The smoking cessation in pregnancy incentives trial (CPIT): study protocol for a phase III randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Eighty per cent of UK women have at least one baby, making pregnancy an opportunity to help women stop smoking before their health is irreparably compromised. Smoking cessation during pregnancy helps protect infants from miscarriage, still birth, low birth weight, asthma, attention deficit disorder and adult cardiovascular disease. UK national guidelines highlight lack of evidence for effectiveness of financial incentives to help pregnant smokers quit. This includes a research recommendation: within a UK context, are incentives an acceptable, effective and cost-effective way to help pregnant women who smoke to quit? METHODS: The Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial (CPIT) III is a pragmatic, 42-month, multi-centre, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled superiority trial of the effect on smoking status of adding to usual Stop Smoking Services (SSS) support, the offer of up to £400 of financial voucher incentives, compared with usual support alone, to quit smoking during pregnancy. Participants (n = 940) are pregnant smokers (age > 16 years, < 24 weeks pregnant, English speaking), who consent via telephone to take part and are willing to be followed-up in late pregnancy and 6 months after birth. The primary outcome is cotinine/anabasine-validated abstinence from smoking in late pregnancy. Secondary outcomes include engagement with SSS, quit rates at 4 weeks from agreed quit date and 6 months after birth, and birth weight. Outcomes will be analysed by intention to treat, and regression models will be used to compare treatment effects on outcomes. A meta-analysis will include data from the feasibility study in Glasgow. An economic evaluation will assess cost-effectiveness from a UK NHS perspective. Process evaluation using a case-study approach will identify opportunities to improve recruitment and learning for future implementation. Research questions include: what is the therapeutic efficacy of incentives; are incentives cost-effective; and what are the potential facilitators and barriers to implementing incentives in different parts of the UK? DISCUSSION: This phase III trial in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland follows a successful phase II trial in Glasgow, UK. The participating sites have diverse SSS that represent most cessation services in the UK and serve demographically varied populations. If found to be acceptable and cost-effective, this trial could demonstrate that financial incentives are effective and transferable to most UK SSS for pregnant women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN15236311. Registered on 9 October 2017.

AVURT: aspirin versus placebo for the treatment of venous leg ulcers - a Phase II pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are the most common cause of leg ulceration, affecting 1 in 100 adults. VLUs may take many months to heal (25% fail to heal). Estimated prevalence is between 1% and 3% of the elderly population. Compression is the mainstay of treatment and few additional therapies exist to improve healing. Two previous trials have indicated that low-dose aspirin, as an adjunct to standard care, may improve healing time, but these trials were insufficiently robust. Aspirin is an inexpensive, widely used medication but its safety and efficacy in the treatment of VLUs remains to be established. OBJECTIVES: Primary objective - to assess the effects of 300 mg of aspirin (daily) versus placebo on the time to healing of the reference VLU. Secondary objectives - to assess the feasibility of leading into a larger pragmatic Phase III trial and the safety of aspirin in this population. DESIGN: A multicentred, pilot, Phase II randomised double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled efficacy trial. SETTING: Community leg ulcer clinics or services, hospital outpatient clinics, leg ulcer clinics, tissue viability clinics and wound clinics in England, Wales and Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a chronic VLU (i.e. the VLU is > 6 weeks in duration or the patient has a history of VLU) and who are not regularly taking aspirin. INTERVENTIONS: 300 mg of daily oral aspirin versus placebo. All patients were offered care in accordance with Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guidance with multicomponent compression therapy aiming to deliver 40 mmHg at the ankle when possible. RANDOMISATION: Participants were allocated in a 1 : 1 (aspirin : placebo) ratio by the Research Pharmacy, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, using a randomisation schedule generated in advance by the investigational medicinal product manufacturer. Randomisation was stratified according to ulcer size (≤ 5cm2 or > 5cm2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was time to healing of the largest eligible ulcer (reference ulcer). FEASIBILITY RESULTS ­ RECRUITMENT: 27 patients were recruited from eight sites over a period of 8 months. The target of 100 patients was not achieved and two sites did not recruit. Barriers to recruitment included a short recruitment window and a large proportion of participants failing to meet the eligibility criteria. RESULTS: The average age of the 27 randomised participants (placebo, n = 13; aspirin, n = 14) was 62 years (standard deviation 13 years), and two-thirds were male (n = 18). Participants had their reference ulcer for a median of 15 months, and the median size of ulcer was 17.1 cm2. There was no evidence of a difference in time to healing of the reference ulcer between groups in an adjusted analysis for log-ulcer area and duration (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 1.85; p = 0.357). One expected, related serious adverse event was recorded for a participant in the aspirin group. LIMITATIONS: The trial under-recruited because many patients did not meet the eligibility criteria. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that aspirin was efficacious in hastening the healing of chronic VLUs. It can be concluded that a larger Phase III (effectiveness) trial would not be feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT02333123; European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) 2014-003979-39. 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. 55. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

