Identifying factors that can be used to assess a country's readiness to deploy a new vaccine or improve uptake of an underutilised vaccine: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Identifying whether a country is ready to deploy a new vaccine or improve uptake of an existing vaccine requires knowledge of a diverse range of interdependent, context-specific factors. This scoping review aims to identify common themes that emerge across articles, which include tools or guidance that can be used to establish whether a country is ready to deploy a new vaccine or increase uptake of an underutilised vaccine. DESIGN: Scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched for articles published until 9 September 2023. Relevant articles were also identified through expert opinion. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles published in any year or language that included tools or guidance to identify factors that influence a country's readiness to deploy a new or underutilised vaccine. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers screened records and performed data extraction. Findings were synthesised by conducting a thematic analysis. RESULTS: 38 articles met our inclusion criteria; these documents were created using methodologies including expert review panels and Delphi surveys and varied in terms of content and context-of-use. 12 common themes were identified relevant to a country's readiness to deploy a new or underutilised vaccine. These themes were as follows: (1) legal, political and professional consensus; (2) sociocultural factors and communication; (3) policy, guidelines and regulations; (4) financing; (5) vaccine characteristics and supply logistics; (6) programme planning; (7) programme monitoring and evaluation; (8) sustainable and integrated healthcare provision; (9) safety surveillance and reporting; (10) disease burden and characteristics; (11) vaccination equity and (12) human resources and training of professionals. CONCLUSIONS: This information has the potential to form the basis of a globally applicable evidence-based vaccine readiness assessment tool that can inform policy and immunisation programme decision-makers.

Effect of parental touch on relieving acute procedural pain in neonates and parental anxiety (Petal): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Touch interventions such as massage and skin-to-skin contact relieve neonatal pain. The Parental touch trial (Petal) aimed to assess whether parental stroking of their baby before a clinically required heel lance, at a speed of approximately 3 cm/s to optimally activate C-tactile nerve fibres, provides effective pain relief. METHODS: Petal is a multicentre, randomised, parallel-group interventional superiority trial conducted in the John Radcliffe Hospital (Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK) and the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital (Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK). Neonates without neurological abnormalities who were born at 35 weeks gestational age or more and required a blood test via a heel lance in the first week of life were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive parental touch for 10 s either before (intervention group) or after (control group) the clinically required heel lance. Randomisation was managed at the Oxford site using a web-based minimisation algorithm with allocation concealment. The primary outcome measure was the magnitude of noxious-evoked brain activity in response to the heel lance measured with electroencephalography (EEG). Secondary outcome measures were Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (PIPP-R) score, development of tachycardia, and parental anxiety score. For all outcomes, the per-protocol effect was estimated via complier average causal effect analysis on the full analysis set. The trial is registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN14135962) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04901611). FINDINGS: Between Sept 1, 2021, and Feb 7, 2023, 159 parents were approached to participate in the study, and 112 neonates were included. 56 neonates were randomly assigned to the intervention group of parental stroking before the heel lance and 56 to the control group of parental stroking after the heel lance. The mean of the magnitude of the heel lance-evoked brain activity was 0·85 arbitrary units (a.u.; SD 0·70; n=39; a scaled magnitude of 1 a.u. represents the expected mean response to a heel lance in term-aged neonates) in the intervention group and 0·91 a.u. (SD 0·76; n=43) in the control group. Therefore, the primary outcome did not differ significantly between groups, with a mean difference of -0·11 a.u. (lower in intervention group; SD 0·77; 95% CI -0·42 to 0·20; p=0·38; n=82). No significant difference was observed across secondary outcomes. The PIPP-R difference in means was 1·10 (higher in intervention group, 95% CI -0·42 to 2·61; p=0·15; n=100); the odds ratio of becoming tachycardic was 2·08 (95% CI 0·46 to 9·46; p=0·34, n=105) in the intervention group with reference to the control group; and the difference in parental State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-State score was -0·44 (higher in control group; SD 6·85; 95% CI -2·91 to 2·02; p=0·72; n=106). One serious adverse event (desaturation) occurred in a neonate randomly assigned to the control group, which was not considered to be related to the study. INTERPRETATION: Parental stroking delivered at an optimal speed to activate C-tactile fibres for a duration of 10 s before the painful procedure did not significantly change neonates' magnitude of pain-related brain activity, PIPP-R score, or development of tachycardia. The trial highlighted the challenge of translating an experimental researcher-led tactile intervention into a parent-led approach, and the value of involving parents in their baby's pain management. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust and Bliss.

