Goal setting as part of a holistic intervention to promote independence in older people with mild frailty: a process evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a condition resulting from a decline in physiological reserves caused by an accumulation of several deficits, which progressively impairs the ability to recover from health adverse events. Following a promising feasibility study, the HomeHealth trial assessed a holistic tailored intervention for older adults with mild frailty to promote independence in their own homes, compared with usual care. We aimed to understand how goal setting worked among older people with mild frailty. METHODS: This study was a process evaluation alongside the HomeHealth randomised trial in older adults with mild frailty. The intervention was delivered at participants' homes, either in person or by telephone or videoconferencing. We carried out semi-structured interviews with older participants who had received the intervention (between three and six appointments), on average 233 days (range 68-465) after their last appointment, purposively sampled according to age, gender, number of sessions attended, adverse events, ethnicity, Index of Multiple Deprivation, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Barthel scores, research site, and HomeHealth worker. We also conducted interviews with HomeHealth workers who delivered the intervention (n=7). Interviews explored the experience and process of goal setting, benefits and challenges, perceived progress, and behaviour change maintenance after the service had finished. Ethics approval was obtained, and all participants gave informed consent. Interviews were thematically analysed. HomeHealth workers kept formal records of goals set and assessed progress towards goals (0-2 rating scale) during six monthly-sessions, which were descriptively summarised. FINDINGS: 56 interviews were completed between July 15, 2022, and May 18, 2023. Study participants (n=49) had a mean age of 80 years (range 66-94), including 32 (65%) women and 17 (35%) men. Participants self-identified as White (n=42), Asian (n=3), Black (n=2), Mixed (n=1), and other ethnic (n=1) backgrounds. Findings suggested goal setting could be both a challenge and a motivator for older participants with mild frailty. Goal setting worked well when the older person could identify a clear need and set realistic goals linked to functioning, which led to a positive sense of achievement. Challenges occurred when older people were already accessing multiple resources and health services, or where the terminology of "goals" was off-putting due to work or school connotations. Average progress towards goals was 1·15/2. Most participants set goals around improving mobility (or a combination of mobility and another goal type such as socialising), and there was evidence of participants sustaining these behaviour changes after the intervention. INTERPRETATION: Older people with mild frailty can engage well with goal setting to promote independence. The lapse between receiving the intervention and being interviewed limited recall for some participants. However, the acceptability and adherence to the intervention for older people with mild frailty, and their moderate progress towards goals, should encourage further tailored and person-centred practices to promote their independence. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment.

Attendance, Weight Loss, and Participation in a Behavioural Diabetes Prevention Programme.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss in diabetes prevention programmes has been shown to be associated with participants' age, socio-economic status, and ethnicity. However, little is known about how these differences relate to attendance and whether such differences can be mediated by other potentially modifiable factors. Differential effectiveness across these factors may exacerbate health inequalities. METHOD: Prospective analysis of participant data collected by one provider of the standardised national NHS diabetes prevention programme in England. Mediation analysis was performed via a structural equation model to examine whether the number of attended sessions mediated the associations of age, socio-economic status, and ethnicity with follow-up weight. The group-level factor of number of attended sessions was examined using multiple linear regression as a benchmark; multilevel linear regression using three levels (venue, coach, and group); and fixed effects regression to account for venue-specific and coach-specific characteristics. RESULTS: The associations of age, socio-economic status, and ethnicity with follow-up weight were all mediated by the number of attended sessions. Group size was associated with attendance in an inverted 'U' shape, and the number of days between referral and group start was negatively associated with attendance. Time of day, day of the week, and the number of past groups led by the coach were not associated with attendance. CONCLUSION: Most of the differences in weight loss initially attributed to socio-demographic factors are mediated by the attendance of the diabetes prevention programme. Therefore, targeted efforts to improve uptake and adherence to such programmes may help alleviate inequalities.

The DAFNEplus programme for sustained type 1 diabetes self management: Intervention development using the Behaviour Change Wheel.

