The efficacy of real versus sham external Trigeminal Nerve Stimulation (eTNS) in youth with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) over 4 weeks: a protocol for a multi-centre, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, phase IIb study (ATTENS).

BACKGROUND: Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), if severe, is usually treated with stimulant or non-stimulant medication. However, users prefer non-drug treatments due to side effects. Alternative non-medication treatments have so far only shown modest effects. External trigeminal nerve stimulation (eTNS) is a minimal risk, non-invasive neuromodulation device, targeting the trigeminal system. It was approved for ADHD in 2019 by the USA Food and Drug administration (FDA) based on a small proof of concept randomised controlled trial (RCT) in 62 children with ADHD showing improvement of ADHD symptoms after 4 weeks of nightly real versus sham eTNS with minimal side effects. We present here the protocol of a larger confirmatory phase IIb study testing efficacy, longer-term persistency of effects and underlying mechanisms of action. METHODS: A confirmatory, sham-controlled, double-blind, parallel-arm, multi-centre phase IIb RCT of 4 weeks of eTNS in 150 youth with ADHD, recruited in London, Portsmouth, and Southampton, UK. Youth with ADHD will be randomized to either real or sham eTNS, applied nightly for 4 weeks. Primary outcome is the change in the investigator-administered parent rated ADHD rating scale. Secondary outcomes are other clinical and cognitive measures, objective hyperactivity and pupillometry measures, side effects, and maintenance of effects over 6 months. The mechanisms of action will be tested in a subgroup of 56 participants using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after the 4-week treatment. DISCUSSION: This multi-centre phase IIb RCT will confirm whether eTNS is effective in a larger age range of children and adolescents with ADHD, whether it improves cognition and other clinical measures, whether efficacy persists at 6 months and it will test underlying brain mechanisms. The results will establish whether eTNS is effective and safe as a novel non-pharmacological treatment for ADHD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN82129325 on 02/08/2021, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN82129325 .

Olanzapine for young PEople with aNorexia nervosa (OPEN): A protocol for an open-label feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Antipsychotics are routinely prescribed off-label for anorexia nervosa (AN) despite limited evidence. This article presents a protocol of a study aiming to assess the feasibility of a future definitive trial on olanzapine in young people with AN. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In an open-label, one-armed feasibility study, 55 patients with AN or atypical AN, aged 12-24, receiving outpatient, inpatient or day-care treatment who are considered for olanzapine treatment will be recruited from NHS sites based in England. Assessments will be conducted at screening, baseline and at 8-, 16 weeks, 6- and 12 months. Primary feasibility parameters will be proportions of patients who agree to take olanzapine and who adhere to treatment and complete study assessments. Qualitative methods will be used to explore acceptability of the intervention and study design. Secondary feasibility parameters will be changes in body mass index, psychopathology, side effects, health-related quality of life, carer burden and proportion of participants who would enrol in a future randomised controlled trial. The study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research via Health Technology Assessment programme. DISCUSSION: Olanzapine for young PEople with aNorexia nervosa will inform a future randomised controlled trial on the efficacy and safety of prescribing olanzapine in young people with AN.

Geriatric Assessment Is Associated With Reduced Mortality at 1 Year for Older Adults Admitted to a Major Trauma Center: A Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of geriatrician review on 1-year mortality in older adults admitted with trauma. BACKGROUND: Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been associated with improved outcomes in older adults with hip fracture, but has not been evaluated in a broader trauma population. METHODS: Trauma patients aged ≥ 65years admitted to an English Major Trauma Centre between November 2018 and September 2019 were included. Patients were divided into 3 cohorts: no geriatric assessment, reactive geriatric assessment, and proactive CGA. The primary outcome was time to mortality, secondary outcomes were time to discharge and frequency of complications. Analyses were adjusted for factors known to be associated with outcomes including age, frailty, injury severity, and complications. RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-five patients were included (no geriatric assessment = 125; reactive geriatric assessment = 134; proactive CGA = 326): median age was 81 years (IQR 74-88); 326 (55.7%) were women; 297 (50.8%) were living with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale ≥5). Median Injury Severity Score was 13 (IQR9-25). At 1-year follow-up, 147 (25.1%) patients had died. In multivariate analysis, both types of geriatric assessment were associated with reduced mortality [reactive aHR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.18-0.53; proactive adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.41, 95% CI 0.26-0.64]. There was no association between either type of geriatric assessment and length of stay (reactive aHR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.62-1.15; proactive aHR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.63-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: Geriatrician assessment is associated with reduced mortality in older adults admitted following trauma. Further research should focus on defining optimal models of geriatrician intervention.

