be offered 6 monthly thoracic CTs for 24 months. An initial chest X-ray will be used to determine the speed and the need for contrast in the first screening CT. Participants who are found to have lung cancer will be followed-up to assess both time to diagnosis and stage of disease at diagnosis. DISCUSSION: The study will determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of EarlyCDT®-Lung Test for early lung cancer detection and assess its suitability for a large-scale, accredited screening service. The study will also assess the potential psychological and behavioural harms arising from false positive or false negative results, as well as the potential benefits to patients of true negative EarlyCDT lung test results. A cost-effectiveness model of lung cancer screening based on the results of the EarlyCDT Lung Test study will be developed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01925625 . August 19, 2013.

"Keeping Moving": factors associated with sedentary behaviour among older people recruited to an exercise promotion trial in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Sedentary behaviour is detrimental to health, even in those who achieve recommended levels of physical activity. Efforts to increase physical activity in older people so that they reach beneficial levels have been disappointing. Reducing sedentary behaviour may improve health and be less demanding of older people, but it is not clear how to achieve this. We explored the characteristics of sedentary older people enrolled into an exercise promotion trial to gain insights about those who were sedentary but wanted to increase activity. METHOD: Participants in the ProAct65+ trial (2009-2013) were categorised as sedentary or not using a self-report questionnaire. Demographic data, health status, self-rated function and physical test performance were examined for each group. 1104 participants aged 65 & over were included in the secondary analysis of trial data from older people recruited via general practice. Results were analysed using logistic regression with stepwise backward elimination. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty seven (35 %) of the study sample were characterised as sedentary. The likelihood of being categorised as sedentary increased with an abnormal BMI (<18.5 or >25 g/m(2)) (Odds Ratio 1.740, CI 1.248-2.425), ever smoking (OR 1.420, CI 1.042-1.934) and with every additional medication prescribed (OR 1.069, CI 1.016-1.124). Participants reporting better self-rated physical health (SF-12) were less likely to be sedentary; (OR 0.961, 0.936-0.987). Participants' sedentary behaviour was not associated with gender, age, income, education, falls, functional fitness, quality of life or number of co-morbidities. CONCLUSION: Some sedentary older adults will respond positively to an invitation to join an exercise study. Those who did so in this study had poor self-rated health, abnormal BMI, a history of smoking, and multiple medication use, and are therefore likely to benefit from an exercise intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN reference: ISRCTN43453770.

Can oral corticosteroids reduce the severity or duration of an acute cough, and the associated National Health Service and societal costs, in adults presenting to primary care? Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) is one of the most common conditions managed internationally and is costly to health services and patients. Despite good evidence that antibiotics are not effective for improving the symptoms of uncomplicated LRTI, they are widely prescribed, contributing to antimicrobial resistance. Many of the symptoms observed in LRTI are mediated by inflammatory processes also observed in exacerbations of asthma, for which there is strong evidence of corticosteroid effectiveness. The primary aim of the OSAC (Oral Steroids for Acute Cough) Trial is to determine whether oral prednisolone (40 mg daily for 5 days) can reduce the duration of moderately bad (or worse) cough and the severity of all its associated symptoms on days 2 to 4 post-randomisation (day 1 is trial entry) by at least 20% in adults ≥18 years with acute LRTI presenting to primary care. METHODS/DESIGN: OSAC is a two-arm, multi-centre, placebo-controlled, randomised superiority trial. The target sample size is 436 patients, which allows for a 20% dropout rate. Patients will be recruited from primary care sites (General Practitioner surgeries) across England and followed up until symptom resolution. The two primary clinical outcomes are the duration of moderately bad (or worse) cough, and the severity of all its associated symptoms on days 2 to 4 post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes include: antibiotic consumption; symptom burden; adverse events; participant satisfaction with treatment and intention to consult for future similar illnesses. A parallel economic evaluation will investigate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention. DISCUSSION: Results from the OSAC trial will increase knowledge regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of corticosteroids for LRTI, and will establish the potential of a new treatment option that could substantially improve patient health. We have chosen a relatively high 'efficacy dose' as this will enable us to decide on the potential for further research into lower dose oral and/or inhaled corticosteroids. This trial will also contribute to a growing body of research investigating the natural course of this very common illness, as well as the effects of steroids on the undesirable inflammatory symptoms associated with infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN57309858 (31 January 2013).