AIMS: Self-management programmes for type 1 diabetes, such as the UK's Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE), improve short-term clinical outcomes but difficulties maintaining behavioural changes attenuate long-term impact. This study used the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) framework to revise the DAFNE intervention to support sustained behaviour change. METHODS: A four-step method was based on the BCW intervention development approach: (1) Identifying self-management behaviours and barriers/enablers to maintain them via stakeholder consultation and evidence synthesis, and mapping barriers/enablers to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model. (2) Specifying behaviour change techniques (BCTs) in the existing DAFNE intervention using the Behaviour Change Techniques Taxonomy (BCTTv1). (3) Identifying additional BCTs to target the barriers/enablers using the BCW and BCTTv1. (4) Parallel stakeholder consultation to generate recommendations for intervention revision. Revised materials were co-designed by stakeholders (diabetologists, psychologists, specialist nurses and dieticians). RESULTS: In all, 34 barriers and 5 enablers to sustaining self-management post-DAFNE were identified. The existing DAFNE intervention contained 24 BCTs, which partially addressed the enablers. In all, 27 BCTs were added, including 'Habit formation', 'Credible source' and 'Conserving mental resources'. In total, 15 stakeholder-agreed recommendations for content and delivery were incorporated into the final DAFNEplus intervention, comprising three co-designed components: (1) face-to-face group learning course, (2) individual structured follow-up sessions and (3) technological support, including blood glucose data management. CONCLUSIONS: This method provided a systematic approach to specifying and revising a behaviour change intervention incorporating stakeholder input. The revised DAFNEplus intervention aims to support the maintenance of behavioural changes by targeting barriers and enablers to sustaining self-management behaviours.

Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of the DAFNEplus (Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating) intervention compared with 5x1 DAFNE: a lifelong approach to promote effective self-management in adults with type 1 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: The successful treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) requires those affected to employ insulin therapy to maintain their blood glucose levels as close to normal to avoid complications in the long-term. The Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating (DAFNE) intervention is a group education course designed to help adults with T1D develop and sustain the complex self-management skills needed to adjust insulin in everyday life. It leads to improved glucose levels in the short term (manifest by falls in glycated haemoglobin, HbA1c), reduced rates of hypoglycaemia and sustained improvements in quality of life but overall glucose levels remain well above national targets. The DAFNEplus intervention is a development of DAFNE designed to incorporate behavioural change techniques, technology and longer-term structured support from healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in adults with T1D, delivered in diabetes centres in National Health Service secondary care hospitals in the UK. Centres will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to standard DAFNE or DAFNEplus. Primary clinical outcome is the change in HbA1c and the primary endpoint is HbA1c at 12 months, in those entering the trial with HbA1c >7.5% (58 mmol/mol), and HbA1c at 6 months is the secondary endpoint. Sample size is 662 participants (approximately 47 per centre); 92% power to detect a 0.5% difference in the primary outcome of HbA1c between treatment groups. The trial also measures rates of hypoglycaemia, psychological outcomes, an economic evaluation and process evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by South West-Exeter Research Ethics Committee (REC ref: 18/SW/0100) on 14 May 2018. The results of the trial will be published in a National Institute for Health Research monograph and relevant high-impact journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN42908016.

Multiple Interventions for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Treatment Trial (MIDFUT): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes affects more than 425 million people worldwide with a lifetime risk of diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) of up to 25%. Management includes wound debridement, wound dressings, offloading, treatment of infection and ischaemia, optimising glycaemic control; use of advanced adjuvant therapies is limited by high cost and lack of robust evidence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, seamless phase II/III, open, parallel group, multi-arm multi-stage randomised controlled trial in patients with a hard-to-heal DFU, with blinded outcome assessment. A maximum of 447 participants will be randomised (245 participants in phase II and 202 participants in phase III). The phase II primary objective will determine the efficacy of treatment strategies including hydrosurgical debridement ± decellularised dermal allograft, or the combination with negative pressure wound therapy, as an adjunct to treatment as usual (TAU), compared with TAU alone, with patients randomised in a 1:1:1:2 allocation. The outcome is achieving at least 50% reduction in index ulcer area at 4 weeks post randomisation.The phase III primary objective will determine whether one treatment strategy, continued from phase II, reduces time to healing of the index ulcer compared with TAU alone, with participants randomised in a 1:1 allocation. Secondary objectives will compare healing status of the index ulcer, infection rate, reulceration, quality of life, cost-effectiveness and incidence of adverse events over 52 weeks post randomisation. Phase II and phase III primary endpoint analysis will be conducted using a mixed-effects logistic regression model and Cox proportional hazards regression, respectively. A within-trial economic evaluation will be undertaken; the primary economic analysis will be a cost-utility analysis presenting ICERs for each treatment strategy in rank order of effectiveness, with effects expressed as quality-adjusted life years.The trial has predefined progression criteria for the selection of one treatment strategy into phase III based on efficacy, safety and costs at 4 weeks. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) Committee Yorkshire and The Humber - Bradford Leeds Research Ethics Committee; approved 26 April 2017; (REC reference: 17/YH/0055). There is planned publication of a monograph in National Institute for Health Research journals and main trial results and associated papers in high-impact peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN64926597; registered on 6 June 2017.