Multicentre, England-wide randomised controlled trial of the 'Foundations' smartphone application in improving mental health and well-being in a healthcare worker population.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) have faced considerable pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic. For some, this has resulted in mental health distress and disorder. Although interventions have sought to support HCWs, few have been evaluated. AIMS: We aimed to determine the effectiveness of the 'Foundations' application (app) on general (non-psychotic) psychiatric morbidity. METHOD: We conducted a multicentre randomised controlled trial of HCWs at 16 NHS trusts (trial registration number: EudraCT: 2021-001279-18). Participants were randomly assigned to the app or wait-list control group. Measures were assessed at baseline, after 4 and 8 weeks. The primary outcome was general psychiatric morbidity (using the General Health Questionnaire). Secondary outcomes included: well-being; presenteeism; anxiety; depression and insomnia. The primary analysis used mixed-effects multivariable regression, presented as adjusted mean differences (aMD). RESULTS: Between 22 March and 3 June 2021, 1002 participants were randomised (500:502), and 894 (89.2%) followed-up. The sample was predominately women (754/894, 84.3%), with a mean age of 44⋅3 years (interquartile range (IQR) 34-53). Participants randomised to the app had a reduction in psychiatric morbidity symptoms (aMD = -1.39, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.74), improvement in well-being (aMD = 0⋅54, 95% CI 0⋅20 to 0⋅89) and reduction in insomnia (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0⋅36, 95% CI 0⋅21 to 0⋅60). No other significant findings were found, or adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: The app had an effect in reducing psychiatric morbidity symptoms in a sample of HCWs. Given it is scalable with no adverse effects, the app may be used as part of an organisation's tiered staff support package. Further evidence is needed on long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Catatonia: demographic, clinical and laboratory associations.

BACKGROUND: Catatonia, a severe neuropsychiatric syndrome, has few studies of sufficient scale to clarify its epidemiology or pathophysiology. We aimed to characterise demographic associations, peripheral inflammatory markers and outcome of catatonia. METHODS: Electronic healthcare records were searched for validated clinical diagnoses of catatonia. In a case-control study, demographics and inflammatory markers were compared in psychiatric inpatients with and without catatonia. In a cohort study, the two groups were compared in terms of their duration of admission and mortality. RESULTS: We identified 1456 patients with catatonia (of whom 25.1% had two or more episodes) and 24 956 psychiatric inpatients without catatonia. Incidence was 10.6 episodes of catatonia per 100 000 person-years. Patients with and without catatonia were similar in sex, younger and more likely to be of Black ethnicity. Serum iron was reduced in patients with catatonia [11.6 v. 14.2 µmol/L, odds ratio (OR) 0.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.95), p = 0.03] and creatine kinase was raised [2545 v. 459 IU/L, OR 1.53 (95% CI 1.29-1.81), p < 0.001], but there was no difference in C-reactive protein or white cell count. N-Methyl-d-aspartate receptor antibodies were significantly associated with catatonia, but there were small numbers of positive results. Duration of hospitalisation was greater in the catatonia group (median: 43 v. 25 days), but there was no difference in mortality after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest clinical study of catatonia, we found catatonia occurred in approximately 1 per 10 000 person-years. Evidence for a proinflammatory state was mixed. Catatonia was associated with prolonged inpatient admission but not with increased mortality.

Association between depression diagnosis and educational attainment trajectories: an historical cohort study using linked data.

BACKGROUND: Depression symptoms are thought to be associated with lower educational attainment, but patterns of change in attainment among those who receive a clinical diagnosis of depression at any point during childhood and adolescence remain unclear. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of an existing data linkage between a national educational dataset (National Pupil Database) and pseudonymised electronic health records (Clinical Record Interactive Search) from a large mental healthcare provider in London, United Kingdom (2007 to 2013). A cohort of 222,027 pupils were included. We used Growth Mixture Modelling (GMM) and stakeholder input to estimate trajectories of standardised educational attainment over School Years 2, 6 and 11. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were then used to investigate the association between resulting educational attainment trajectory membership (outcome) and depression diagnosis any time before age 18 (exposure). RESULTS: A five-trajectory GMM solution for attainment was derived: (1) average/high-stable, (2) average-modest declining, (3) average-steep declining, (4) low-improving and (5) low-stable. After adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic covariates, having a depression diagnosis before age 18 was associated with occupying the average-modest declining trajectory (RRR = 2.80, 95% CI 2.36-3.32, p < .001) or the average-steep declining trajectory (RRR = 3.54, 95% CI 3.10-4.04, p < .001), as compared to the average/high-stable trajectory. CONCLUSIONS: Receiving a diagnosis of depression before age 18 was associated with a relative decline in attainment throughout school. While these findings cannot support a causal direction, they nonetheless suggest a need for timely mental health and educational support among pupils struggling with depression.