Parental experience of neonatal pain research while participating in the Parental touch trial (Petal).

ABSTRACT: Parental involvement in neonatal comfort care is a core component of family-centred care. Yet, parents experience a range of positive and negative feelings when providing pain-relieving interventions for their infants. Parents of infants who participated in the Parental touch trial (Petal), a multicentre randomised controlled trial investigating the impact of gentle parental touch on neonatal pain, were asked to complete an anonymous survey. This survey aimed to (1) explore parent-reported motivations in deciding to participate in the Petal trial; (2) understand parent-reported experiences related to trial participation; (3) understand parents' willingness to participate in future studies; and (4) evaluate parent-reported feelings while they were delivering a gentle touch intervention either before or after a clinically necessary blood test. One hundred six parents (1 parent per infant) took part in the survey. Primary motivators for participation were altruistic. Parents most frequently reported that they wanted their child to take part in the research because it has a potential benefit to babies in the future and because they wanted to improve scientific understanding. Parents reported that providing gentle touch to their children during painful procedures was associated with positive emotions, such as feeling "useful" (64%) and "reassured" (53%). Furthermore, nearly all parents (98%) were pleased to have participated in the Petal trial and would consider, or maybe consider, participating in further research studies. These results underscore the importance of structuring trials around parental involvement and providing opportunities for parents to be involved in providing comfort to their infants during necessary painful clinical procedures.

Grading the level of evidence of neonatal pharmacotherapy: midazolam and phenobarbital as examples.

BACKGROUND: Many drugs are used off-label or unlicensed in neonates. This does not mean they are used without evidence or knowledge. We aimed to apply and evaluate the Grading and Assessment of Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Studies (GAPPS) scoring system for the level of evidence of two commonly used anti-epileptic drugs. METHODS: Midazolam and phenobarbital as anti-epileptics were evaluated with a systematic literature search on neonatal pharmacokinetic (PK) and/or pharmacodynamic [PD, (amplitude-integrated) electroencephalography effect] studies. With the GAPPS system, two evaluators graded the current level of evidence. Inter-rater agreement was assessed for dosing evidence score (DES), quality of evidence (QoE), and strength of recommendation (REC). RESULTS: Seventy-two studies were included. DES scores 4 and 9 were most frequently used for PK, and scores 0 and 1 for PD. Inter-rater agreements on DES, QoE, and REC ranged from moderate to very good. A final REC was provided for all PK studies, but only for 25% (midazolam) and 33% (phenobarbital) of PD studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a reasonable level of evidence concerning midazolam and phenobarbital PK in neonates, although using a predefined target without integrated PK/PD evaluation. Further research is needed on midazolam use in term neonates with therapeutic hypothermia, and phenobarbital treatment in preterms. IMPACT: There is a reasonable level of evidence concerning pharmacotherapy of midazolam and phenobarbital in neonates. Most evidence is however based on PK studies, using a predefined target level or concentration range without integrated, combined PK/PD evaluation. Using the GAPPS system, final strength of recommendation could be provided for all PK studies, but only for 25% (midazolam) to 33% (phenobarbital) of PD studies. Due to the limited PK observations of midazolam in term neonates with therapeutic hypothermia, and of phenobarbital in preterm neonates these subgroups can be identified for further research.

The PiNe box: Development and validation of an electronic device to time-lock multimodal responses to sensory stimuli in hospitalised infants.