An economic evaluation of Alexander Technique lessons or acupuncture sessions for patients with chronic neck pain: A randomized trial (ATLAS).

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture and usual care, and Alexander Technique lessons and usual care, compared with usual GP care alone for chronic neck pain patients. METHODS: An economic evaluation was undertaken alongside the ATLAS trial, taking both NHS and wider societal viewpoints. Participants were offered up to twelve acupuncture sessions or twenty Alexander lessons (equivalent overall contact time). Costs were in pounds sterling. Effectiveness was measured using the generic EQ-5D to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), as well as using a specific neck pain measure-the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). RESULTS: In the base case analysis, incremental QALY gains were 0.032 and 0.025 in the acupuncture and Alexander groups, respectively, in comparison to usual GP care, indicating moderate health benefits for both interventions. Incremental costs were £451 for acupuncture and £667 for Alexander, mainly driven by intervention costs. Acupuncture was likely to be cost-effective (ICER = £18,767/QALY bootstrapped 95% CI £4,426 to £74,562) and was robust to most sensitivity analyses. Alexander lessons were not cost-effective at the lower NICE threshold of £20,000/QALY (£25,101/QALY bootstrapped 95% CI -£150,208 to £248,697) but may be at £30,000/QALY, however, there was considerable statistical uncertainty in all tested scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with usual care, acupuncture is likely to be cost-effective for chronic neck pain, whereas, largely due to higher intervention costs, Alexander lessons are unlikely to be cost-effective. However, there were high levels of missing data and further research is needed to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of these interventions.

Alexander Technique Lessons or Acupuncture Sessions for Persons With Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Management of chronic neck pain may benefit from additional active self-care-oriented approaches. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons or acupuncture versus usual care for persons with chronic, nonspecific neck pain. DESIGN: Three-group randomized, controlled trial. (Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN15186354). SETTING: U.K. primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Persons with neck pain lasting at least 3 months, a score of at least 28% on the Northwick Park Questionnaire (NPQ) for neck pain and associated disability, and no serious underlying pathology. INTERVENTION: 12 acupuncture sessions or 20 one-to-one Alexander lessons (both 600 minutes total) plus usual care versus usual care alone. MEASUREMENTS: NPQ score (primary outcome) at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months (primary end point) and Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale score, quality of life, and adverse events (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: 517 patients were recruited, and the median duration of neck pain was 6 years. Mean attendance was 10 acupuncture sessions and 14 Alexander lessons. Between-group reductions in NPQ score at 12 months versus usual care were 3.92 percentage points for acupuncture (95% CI, 0.97 to 6.87 percentage points) (P = 0.009) and 3.79 percentage points for Alexander lessons (CI, 0.91 to 6.66 percentage points) (P = 0.010). The 12-month reductions in NPQ score from baseline were 32% for acupuncture and 31% for Alexander lessons. Participant self-efficacy improved for both interventions versus usual care at 6 months (P < 0.001) and was significantly associated (P < 0.001) with 12-month NPQ score reductions (acupuncture, 3.34 percentage points [CI, 2.31 to 4.38 percentage points]; Alexander lessons, 3.33 percentage points [CI, 2.22 to 4.44 percentage points]). No reported serious adverse events were considered probably or definitely related to either intervention. LIMITATION: Practitioners belonged to the 2 main U.K.-based professional associations, which may limit generalizability of the findings. CONCLUSION: Acupuncture sessions and Alexander Technique lessons both led to significant reductions in neck pain and associated disability compared with usual care at 12 months. Enhanced self-efficacy may partially explain why longer-term benefits were sustained. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Arthritis Research UK.