A study protocol for a European, mixed methods, prospective, cohort study of the effectiveness of naloxone administration by community members, in reversing opioid overdose: NalPORS.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, opioid use causes more than 100,000 overdose deaths annually. Naloxone has proven efficacy in reversing opioid overdoses and is approved as an emergency antidote to opioid overdose. Take home naloxone (THN) programmes have been introduced to provide 'community members', who are likely to observe opioid overdoses, with naloxone kits and train them to recognise an overdose and administer naloxone. The acceptability and feasibility of THN programmes has been demonstrated, but the real-life effectiveness of naloxone administration by community members is not known. In recent years, the approval of several concentrated naloxone nasal-spray formulations (in addition to injectable formulations, eg.prenoxad) potentially increases acceptability and scope for wider provision. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of THN (all formulations) in real-world conditions. METHODS: A European, multi-country, prospective cohort study, to assess the use of THN by community members to reverse opioid overdoses in a six-month, follow-up period. Participants provided with THN from participating harm reduction and drug treatment sites will be recruited to the study and followed-up for six months. We are particularly interested in the experiences of community members who have been provided with THN and have witnessed an opioid overdose. All participants who witness an opioid overdose during the six-month period (target approx. 600) will be asked to take part in a structured interview about this event. Of these, 60 will be invited to participate in a qualitative interview. A Post Authorisation Efficacy Study (PAES) for the concentrated nasal naloxone, Nyxoid, has been integrated into the study design. DISCUSSION: There are many challenges involved in evaluating the real-life effectiveness of THN. It is not possible to use a randomised trial design, recruitment of community members provided with THN will depend upon recruitment sites distributing THN kits, and the type of THN received by participants will depend on regulations and on local clinical and policy decision-makers. Following up this population, some of whom may be itinerant, over the 6-month study period will be challenging, but we plan to maintain contact with participants through regular text message reminders and staff contact. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05072249. Date of Registration: 8.10.2021.

Amputation and advance care plans: An observational study exploring decision making and long-term outcomes in a vascular centre.

BACKGROUND: Half of those undergoing major lower limb amputation for peripheral arterial disease die within 1 year. Advance care planning reduces days in hospital and increases the chance of dying in a preferred place. AIM: To investigate the prevalence and content of advance care planning for people having a lower limb amputation due to acute or chronic limb-threatening ischaemia or diabetes. Secondary aims were to explore its association with mortality, and length of hospital stay. DESIGN: A retrospective observational cohort study. The intervention was advance care planning. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted to the South West England Major Arterial Centre between 1 January 2019 and 1 January 2021 who received unilateral or bilateral below, above, or through knee amputation due to acute or chronic limb-threatening ischaemia or diabetes. RESULTS: 116 patients were included in the study. 20.7% (n = 24) died within 1 year. 40.5% (n = 47) had an advance care planning discussion of which all included cardiopulmonary resuscitation decisions with few exploring other options. Patients who were more likely to have advance care planning discussions were ≥75 years (aOR = 5.58, 95%CI 1.56-20.0), female (aOR = 3.24, 95%CI 1.21-8.69), and had multimorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥5, aOR = 2.97, 95%CI 1.11-7.92). Discussions occurred more often in the emergency pathway and were predominantly initiated by physicians. Advance care planning was associated with increased mortality (aHR = 2.63, 95%CI 1.01, 5.02) and longer hospital stay (aHR = 0.52, 95%CI 0.32-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high risk of death for all patients in the months following amputation, advance care planning occurred in fewer than half of people and mostly focused on resuscitation.