Exploring recruitment barriers and facilitators in early cancer detection trials: the use of pre-trial focus groups.

BACKGROUND: Recruiting to randomized controlled trials is fraught with challenges; with less than one third recruiting to their original target. In preparation for a trial evaluating the effectiveness of a blood test to screen for lung cancer (the ECLS trial), we conducted a qualitative study to explore the potential barriers and facilitators that would impact recruitment. METHODS: Thirty two people recruited from community settings took part in four focus groups in Glasgow and Dundee (UK). Thematic analysis was used to code the data and develop themes. RESULTS: Three sub-themes were developed under the larger theme of recruitment strategies. The first of these themes, recruitment options, considered that participants largely felt that the invitation to participate letter should come from GPs, with postal reminders and face-to-face reminders during primary care contacts. The second theme dealt with understanding randomization and issues related to the control group (where bloods were taken but not tested). Some participants struggled with the concept or need for randomization, or for the need for a control group. Some reported that they would not consider taking part if allocated to the control group, but others were motivated to take part even if allocated to the control group by altruism. The final theme considered perceived barriers to participation and included practical barriers (such as flexible appointments and reimbursement of travel expenses) and psychosocial barriers (such as feeling stigmatized because of their smoking status and worries about being coerced into stopping smoking). CONCLUSIONS: Focus groups provided useful information which resulted in numerous changes to proposed trial documentation and processes. This was in order to address participants information needs, improve comprehension of the trial documentation, enhance facilitators and remove barriers to participation. The modifications made in light of these findings may enhance trial recruitment and future trials may wish to consider use of pretrial focus groups.

REFINE (REducing Falls in In-patieNt Elderly) using bed and bedside chair pressure sensors linked to radio-pagers in acute hospital care: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: falls in hospitals are a major problem and contribute to substantial healthcare burden. Advances in sensor technology afford innovative approaches to reducing falls in acute hospital care. However, whether these are clinically effective and cost effective in the UK setting has not been evaluated. METHODS: pragmatic, parallel-arm, individual randomised controlled trial of bed and bedside chair pressure sensors using radio-pagers (intervention group) compared with standard care (control group) in elderly patients admitted to acute, general medical wards, in a large UK teaching hospital. Primary outcome measure number of in-patient bedside falls per 1,000 bed days. RESULTS: 1,839 participants were randomised (918 to the intervention group and 921 to the control group). There were 85 bedside falls (65 fallers) in the intervention group, falls rate 8.71 per 1,000 bed days compared with 83 bedside falls (64 fallers) in the control group, falls rate 9.84 per 1,000 bed days (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.22; P = 0.51). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to time to first bedside fall (adjusted hazard ratio (HR), 0.95; 95% CI: 0.67-1.34; P= 0.12). The mean cost per patient in the intervention group was £7199 compared with £6400 in the control group, mean difference in QALYs per patient, 0.0001 (95% CI: -0.0006-0.0004, P= 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: bed and bedside chair pressure sensors as a single intervention strategy do not reduce in-patient bedside falls, time to first bedside fall and are not cost-effective in elderly patients in acute, general medical wards in the UK. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org identifier: ISRCTN44972300.

Extending methods for investigating the relationship between treatment effect and baseline risk from pairwise meta-analysis to network meta-analysis.

Baseline risk is a proxy for unmeasured but important patient-level characteristics, which may be modifiers of treatment effect, and is a potential source of heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Models adjusting for baseline risk have been developed for pairwise meta-analysis using the observed event rate in the placebo arm and taking into account the measurement error in the covariate to ensure that an unbiased estimate of the relationship is obtained. Our objective is to extend these methods to network meta-analysis where it is of interest to adjust for baseline imbalances in the non-intervention group event rate to reduce both heterogeneity and possibly inconsistency. This objective is complicated in network meta-analysis by this covariate being sometimes missing, because of the fact that not all studies in a network may have a non-active intervention arm. A random-effects meta-regression model allowing for inclusion of multi-arm trials and trials without a 'non-intervention' arm is developed. Analyses are conducted within a Bayesian framework using the WinBUGS software. The method is illustrated using two examples: (i) interventions to promote functional smoke alarm ownership by households with children and (ii) analgesics to reduce post-operative morphine consumption following a major surgery. The results showed no evidence of baseline effect in the smoke alarm example, but the analgesics example shows that the adjustment can greatly reduce heterogeneity and improve overall model fit.