Muslim communities learning about second-hand smoke: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, men of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin have higher smoking rates than the general population. This makes non-smokers in their households more vulnerable to second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure than the general population. AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of implementing and pilot testing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 'Smoke-free Homes' (SFH) intervention in Islamic religious settings to encourage families of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin to apply smoking restrictions in their homes. METHODS: We allocated Islamic religious settings (clusters) to either receive SFH-an educational intervention-or to a control arm. Within each cluster, we recruited households with at least one smoker and one non-smoker. SHS exposure among non-smokers was measured using salivary cotinine. RESULTS: Seven (50%) clusters were randomised to each trial arm. A total of 468 households were assessed for eligibility and 62% (n=289) were eligible, of which 74% (n=213) agreed to participate in the trial. Six of the seven intervention clusters delivered the intervention, and all clusters were retained throughout the trial. In all, 81% (n=172) of households provided data at follow-up. No evidence of a difference in log cotinine level was observed (adjusted mean difference -0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.28-1.23, P=0.97) between the two trial arms. The direct mean cost of delivering the intervention was £18.18 per household (range £3.55-42.20). CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to recruit, randomise and retain Islamic religious settings and participant households. However, some of the original assumptions, in particular our ability to collect primary outcome data, need to be revisited before a definitive trial.

Alexander Technique Lessons, Acupuncture Sessions or usual care for patients with chronic neck pain (ATLAS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic neck pain is a common condition in the adult population. More research is needed to evaluate interventions aiming to facilitate beneficial long-term change. We propose to evaluate the effect of Alexander Technique lessons and acupuncture in a rigorously conducted pragmatic trial with an embedded qualitative study. METHODS/DESIGN: We will recruit 500 patients who have been diagnosed with neck pain in primary care, who have continued to experience neck pain for at least three months with 28% minimum cut-off score on the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). We will exclude patients with serious underlying pathology, prior cervical spine surgery, history of psychosis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, osteoporosis, haemophilia, cancer, HIV or hepatitis, or with alcohol or drug dependency currently or in the last 12 months, or actively pursuing compensation or with pending litigation.The York Trials Unit will randomly allocate participants using a secure computer-based system. We will use block randomisation with allocation to each intervention arm being unambiguously concealed from anyone who might subvert the randomisation process.Participants will be randomised in equal proportions to Alexander Technique lessons, acupuncture or usual care alone. Twenty 30-minute Alexander Technique lessons will be provided by teachers registered with the Society of Teachers of the Alexander Technique and twelve 50-minute sessions of acupuncture will be provided by acupuncturists registered with the British Acupuncture Council. All participants will continue to receive usual GP care.The primary outcome will be the NPQ at 12 months, with the secondary time point at 6 months, and an area-under-curve analysis will include 3, 6 and 12 month time-points. Adverse events will be documented. Potential intervention effect modifiers and mediators to be explored include: self-efficacy, stress management, and the incorporation of practitioner advice about self-care and lifestyle. Qualitative material will be used to address issues of safety, acceptability and factors that impact on longer term outcomes. DISCUSSION: This study will provide robust evidence on whether there are significant clinical benefits to patients, economic benefits demonstrating value for money, and sufficient levels of acceptability and safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15186354.