Patient preference for commonly-used, head and neck cancer-specific quality of life questionnaires in the follow-up setting (Determin): A multi-centre randomised controlled trial and mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) assessment forms an integral part of modern cancer care and research. The aim of this study is to determine patients' preferences and willingness to complete commonly used head-and-neck cancer (HNC) QoL questionnaires (QLQs) in routine follow-up clinics. METHODS: This is a randomised control trial of 583 subjects from 17 centres during follow-up after treatment for oral, oropharyngeal or laryngeal cancer. Subjects completed three structured validated questionnaires: EORTC QLQ-HN35; FACT-HN and UW-QOL, and an unstructured patient-generated list. The order of questionnaire presentation was randomised, and subjects were stratified by disease site and stage. Patients self-rated the questionnaires they found most helpful to communicate their health concerns to their clinicians. RESULTS: Of the 558 respondents, 82% (457) found QLQs useful to communicate their health concerns to their clinician (OR = 15.76; 95% CI 10.83-22.94). Patients preferred the structured disease-specific instruments (OR 8.79; 95% CI 5.99-12.91), while the open list was the most disliked (OR = 4.25; 95% CI 3.04-5.94). There was no difference in preference by treatment modality. More women preferred the FACT-HN (OR = 3.01, 95% CI 1.05-8.62), and patients under 70 preferred EORTC QLQ-HN35 (OR = 3.14, 95% CI 1.3-7.59). However, only 55% of patients expressed preference to complete questionnaires routinely at the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients found QLQs helpful during their follow-up and 55% supported routine questionnaires in follow-up clinics. Males and people over 70 years old were the least willing to complete the routine questionnaires and preferred shorter questionnaires (e.g., UW-QOL). Women preferred FACT-HN, and younger patients preferred EORTC QLQ-HN35. Reasons for the reluctance to complete questionnaires require elucidation.

Preventing anxiety in the children of anxious parents - feasibility of a brief, online, group intervention for parents of one- to three-year-olds.

BACKGROUND: The evidence suggests an increased risk of developing anxiety problems in children of anxious parents. The current study explored the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention with anxious parents of young children, to inform the possibility of further trials. METHODS: Participants were recruited through primary and secondary care psychological services and social media. Participants who had a current or recent anxiety disorder and a child aged 12-47 months were included. Assessments of parental and child outcomes occurred at baseline, after the intervention (week-2) and follow-up (week-8). The intervention was delivered in a small group format, in two sessions, one week apart, using videoconferencing. RESULTS: Out of 32 participants, 30 (94%) attended the full intervention. All found the intervention acceptable and reported it as useful and relevant. There was a reduction in parental depression (MD = 2.63, 95%CI 1.01-4.26), anxiety (MD = 3.93, 95%CI 2.49-5.37) and stress (MD = 4.60, 95% CI 3.02-6.18) and increases in parenting confidence. CONCLUSIONS: The online group intervention was feasible and acceptable. There were moderate to large effects on parental mental health and no adverse effects on children (decline on outcome measures). This indicates that intervening early in parenting with anxious parents is possible and warrants further investigation to establish prevention efficacy with a larger, controlled trial.

The meaning of significant mean group differences for biomarker discovery.

Over the past decade, biomarker discovery has become a key goal in psychiatry to aid in the more reliable diagnosis and prognosis of heterogeneous psychiatric conditions and the development of tailored therapies. Nevertheless, the prevailing statistical approach is still the mean group comparison between "cases" and "controls," which tends to ignore within-group variability. In this educational article, we used empirical data simulations to investigate how effect size, sample size, and the shape of distributions impact the interpretation of mean group differences for biomarker discovery. We then applied these statistical criteria to evaluate biomarker discovery in one area of psychiatric research-autism research. Across the most influential areas of autism research, effect size estimates ranged from small (d = 0.21, anatomical structure) to medium (d = 0.36 electrophysiology, d = 0.5, eye-tracking) to large (d = 1.1 theory of mind). We show that in normal distributions, this translates to approximately 45% to 63% of cases performing within 1 standard deviation (SD) of the typical range, i.e., they do not have a deficit/atypicality in a statistical sense. For a measure to have diagnostic utility as defined by 80% sensitivity and 80% specificity, Cohen's d of 1.66 is required, with still 40% of cases falling within 1 SD. However, in both normal and nonnormal distributions, 1 (skewness) or 2 (platykurtic, bimodal) biologically plausible subgroups may exist despite small or even nonsignificant mean group differences. This conclusion drastically contrasts the way mean group differences are frequently reported. Over 95% of studies omitted the "on average" when summarising their findings in their abstracts ("autistic people have deficits in X"), which can be misleading as it implies that the group-level difference applies to all individuals in that group. We outline practical approaches and steps for researchers to explore mean group comparisons for the discovery of stratification biomarkers.