Children at risk of medicinal and non-medicinal poisoning: a population-based case-control study in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Preschool children have a high risk of poisoning. While medicines prescribed by primary care are potential poisoning agents, the risk factors for poisoning from medication are not well described. AIM: To identify risk factors for medicinal and non-medicinal poisoning in preschool children. DESIGN AND SETTING: Population-based nested case-control study using The Health Improvement Network primary care database 1988-2004. METHOD: Conditional logistic regression was used to identify child, maternal, and social risk factors for medicinal (1316 cases) and non-medicinal poisoning (503 cases), using 17 709 controls matched on general practice. RESULTS: Poisoning by medicines was independently associated with deprivation (test for trend P<0.001), maternal age (P<0.001), birth order (P<0.001), maternal alcohol misuse (odds ratio [OR] = 5.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.99 to 14.91), and perinatal depression (OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.26 to 1.88). Living in a household with two or more adults lowered the odds of injury compared to single-parent households (OR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.96) and the odds varied by age, being highest in 2 year olds (OR = 9.61, 95% CI = 7.73 to 11.95). Non-medicinal poisoning was associated with deprivation (P = 0.001), maternal age (P<0.001), and birth order (P<0.001). The odds were raised in 1 year olds (OR = 5.44, 95% CI = 4.07 to 7.26) and 2 year olds (OR = 5.07, 95% CI = 3.73 to 6.90) compared to those aged <1 year. CONCLUSION: Primary care data can be used to target interventions to children at risk of poisoning. This is pertinent when prescribing for children/family members, as prescribed medications may become poisoning agents. Prompt identification of maternal depression and alcohol misuse, and delivery of poisoning-prevention interventions at this stage may help prevent poisonings.

A pharmacist-led information technology intervention for medication errors (PINCER): a multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors are common in primary care and are associated with considerable risk of patient harm. We tested whether a pharmacist-led, information technology-based intervention was more effective than simple feedback in reducing the number of patients at risk of measures related to hazardous prescribing and inadequate blood-test monitoring of medicines 6 months after the intervention. METHODS: In this pragmatic, cluster randomised trial general practices in the UK were stratified by research site and list size, and randomly assigned by a web-based randomisation service in block sizes of two or four to one of two groups. The practices were allocated to either computer-generated simple feedback for at-risk patients (control) or a pharmacist-led information technology intervention (PINCER), composed of feedback, educational outreach, and dedicated support. The allocation was masked to researchers and statisticians involved in processing and analysing the data. The allocation was not masked to general practices, pharmacists, patients, or researchers who visited practices to extract data. [corrected]. Primary outcomes were the proportions of patients at 6 months after the intervention who had had any of three clinically important errors: non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) prescribed to those with a history of peptic ulcer without co-prescription of a proton-pump inhibitor; ß blockers prescribed to those with a history of asthma; long-term prescription of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or loop diuretics to those 75 years or older without assessment of urea and electrolytes in the preceding 15 months. The cost per error avoided was estimated by incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. This study is registered with Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN21785299. FINDINGS: 72 general practices with a combined list size of 480,942 patients were randomised. At 6 months' follow-up, patients in the PINCER group were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID if they had a history of peptic ulcer without gastroprotection (OR 0·58, 95% CI 0·38-0·89); a ß blocker if they had asthma (0·73, 0·58-0·91); or an ACE inhibitor or loop diuretic without appropriate monitoring (0·51, 0·34-0·78). PINCER has a 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker's ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 per error avoided at 6 months. INTERPRETATION: The PINCER intervention is an effective method for reducing a range of medication errors in general practices with computerised clinical records. FUNDING: Patient Safety Research Portfolio, Department of Health, England.