Recording multimodal responses to sensory stimuli in infants provides an integrative approach to investigate the developing nervous system. Accurate time-locking across modalities is essential to ensure that responses are interpreted correctly, and could also improve clinical care, for example, by facilitating automatic and objective multimodal pain assessment. Here we develop and assess a system to time-lock stimuli (including clinically-required heel lances and experimental visual, auditory and tactile stimuli) to electrophysiological research recordings and data recorded directly from a hospitalised infant's vital signs monitor. The electronic device presented here (that we have called 'the PiNe box') integrates a previously developed system to time-lock stimuli to electrophysiological recordings and can simultaneously time-lock the stimuli to recordings from hospital vital signs monitors with an average precision of 105 ms (standard deviation: 19 ms), which is sufficient for the analysis of changes in vital signs. Our method permits reliable and precise synchronisation of data recordings from equipment with legacy ports such as TTL (transistor-transistor logic) and RS-232, and patient-connected networkable devices, is easy to implement, flexible and inexpensive. Unlike current all-in-one systems, it enables existing hospital equipment to be easily used and could be used for patients of any age. We demonstrate the utility of the system in infants using visual and noxious (clinically-required heel lance) stimuli as representative examples.

Multicentre, randomised controlled trial to investigate the effects of parental touch on relieving acute procedural pain in neonates (Petal).

INTRODUCTION: Newborn infants routinely undergo minor painful procedures as part of postnatal care, with infants born sick or premature requiring a greater number of procedures. As pain in early life can have long-term neurodevelopmental consequences and lead to parental anxiety and future avoidance of interventions, effective pain management is essential. Non-pharmacological comfort measures such as breastfeeding, swaddling and sweet solutions are inconsistently implemented and are not always practical or effective in reducing the transmission of noxious input to the brain. Stroking of the skin can activate C-tactile fibres and reduce pain, and therefore could provide a simple and safe parent-led intervention for the management of pain. The trial aim is to determine whether parental touch prior to a painful clinical procedure provides effective pain relief in neonates. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre randomised controlled trial. A total of 112 neonates born at 35 weeks' gestation or more requiring a blood test in the first week of life will be recruited and randomised to receive parental stroking either preprocedure or postprocedure. We will record brain activity (EEG), cardiac and respiratory dynamics, oxygen saturation and facial expression to provide proxy pain outcome measures. The primary outcome will be the reduction of noxious-evoked brain activity in response to a heel lance. Secondary outcomes will be a reduction in clinical pain scores (Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised), postprocedural tachycardia and parental anxiety. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the London-South East Research Ethics Committee (ref: 21/LO/0523). The results will be widely disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, international conferences and via our partner neonatal charities Bliss and Supporting the Sick Newborn And their Parents (SSNAP). If the parental tactile intervention is effective, recommendations will be submitted via the National Health Service clinical guideline adoption process. STUDY STATUS: Commenced September 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04901611; 14 135 962.

Early life inflammation is associated with spinal cord excitability and nociceptive sensitivity in human infants.

Immune function and sensitivity to pain are closely related, but the association between early life inflammation and sensory nervous system development is poorly understood-especially in humans. Here, in term-born infants, we measure brain activity and reflex withdrawal activity (using EEG and EMG) and behavioural and physiological activity (using the PIPP-R score) to assess the impact of suspected early-onset neonatal infection on tactile- and noxious-evoked responses. We present evidence that neonatal inflammation (assessed by measuring C-reactive protein levels) is associated with increased spinal cord excitability and evoked brain activity following both tactile and noxious stimulation. There are early indications that this hyperalgesia could be maintained post-inflammation, supporting pre-clinical reports of early-life immune dysfunction influencing pain sensitivity in adults.

A chewable pediatric preparation of ibuprofen is palatable and acceptable to children.

The development of palatable and acceptable analgesics for children is a major challenge. Given the majority of medications are administered orally, and children are more sensitive to and less tolerant of bitterness, novel "child-friendly" preparations need to be developed and tested specifically in this patient population. This study investigated the palatability and acceptability of a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen in the form of soft chewable capsules in 100 healthy children aged 7-12 years of age and the acceptability of this novel preparation to their caregivers. About 97% of children adhered to a full therapeutic age-related dose, with 72% of these participants rating the preparation as acceptable on a hedonic facial scale. Despite 22% of children noting a "hot, spicy, or burning" sensation, consistent with known chemesthetic effects of ibuprofen, 83% of children confirmed they would take the medication in future, which rose to 87% in the context of future illness. In addition, after observing their children ingesting the medication, 92% of parents/guardians confirmed that they would be happy to administer this preparation of ibuprofen to their child if they were unwell. In conclusion, ibuprofen administered in the form of soft chewable capsules was palatable and acceptable to the majority of children and their parents/guardians and may provide a convenient and easy to dose preparation to reduce fever and relieve pain in children.