MORe PREcISE: a multicentre prospective study of patient reported outcome measures in stroke morbidity: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The use of patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs) may offer utility that are important for stroke survivors. This study assessed the PROMIS-10, which contains Mental health (MH) and Physical Health (PH) domains, with an additional five stroke specific questions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the MH and PH measures following a stroke and pre-existing health conditions. METHODS: A multicentre prospective cohort study at 19 hospital sites across England and Wales during 2019 was conducted. The association between each PROMIS-10 domain and demographic and health conditions were calculated using a multilevel multivariable linear and present the adjusted mean difference (aMD). RESULTS: The study enrolled 549 stroke survivors within 14 days of the index event, 232 were women (42.3%) and with a mean age of 72.7 years (SD = 12.9, range 25 to 97). The MH domain was scored as poor in 3.9% of participants, and very good or excellent in almost a half (48.4%). In contrast the PH domain was scored as poor in 39.9%, compared to very good or excellent in 8.5%. The MH domain was associated with pre-existing diabetes (aMD = - 2.01; 95%CI -3.91, - 0.12; p = 0.04), previous stroke (aMD = - 3.62; 95%CI -5.86, - 1.39; p = 0.001), age (aMD = 0.07; 95%CI: 0.01, 0.14; p = 0.037), and female sex (aMD = 1.91; 95%CI 0.28, 3.54; p = 0.022). The PH domain was found to be associated with sex (female) (aMD = 2.09; 95%CI 0.54, 3.65; p = 0.008) and previous stroke (aMD = - 3.05; 95%CI -5.17, - 0.93; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of stroke survivors reported poor PH using a PROM with less reporting poor MH. age, and sex were associated with both MH and PH domains, and additionally pre-exising diabetes and stroke were associated with poorer MH. Clinical management offers an opportunity to investigate and intervene to prevent long term poorer health in stroke survivors.

Strategies for using topical corticosteroids in children and adults with eczema.

BACKGROUND: Eczema is a common skin condition. Although topical corticosteroids have been a first-line treatment for eczema for decades, there are uncertainties over their optimal use. OBJECTIVES: To establish the effectiveness and safety of different ways of using topical corticosteroids for treating eczema. SEARCH METHODS: We searched databases to January 2021 (Cochrane Skin Specialised Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; GREAT) and five clinical trials registers. We checked bibliographies from included trials to identify further trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in adults and children with eczema that compared at least two strategies of topical corticosteroid use. We excluded placebo comparisons, other than for trials that evaluated proactive versus reactive treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods, with GRADE certainty of evidence for key findings. Primary outcomes were changes in clinician-reported signs and relevant local adverse events. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported symptoms and relevant systemic adverse events. For local adverse events, we prioritised abnormal skin thinning as a key area of concern for healthcare professionals and patients. MAIN RESULTS: We included 104 trials (8443 participants). Most trials were conducted in high-income countries (81/104), most likely in outpatient or other hospital settings. We judged only one trial to be low risk of bias across all domains. Fifty-five trials had high risk of bias in at least one domain, mostly due to lack of blinding or missing outcome data. Stronger-potency versus weaker-potency topical corticosteroids Sixty-three trials compared different potencies of topical corticosteroids: 12 moderate versus mild, 22 potent versus mild, 25 potent versus moderate, and 6 very potent versus potent. Trials were usually in children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, lasting one to five weeks. The most reported outcome was Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) of clinician-reported signs of eczema. We pooled four trials that compared moderate- versus mild-potency topical corticosteroids (420 participants). Moderate-potency topical corticosteroids probably result in more participants achieving treatment success, defined as cleared or marked improvement on IGA (52% versus 34%; odds ratio (OR) 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 3.04; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled nine trials that compared potent versus mild-potency topical corticosteroids (392 participants). Potent topical corticosteroids probably result in a large increase in number achieving treatment success (70% versus 39%; OR 3.71, 95% CI 2.04 to 6.72; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled 15 trials that compared potent versus moderate-potency topical corticosteroids (1053 participants). There was insufficient evidence of a benefit of potent topical corticosteroids compared to moderate topical corticosteroids (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.89; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled three trials that compared very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids (216 participants). The evidence is uncertain with a wide confidence interval (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.09; low-certainty evidence). Twice daily or more versus once daily application We pooled 15 of 25 trials in this comparison (1821 participants, all reported IGA). The trials usually assessed adults and children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, using potent topical corticosteroids, lasting two to six weeks. Applying potent topical corticosteroids only once a day probably does not decrease the number achieving treatment success compared to twice daily application (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.38; 15 trials, 1821 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Local adverse events Within the trials that tested 'treating eczema flare-up' strategies, we identified only 26 cases of abnormal skin thinning from 2266 participants (1% across 22 trials). Most cases were from the use of higher-potency topical corticosteroids (16 with very potent, 6 with potent, 2 with moderate and 2 with mild). We assessed this evidence as low certainty, except for very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids, which was very low-certainty evidence.  Longer versus shorter-term duration of application for induction of remission No trials were identified. Twice weekly application (weekend, or 'proactive therapy') to prevent relapse (flare-ups) versus no topical corticosteroids/reactive application Nine trials assessed this comparison, generally lasting 16 to 20 weeks. We pooled seven trials that compared weekend (proactive) topical corticosteroids therapy versus no topical corticosteroids (1179 participants, children and adults with a range of eczema severities, though mainly moderate or severe). Weekend (proactive) therapy probably results in a large decrease in likelihood of a relapse from 58% to 25% (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57; 7 trials, 1149 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Local adverse events We did not identify any cases of abnormal skin thinning in seven trials that assessed skin thinning (1050 participants) at the end of treatment. We assessed this evidence as low certainty. Other comparisons  Other comparisons included newer versus older preparations of topical corticosteroids (15 trials), cream versus ointment (7 trials), topical corticosteroids with wet wrap versus no wet wrap (6 trials), number of days per week applied (4 trials), different concentrations of the same topical corticosteroids (2 trials), time of day applied (2 trials), topical corticosteroids alternating with topical calcineurin inhibitors versus topical corticosteroids alone (1 trial), application to wet versus dry skin (1 trial) and application before versus after emollient (1 trial). No trials compared branded versus generic topical corticosteroids and time between application of emollient and topical corticosteroids. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Potent and moderate topical corticosteroids are probably more effective than mild topical corticosteroids, primarily in moderate or severe eczema; however, there is uncertain evidence to support any advantage of very potent over potent topical corticosteroids. Effectiveness is similar between once daily and twice daily (or more) frequent use of potent topical corticosteroids to treat eczema flare-ups, and topical corticosteroids weekend (proactive) therapy is probably better than no topical corticosteroids/reactive use to prevent eczema relapse (flare-ups). Adverse events were not well reported and came largely from low- or very low-certainty, short-term trials. In trials that reported abnormal skin thinning, frequency was low overall and increased with increasing potency. We found no trials on the optimum duration of treatment of a flare, branded versus generic topical corticosteroids, and time to leave between application of topical corticosteroids and emollient. There is a need for longer-term trials, in people with mild eczema.