Burns in Sulaymaniyah province, Iraq: epidemiology and risk factors for death in patients admitted to hospital.

This retrospective study was undertaken to describe the epidemiology of burns in the province of Sulaymaniyah in Iraqi Kurdistan and investigate factors associated with mortality. Hospital records of all patients admitted to the Burns and Plastic Surgery Centre of Sulaymaniyah for a burn incident during the calendar year of 2006 were reviewed retrospectively. A total of 947 acute burn patients were admitted over the year (females 53.5%, males 46.5%) of whom 41% were aged 0 to 14 years. Flame injuries were responsible for 59% and scalds for 37% of injuries. The median TBSA burnt was 19%, the median length of hospital stay was 5 days, and in-hospital mortality rate was 28%. Multivariable logistic regression showed that burn size, inhalation injury, older age, and female sex were significant risk factors for death. The adjusted odds ratios were 4.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-20.0) for those aged 60 years or older compared with children aged 0 to 5 years; 2.2 (95% CI 1.2-4.1) for females compared with males; 9.8 (95% CI 4.8-20.0) for presence of inhalation injury; and 112.8 (95% CI 57.4-221.4) for ≥ 40% TBSA burnt compared with < 40% TBSA burnt. Burn injuries are an important public health problem in Iraq, and further studies are required to investigate circumstances surrounding burns and risk factors to inform planning of prevention programs.

Cost-effectiveness of a day hospital falls prevention programme for screened community-dwelling older people at high risk of falls.

BACKGROUND: multifactorial falls prevention programmes for older people have been proved to reduce falls. However, evidence of their cost-effectiveness is mixed. DESIGN: economic evaluation alongside pragmatic randomised controlled trial. INTERVENTION: randomised trial of 364 people aged ≥70, living in the community, recruited via GP and identified as high risk of falling. Both arms received a falls prevention information leaflet. The intervention arm were also offered a (day hospital) multidisciplinary falls prevention programme, including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, nurse, medical review and referral to other specialists. MEASUREMENTS: self-reported falls, as collected in 12 monthly diaries. Levels of health resource use associated with the falls prevention programme, screening (both attributed to intervention arm only) and other health-care contacts were monitored. Mean NHS costs and falls per person per year were estimated for both arms, along with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost effectiveness acceptability curve. RESULTS: in the base-case analysis, the mean falls programme cost was £349 per person. This, coupled with higher screening and other health-care costs, resulted in a mean incremental cost of £578 for the intervention arm. The mean falls rate was lower in the intervention arm (2.07 per person/year), compared with the control arm (2.24). The estimated ICER was £3,320 per fall averted. CONCLUSIONS: the estimated ICER was £3,320 per fall averted. Future research should focus on adherence to the intervention and an assessment of impact on quality of life.

A multicentre randomised controlled trial of day hospital-based falls prevention programme for a screened population of community-dwelling older people at high risk of falls.

OBJECTIVE: to determine the clinical effectiveness of a day hospital-delivered multifactorial falls prevention programme, for community-dwelling older people at high risk of future falls identified through a screening process. DESIGN: multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: eight general practices and three day hospitals based in the East Midlands, UK. PARTICIPANTS: three hundred and sixty-four participants, mean age 79 years, with a median of three falls risk factors per person at baseline. INTERVENTIONS: a day hospital-delivered multifactorial falls prevention programme, consisting of strength and balance training, a medical review and a home hazards assessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: rate of falls over 12 months of follow-up, recorded using self-completed monthly diaries. RESULTS: one hundred and seventy-two participants in each arm contributed to the primary outcome analysis. The overall falls rate during follow-up was 1.7 falls per person-year in the intervention arm compared with 2.0 falls per person-year in the control arm. The stratum-adjusted incidence rate ratio was 0.86 (95% CI 0.73-1.01), P = 0.08, and 0.73 (95% CI 0.51-1.03), P = 0.07 when adjusted for baseline characteristics. There were no significant differences between the intervention and control arms in any secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: this trial did not conclusively demonstrate the benefit of a day hospital-delivered multifactorial falls prevention programme, in a population of older people identified as being at high risk of a future fall.