Cost-effectiveness of superabsorbent wound dressing versus standard of care in patients with moderate-to-highly exuding leg ulcers.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness/utility of a superabsorbent wound dressing (Zetuvit Plus Silicone) versus the current standard of care (SoC) dressings, from the NHS perspective in England, in patients with moderate-to-high exudating leg ulcers. METHOD: A model-based economic evaluation was conducted to analyse the cost-effectiveness/utility of a new intervention. We used a microsimulation state-transition model with a time horizon of six months and a cycle length of one week. The model uses a combination of incidence base and risk prediction approach to inform transition probabilities. All clinical efficiency, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), cost and resource use inputs were informed by conducting a systematic review of UK specific literature. RESULTS: Treatment with the superabsorbent dressing leads to a total expected cost per patient for a six month period of £2887, associated with 15.933 expected quality adjusted life weeks and 10.9% healing rate. When treated with SoC, the total expected cost per patient for a six month period is £3109, 15.852 expected quality adjusted life weeks and 8% healing rate. Therefore, the superabsorbent dressing leads to an increase in quality-adjusted life weeks, an increase in healing rate by 2.9% and a cost-saving of £222 per single average patient over six months. Results of several scenario analyses, one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of base-case results. The probabilistic analysis confirmed that, in any combination of variable values, the superabsorbent dressing leads to cost saving results. CONCLUSION: According to the model prediction, the superabsorbent dressing leads to an increase in health benefits and a decrease in associated costs of treatment.

Adjunctive rifampicin to reduce early mortality from Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: the ARREST RCT.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common and frequently fatal infection. Adjunctive rifampicin may enhance early S. aureus killing, sterilise infected foci and blood faster, and thereby reduce the risk of dissemination, metastatic infection and death. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether or not adjunctive rifampicin reduces bacteriological (microbiologically confirmed) failure/recurrence or death through 12 weeks from randomisation. Secondary objectives included evaluating the impact of rifampicin on all-cause mortality, clinically defined failure/recurrence or death, toxicity, resistance emergence, and duration of bacteraemia; and assessing the cost-effectiveness of rifampicin. DESIGN: Parallel-group, randomised (1 : 1), blinded, placebo-controlled multicentre trial. SETTING: UK NHS trust hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult inpatients (≥ 18 years) with meticillin-resistant or susceptible S. aureus grown from one or more blood cultures, who had received < 96 hours of antibiotic therapy for the current infection, and without contraindications to rifampicin. INTERVENTIONS: Adjunctive rifampicin (600-900 mg/day, oral or intravenous) or placebo for 14 days in addition to standard antibiotic therapy. Investigators and patients were blinded to trial treatment. Follow-up was for 12 weeks (assessments at 3, 7, 10 and 14 days, weekly until discharge and final assessment at 12 weeks post randomisation). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was all-cause bacteriological (microbiologically confirmed) failure/recurrence or death through 12 weeks from randomisation. RESULTS: Between December 2012 and October 2016, 758 eligible participants from 29 UK hospitals were randomised: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. The median age was 65 years [interquartile range (IQR) 50-76 years]. A total of 485 (64.0%) infections were community acquired and 132 (17.4%) were nosocomial; 47 (6.2%) were caused by meticillin-resistant S. aureus. A total of 301 (39.7%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for a median of 29 days (IQR 18-45 days) and 619 (81.7%) participants received flucloxacillin. By 12 weeks, 62 out of 370 (16.8%) patients taking rifampicin versus 71 out of 388 (18.3%) participants taking the placebo experienced bacteriological (microbiologically confirmed) failure/recurrence or died [absolute risk difference -1.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.0% to 4.3%; hazard ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35; p = 0.81]. There were 4 (1.1%) and 5 (1.3%) bacteriological failures (p = 0.82) in the rifampicin and placebo groups, respectively. There were 3 (0.8%) versus 16 (4.1%) bacteriological recurrences (p = 0.01), and 55 (14.9%) versus 50 (12.9%) deaths without bacteriological failure/recurrence (p = 0.30) in the rifampicin and placebo groups, respectively. Over 12 weeks, there was no evidence of differences in clinically defined failure/recurrence/death (p = 0.84), all-cause mortality (p = 0.60), serious (p = 0.17) or grade 3/4 (p = 0.36) adverse events (AEs). However, 63 (17.0%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10.1%) participants in the placebo group experienced antibiotic or trial drug-modifying AEs (p = 0.004), and 24 (6.5%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 6 (1.5%) participants in the placebo group experienced drug-interactions (p = 0.0005). Evaluation of the costs and health-related quality-of-life impacts revealed that an episode of S. aureus bacteraemia costs an average of £12,197 over 12 weeks. Rifampicin was estimated to save 10% of episode costs (p = 0.14). After adjustment, the effect of rifampicin on total quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was positive (0.004 QALYs), but not statistically significant (standard error 0.004 QALYs). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S. aureus bacteraemia. FUTURE WORK: Given the substantial mortality, other antibiotic combinations or improved source management should be investigated. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN37666216, EudraCT 2012-000344-10 and Clinical Trials Authorisation 00316/0243/001. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.