Domestic violence and injuries: prevalence and patterns-a pilot database study to identify suspected cases in a UK major trauma centre.

BACKGROUND: Victim-survivors of domestic violence and abuse (DVA) present to secondary care with isolated injuries to the head, limb or face. In the UK, there are no published studies looking at the relationship of significant traumatic injuries in adults and the relationship to DVA.The primary objective was to assess the feasibility of using a tailored search method to identify cases of suspected DVA in the national audit database for trauma. The secondary objective was to assess the association of DVA with clinical characteristics. METHODS: We undertook a single-centre retrospective observational cohort pilot study. Data were analysed from the local Trauma and Audit Research Network (TARN) database. The 'Scene Description' field in the database was searched using a tailored search strategy. Feasibility was evaluated with notes review and assessed by the PPV and prevalence. Secondary objectives used a logistic regression in Excel. RESULTS: This method of identifying suspected cases of DVA from the TARN database is feasible. The PPV was 100%, and the prevalence of suspected DVA in the study period was 3.6 per 1000 trauma discharges. Of those who had experienced DVA, 52.7% were male, median age 43 (IQR: 33-52) and mortality 5.5%. Subgroup analysis of older people demonstrated longer hospital stay (p=0.17) and greater likelihood of admission to intensive care (OR 2.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 14.24). CONCLUSION: We have created a feasible methodology to identify suspected DVA-related injuries within the TARN database. Future work is needed to further understand this relationship on a national level.