Cost-effectiveness of acupuncture for irritable bowel syndrome: findings from an economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence to determine whether acupuncture is a cost-effective treatment for irritable bowel syndrome. The objective of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture as an adjunct to usual care versus usual care alone for the treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS). METHODS: Cost-utility analysis conducted alongside a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. 233 patients with irritable bowel syndrome were randomly allocated to either acupuncture plus usual care, or usual care alone. Cost-effectiveness outcomes are expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) at one year after randomisation. Costs were estimated from the UK National Health Service perspective for a time horizon of one year. Cost-utility ratios were estimated based on complete case analysis for the base case analysis, where only patients with available EQ-5D and cost data were included. Sensitivity analyses comprised a multiple imputation approach for missing data and a subgroup analysis for the more severe cases of IBS. RESULTS: The base case analysis showed acupuncture to be marginally more effective than usual care (gain of 0.0035 QALYs, 95% CI: -0.00395 to 0.0465) and more expensive (incremental cost of £218 per patient (95% CI: 55.87 to 492.87) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of approximately £62,500. Sensitivity analysis using multiple imputation for missing data resulted in acupuncture appearing less effective and more costly than usual care, so usual care is dominant. Subgroup analysis selecting the most severe cases of IBS (Symptom Severity Score of over 300) suggested that acupuncture may be a cost-effective treatment option for this group, with a cost-per-QALY of £6,500. CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture as an adjunct to usual care is not a cost-effective option for the whole IBS population; however it may be cost-effective for those with more severe irritable bowel syndrome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN08827905.

A pragmatic multicentered randomized controlled trial of yoga for chronic low back pain: economic evaluation.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicentered randomized controlled trial with quality of life and resource use data collected. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of yoga intervention plus usual care compared with usual care alone for chronic or recurrent low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Yoga has been shown as an effective intervention for treating chronic or recurrent low back pain. However, there is little evidence on its cost-effectiveness. The data are extracted from a pragmatic, multicentered, randomized controlled trial that has been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 12-week progressive program of yoga plus usual care in patients with chronic or recurrent low back pain. METHODS: With this trial data, a cost-effectiveness analysis during the time period of 12 months from both perspectives of the UK National Health Service and the societal is presented. Main outcome measure is an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: From the perspective of the U.K. National Health Service, yoga intervention yields an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £13,606 per QALY. Given a willingness to pay for an additional QALY of £20,000, the probability of yoga intervention being cost-effective is 72%. From the perspective of the society, yoga intervention is a dominant treatment compared with usual care alone. This result is surrounded by fewer uncertainties-the probability of yoga being cost-effective reaches 95% at a willingness to pay for an additional QALY of £20,000. Sensitive analyses suggest the same results that yoga intervention is likely to be cost-effective in both perspectives. CONCLUSION: On the basis of this trial, 12 weekly group classes of specialized yoga are likely to be a cost-effective intervention for treating patients with chronic or recurrent low back pain.

Acupuncture for irritable bowel syndrome: a protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence on the effectiveness of acupuncture for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) for conclusions to be drawn. Given the current interest in acupuncture by patients, it is in the public interest to establish more rigorous evidence. Building on the positive findings from a pilot study, in this paper we present the protocol for a fully-powered trial designed to establish whether or not acupuncture is effective and cost-effective. METHODS/DESIGN: In this pragmatic randomised controlled trial we will randomise patients recruited directly from GP databases to either 10 sessions of acupuncture plus usual GP care or to usual GP care alone. The primary clinical outcome will be the IBS Symptom Severity Score (SSS) (maximum score 500) at three months, and at 12 month assessing whether there is an overall benefit. We estimate the sample size required to detect a minimum clinical difference at 90% power and 5% significance to be 188 patients. To allow for loss to follow up we will recruit 220 patients drawn from an estimated primary care population of 140 000. Analysis will be by intention-to-treat, and multiple imputation is to be used for missing data.In a nested qualitative study using in-depth interviews, we will explore how patients, acupuncturists, and GPs explain and subsequently understand acupuncture to work. We will use purposive sampling to identify patients and flexible topic guides for the interviews. The data analysis will lead to a thematic description of how patients and practitioners explain how acupuncture works, and whether or not the explanations influence treatment outcome and/or referrals.We will undertake a cost-effectiveness analysis at 12 months by comparing resource use in the two groups with any treatment benefit. We will use the EQ-5D to measure health-related quality of life and convert into quality adjusted life years (QALYs). We will generate cost effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) exploring the probability that acupuncture will produce an acceptable cost per QALY at different cost-effectiveness thresholds. DISCUSSION: The trial has received NHS ethics approval and recruited 233 patients between November 2008 and June 2009. Results are expected in 2011. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN08827905.