Rapid detection of health-care-associated bloodstream infection in critical care using multipathogen real-time polymerase chain reaction technology: a diagnostic accuracy study and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in the potential utility of real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in diagnosing bloodstream infection by detecting pathogen deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in blood samples within a few hours. SeptiFast (Roche Diagnostics GmBH, Mannheim, Germany) is a multipathogen probe-based system targeting ribosomal DNA sequences of bacteria and fungi. It detects and identifies the commonest pathogens causing bloodstream infection. As background to this study, we report a systematic review of Phase III diagnostic accuracy studies of SeptiFast, which reveals uncertainty about its likely clinical utility based on widespread evidence of deficiencies in study design and reporting with a high risk of bias. OBJECTIVE: Determine the accuracy of SeptiFast real-time PCR for the detection of health-care-associated bloodstream infection, against standard microbiological culture. DESIGN: Prospective multicentre Phase III clinical diagnostic accuracy study using the standards for the reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies criteria. SETTING: Critical care departments within NHS hospitals in the north-west of England. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients requiring blood culture (BC) when developing new signs of systemic inflammation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SeptiFast real-time PCR results at species/genus level compared with microbiological culture in association with independent adjudication of infection. Metrics of diagnostic accuracy were derived including sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Latent class analysis was used to explore the diagnostic performance of culture as a reference standard. RESULTS: Of 1006 new patient episodes of systemic inflammation in 853 patients, 922 (92%) met the inclusion criteria and provided sufficient information for analysis. Index test assay failure occurred on 69 (7%) occasions. Adult patients had been exposed to a median of 8 days (interquartile range 4-16 days) of hospital care, had high levels of organ support activities and recent antibiotic exposure. SeptiFast real-time PCR, when compared with culture-proven bloodstream infection at species/genus level, had better specificity (85.8%, 95% CI 83.3% to 88.1%) than sensitivity (50%, 95% CI 39.1% to 60.8%). When compared with pooled diagnostic metrics derived from our systematic review, our clinical study revealed lower test accuracy of SeptiFast real-time PCR, mainly as a result of low diagnostic sensitivity. There was a low prevalence of BC-proven pathogens in these patients (9.2%, 95% CI 7.4% to 11.2%) such that the post-test probabilities of both a positive (26.3%, 95% CI 19.8% to 33.7%) and a negative SeptiFast test (5.6%, 95% CI 4.1% to 7.4%) indicate the potential limitations of this technology in the diagnosis of bloodstream infection. However, latent class analysis indicates that BC has a low sensitivity, questioning its relevance as a reference test in this setting. Using this analysis approach, the sensitivity of the SeptiFast test was low but also appeared significantly better than BC. Blood samples identified as positive by either culture or SeptiFast real-time PCR were associated with a high probability (> 95%) of infection, indicating higher diagnostic rule-in utility than was apparent using conventional analyses of diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: SeptiFast real-time PCR on blood samples may have rapid rule-in utility for the diagnosis of health-care-associated bloodstream infection but the lack of sensitivity is a significant limiting factor. Innovations aimed at improved diagnostic sensitivity of real-time PCR in this setting are urgently required. Future work recommendations include technology developments to improve the efficiency of pathogen DNA extraction and the capacity to detect a much broader range of pathogens and drug resistance genes and the application of new statistical approaches able to more reliably assess test performance in situation where the reference standard (e.g. blood culture in the setting of high antimicrobial use) is prone to error. STUDY REGISTRATION: The systematic review is registered as PROSPERO CRD42011001289. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. Professor Daniel McAuley and Professor Gavin D Perkins contributed to the systematic review through their funded roles as codirectors of the Intensive Care Foundation (UK).

Dressing-related trauma: clinical sequelae and resource utilization in a UK setting.