Prognostic value of estimated glomerular filtration rate in hospitalised older patients (over 65) with COVID-19: a multicentre, European, observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The reduced renal function has prognostic significance in COVID-19 and it has been linked to mortality in the general population. Reduced renal function is prevalent in older age and thus we set out to better understand its effect on mortality. METHODS: Patient clinical and demographic data was taken from the COVID-19 in Older People (COPE) study during two periods (February-June 2020 and October 2020-March 2021, respectively). Kidney function on admission was measured using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The primary outcomes were time to mortality and 28-day mortality. Secondary outcome was length of hospital stay. Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards regression, and multilevel logistic regression and adjusted for individual patient clinical and demographic characteristics. RESULTS: One thousand eight hundred two patients (55.0% male; median [IQR] 80 [73-86] years) were included in the study. 28-day mortality was 42.3% (n = 742). 48% (n = 801) had evidence of renal impairment on admission. Using a time-to-event analysis, reduced renal function was associated with increased in-hospital mortality (compared to eGFR ≥ 60 [Stage 1&2]): eGFR 45-59 [Stage 3a] aHR = 1.26 (95%CI 1.02-1.55); eGFR 30-44 [Stage 3b] aHR = 1.41 (95%CI 1.14-1.73); eGFR 1-29 [Stage 4&5] aHR = 1.42 (95%CI 1.13-1.80). In the co-primary outcome of 28-day mortality, mortality was associated with: Stage 3a adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.18 (95%CI 0.88-1.58), Stage 3b aOR = 1.40 (95%CI 1.03-1.89); and Stage 4&5 aOR = 1.65 (95%CI 1.16-2.35). CONCLUSION: eGFR on admission is a good independent predictor of mortality in hospitalised older patients with COVID-19 population. We found evidence of a dose-response between reduced renal function and increased mortality.

Multiple house occupancy is associated with mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries mandated staying at home to reduce transmission. This study examined the association between living arrangements (house occupancy numbers) and outcomes in COVID-19. METHODS: Study population was drawn from the COPE study, a multicentre cohort study. House occupancy was defined as: living alone; living with one other person; living with multiple other people; or living in a nursing/residential home. Outcomes were time from admission to mortality and discharge (Cox regression), and Day 28 mortality (logistic regression) analyses were adjusted for key comorbidities and covariates including admission: age, sex, smoking, heart failure, admission C-reactive protein (CRP), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, estimated glomerular filtration rate, frailty and others. RESULTS: A total of 1584 patients were included from 13 hospitals across UK and Italy: 676 (42.7%) were female, 907 (57.3%) were male, median age was 74 years (range: 19-101). At 28 days, 502 (31.7%) had died. Median admission CRP was 67, 82, 79.5 and 83 mg/l for those living alone, with someone else, in a house of multiple occupancy and in a nursing/residential home, respectively. Compared to living alone, living with anyone was associated with increased mortality: within a couple [adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) = 1.39, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.09-1.77, P = 0.007]; living in a house of multiple occupancy (aHR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.17-2.38, P = 0.005); and living in a residential home (aHR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.03-1.80, P = 0.031). CONCLUSION: For patients hospitalized with COVID-19, those living with one or more people had an increased association with mortality, they also exhibited higher CRP indicating increased disease severity suggesting they delayed seeking care.

Comparison between first and second wave of COVID-19 outbreak in older people: the COPE multicentre European observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Effective shielding measures and virus mutations have progressively modified the disease between the waves, likewise healthcare systems have adapted to the outbreak. Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes for older people with COVID-19 in Wave 1 (W1) and Wave 2 (W2). METHODS: All data, including the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), were collected for COVID-19 consecutive patients, aged ≥65, from 13 hospitals, in W1 (February-June 2020) and W2 (October 2020-March 2021). The primary outcome was mortality (time to mortality and 28-day mortality). Data were analysed with multilevel Cox proportional hazards, linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for wave baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Data from 611 people admitted in W2 were added to and compared with data collected during W1 (N = 1340). Patients admitted in W2 were of similar age, median (interquartile range), W2 = 79 (73-84); W1 = 80 (74-86); had a greater proportion of men (59.4% vs. 53.0%); had lower 28-day mortality (29.1% vs. 40.0%), compared to W1. For combined W1-W2 sample, W2 was independently associated with improved survival: time-to-mortality adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.93], 28-day mortality adjusted odds ratio = 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-1.03). W2 was associated with increased length of hospital stay aHR = 0.69 (95% CI 0.59-0.81). Patients in W2 were less frail, CFS [adjusted mean difference (aMD) = -0.50, 95% CI -0.81, -0.18], as well as presented with lower C-reactive protein (aMD = -22.52, 95% CI -32.00, -13.04). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 older adults in W2 were less likely to die than during W1. Patients presented to hospital during W2 were less frail and with lower disease severity and less likely to have renal decline.

Managing emotions in psychosis: Evaluation of a brief DBT-informed skills group for individuals with psychosis in routine community services.

OBJECTIVES: Individuals with psychosis report that emotion regulation (ER) difficulties are treatment priorities, yet little is known about how targeted ER interventions may help. We evaluated a new eight-session Dialectical Behavioural Therapy (DBT)-informed skills group specifically adapted for individuals with psychosis: the Managing Emotions Group (MEG) in diverse, inner-city community services. METHOD: A mixed-method design was utilised to assess the feasibility (acceptability and potential clinical impact) of local delivery of MEG. Uptake, completion (≥50% of sessions), post-session satisfaction ratings, and thematic analysis of qualitative feedback from 12 completers assessed acceptability. Pre-post-intervention changes in psychological distress, self-reported ER difficulties, and adaptive ER skill use assessed potential clinical impact. RESULTS: Forty-eight individuals (81% of attenders) completed the intervention (Mage = 43, 54% female) of whom 39 completed pre- and post-group measures. Participants reported high satisfaction and meaningful improvements in understanding and managing emotions, with positive impact on daily life. Self-reported psychological distress, ER difficulties, and adaptive ER skill use significantly improved, with medium-to-large pre-post effects (d = 0.5-0.7) except lack of emotional clarity (d = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: MEG was feasible and acceptable, and a future feasibility randomised controlled trial is warranted. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Individuals with psychosis report that support with their emotions is a priority. Brief interventions for emotion regulation difficulties are acceptable to individuals with psychosis and can be feasibly delivered in a local outpatient service. Distress and emotion regulation difficulties and skills improved significantly from pre-post treatment for clients completing the managing emotions group. Further implementation and evaluation are needed to support continued refinement to meet the needs and priorities of individuals with psychosis.

Frailty in Older Patients Undergoing Emergency Laparotomy: Results From the UK Observational Emergency Laparotomy and Frailty (ELF) Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to document the prevalence of frailty in older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy and to explore relationships between frailty and postoperative morbidity and mortality. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The majority of adults undergoing emergency laparotomy are older adults (≥65 y) that carry the highest mortality. Improved understanding is urgently needed to allow development of targeted interventions. METHODS: An observational multicenter (n=49) UK study was performed (March-June 2017). All older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were included. Preoperative frailty score was calculated using the progressive Clinical Frailty Score (CFS): 1 (very fit) to 7 (severely frail). Primary outcome measures were the prevalence of frailty (CFS 5-7) and its association to mortality at 90 days postoperative. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality and morbidity, length of critical care, and overall hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of 937 older adults underwent emergency laparotomy: frailty was present in 20%. Ninety-day mortality was 19.5%. After age and sex adjustment, the risk of 90-day mortality was directly associated with frailty: CFS 5 adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.18 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.24-8.14] and CFS 6/7 aOR 6·10 (95% CI, 2.26-16.45) compared with CFS 1. Similar associations were found for 30-day mortality. Increasing frailty was also associated with increased risk of complications, length of Intensive Care Unit, and overall hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: A fifth of older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy are frail. The presence of frailty is associated with greater risks of postoperative mortality and morbidity and is independent of age. Frailty scoring should be integrated into acute surgical assessment practice to aid decision-making and development of novel postoperative strategies.

Following the science? Comparison of methodological and reporting quality of covid-19 and other research from the first wave of the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Following the initial identification of the 2019 coronavirus disease (covid-19), the subsequent months saw substantial increases in published biomedical research. Concerns have been raised in both scientific and lay press around the quality of some of this research. We assessed clinical research from major clinical journals, comparing methodological and reporting quality of covid-19 papers published in the first wave (here defined as December 2019 to May 2020 inclusive) of the viral pandemic with non-covid papers published at the same time. METHODS: We reviewed research publications (print and online) from The BMJ, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine, from first publication of a covid-19 research paper (February 2020) to May 2020 inclusive. Paired reviewers were randomly allocated to extract data on methodological quality (risk of bias) and reporting quality (adherence to reporting guidance) from each paper using validated assessment tools. A random 10% of papers were assessed by a third, independent rater. Overall methodological quality for each paper was rated high, low or unclear. Reporting quality was described as percentage of total items reported. RESULTS: From 168 research papers, 165 were eligible, including 54 (33%) papers with a covid-19 focus. For methodological quality, 18 (33%) covid-19 papers and 83 (73%) non-covid papers were rated as low risk of bias, OR 6.32 (95%CI 2.85 to 14.00). The difference in quality was maintained after adjusting for publication date, results, funding, study design, journal and raters (OR 6.09 (95%CI 2.09 to 17.72)). For reporting quality, adherence to reporting guidelines was poorer for covid-19 papers, mean percentage of total items reported 72% (95%CI:66 to 77) for covid-19 papers and 84% (95%CI:81 to 87) for non-covid. CONCLUSIONS: Across various measures, we have demonstrated that covid-19 research from the first wave of the pandemic was potentially of lower quality than contemporaneous non-covid research. While some differences may be an inevitable consequence of conducting research during a viral pandemic, poor reporting should not be accepted.