BACKGROUND: Dressings are the mainstay of wound care management; however, adherence of the dressing to the wound or periwound skin is common and can lead to dressing-related pain and trauma. Dressing-related trauma is recognized as a clinical and economic burden to patients and health care providers. This study was conducted to garner expert opinion on clinical sequelae and resource use associated with dressing-related trauma in a UK setting. METHODS: THIS WAS AN EXPLORATORY STUDY WITH TWO PHASES: qualitative pilot interviews with six wound care specialists to explore dressing-related trauma concepts, sequelae, and resource utilization; and online quantitative research with 30 wound care specialists to validate and quantify the concepts, sequelae, and resource utilization explored in the first phase of the study. Data were collected on mean health care professional time, material costs, pharmaceutical costs, and inpatient management per sequela occurrence until resolution. Data were analyzed to give total costs per sequela and concept occurrence. RESULTS: The results demonstrate that dressing-related trauma is a clinically relevant concept. The main types of dressing-related trauma concepts included skin reactions, adherence to the wound, skin stripping, maceration, drying, and plugging of the wound. These were the foundation for a number of clinical sequelae, including wound enlargement, increased exudate, bleeding, infection, pain, itching/excoriation, edema, dermatitis, inflammation, and anxiety. Mean total costs range from £56 to £175 for the complete onward management of each occurrence of the six main concepts. CONCLUSION: These results provide insight into the hidden costs of dressing-related trauma in a UK setting. This research successfully conceptualized dressing-related trauma, identified associated clinical sequelae, and quantified resource utilization associated with a typical occurrence of each trauma concept. Further research is warranted into dressing-related trauma and the associated costs.

The clinical diagnostic accuracy of rapid detection of healthcare-associated bloodstream infection in intensive care using multipathogen real-time PCR technology.

Background There is growing interest in the potential utility of real-time PCR in diagnosing bloodstream infection by detecting pathogen DNA in blood samples within a few hours. SeptiFast is a multipathogen probe-based real-time PCR system targeting ribosomal DNA sequences of bacteria and fungi. It detects and identifies the commonest pathogens causing bloodstream infection and has European regulatory approval. The SeptiFast pathogen panel is suited to identifying healthcare-associated bloodstream infection acquired during complex healthcare, and the authors report here the protocol for the first detailed health-technology assessment of multiplex real-time PCR in this setting. Methods/design A Phase III multicentre double-blinded diagnostic study will determine the clinical validity of SeptiFast for the rapid detection of healthcare-associated bloodstream infection, against the current service standard of microbiological culture, in an adequately sized population of critically ill adult patients. Results from SeptiFast and standard microbiological culture procedures in each patient will be compared at study conclusion and the metrics of clinical diagnostic accuracy of SeptiFast determined in this population setting. In addition, this study aims to assess further the preliminary evidence that the detection of pathogen DNA in the bloodstream using SeptiFast may have value in identifying the presence of infection elsewhere in the body. Furthermore, differences in circulating immune-inflammatory markers in patient groups differentiated by the presence/absence of culturable pathogens and pathogen DNA will help elucidate further the patho-physiology of infection developing in the critically ill. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by the North West 6 Research Ethics Committee (09/H1003/109). Based on the results of this first non-commercial study, independent recommendations will be made to The Department of Health (open-access health technology assessment report) as to whether SeptiFast has sufficient clinical diagnostic accuracy to move forward to efficacy testing during the provision of routine clinical care.

Improved compliance with a gentamicin prescribing policy after introduction of a monitoring form.

OBJECTIVES: Compliance with our local hospital policy for gentamicin administration and monitoring was found to be inadequate on audit. A gentamicin monitoring form was introduced with the aim of improving staff compliance with the policy thus minimizing the risks of toxicity while ensuring adequate dosing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The initial audit examined the prescribing, administration and monitoring of intravenous gentamicin given to 20 patients. The introduction of a gentamicin monitoring form was prompted by unsatisfactory initial dosing and subsequent monitoring and adjustment of gentamicin doses. RESULTS: Following introduction of the monitoring form, the proportion of appropriate starting doses had increased from 13 out of 20 to 18 out of 20 prescriptions. The timing of initial serum levels was significantly better: 18 timed correctly, compared with 12 in initial audit. Subsequent administration and monitoring appeared more compliant with fewer doses inappropriately omitted and more levels checked appropriately. No improvement was seen in the quality of dose adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In conjunction with the support and advice of the pharmacy and microbiology departments, the use of a gentamicin monitoring form can improve the quality of intravenous gentamicin use in the hospital setting.