Cutaneous irritancy of an ibuprofen medicated plaster in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the irritation and contact sensitization potential of a 200 mg ibuprofen medicated plaster. METHODS: This double-blind, phase-1 placebo controlled study had two phases; the induction phase to evaluate the irritant potential of continuous application of the plaster, and the challenge phase to assess contact sensitivity (allergy). The cumulative irritancy potential was evaluated using an adaptation of the Shelanski method. Healthy adults (≥18 years of age) (N = 210) were treated simultaneously with one ibuprofen medicated and one placebo plaster applied in a randomized fashion to either the left or right side of the lower back. During the induction phase, plasters were applied on Days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, and 19 and the final plaster removed on Day 22. At each scheduled visit plasters and applications sites were assessed for degree of adhesion and skin irritation (score of 1 = no irritation to 7 = strong reaction spreading beyond test sites), respectively. The challenge phase followed a two-week washout period. A plaster was applied on Day 36 for 48 h and assessment occurred on Days 38, 39, and 40. RESULTS: The mean cumulative irritation score during the induction phase was lower for the ibuprofen medicated plaster than the placebo plaster (0.32 vs. 1.23, respectively). Three (1.4%) subjects experience a dermal reaction of grade ≥3 for the ibuprofen medicated plaster compared with 27 (12.7%) for the placebo plaster. Following challenge with ibuprofen or placebo plasters, 12 subjects (6.2%) with the ibuprofen medicated plaster and four (2.2%) with the placebo plaster had skin reaction of assessment grade higher than the induction phase. One subject for the ibuprofen and two for the placebo plaster had reactions with grade >2. No subjects showed an increase in sensitization on Day 39 or 40 compared with Day 38. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that the both the irritancy and contact sensitization of the ibuprofen medicated plaster is acceptable.

A Pharmacokinetic Study of an Ibuprofen Topical Patch in Healthy Male and Female Adult Volunteers.

The pharmacokinetics of a novel locally applied ibuprofen topical patch was evaluated. Healthy subjects (n = 28) were administered a 200-mg ibuprofen patch every 24 hours for 5 days, and steady-state pharmacokinetics was determined. The amount of ibuprofen remaining in the patch following each patch removal was also assessed. The maximum steady-state drug concentration and area under the concentration curve from time 0 on day 5 (t = 0) to the 24-hours sample on day 6 were 514 ng/mL (95% CI 439 to 603 ng/mL) and 9.78 kg·h/mL (95% CI 8.43 to 11.4 kg·h/mL), respectively. Maximum ibuprofen concentration on day 5 occurred at 20 hours post-patch application. No evidence of drug accumulation was observed, and steady state was achieved between days 2 and 5. Ibuprofen levels attenuated rapidly to baseline within 24 hours after treatment discontinuation. The amount of ibuprofen remaining in the patch was high (≥80%). Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild, with the most prevalent being headache (n = 6; 21.4%). Only 4 TEAEs were considered related to the ibuprofen patch: paresthesia (n = 1), headache (n = 2), and pruritic rash (n = 1). The study found that the systematic absorption of ibuprofen from a 200-mg patch was low and that the levels of ibuprofen leaving the patch over a 24-hour period are consistent with levels required for therapeutic relief as shown in other studies.

Cutaneous irritancy of an ibuprofen medicated plaster in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: Ibuprofen is a commonly used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug administered to treat injuries, joint pain, and recurrent muscular skeletal pain. The aim of this study was to determine the cutaneous irritancy of a medicated ibuprofen plaster compared with a placebo plaster in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Healthy volunteers (N = 31) were treated at the same time with one ibuprofen and one placebo plaster. The ibuprofen and placebo plaster were applied in a randomized fashion to sites on the left or right side of subjects' lower backs. At each scheduled visit, the plasters and applications sites were assessed for degree of adhesion and skin irritancy, respectively. The plasters were applied on study Days 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, and 19, with final plaster removal on Day 22. RESULTS: The ibuprofen medicated plaster compared with placebo had a lower percentage of Grade 1 (23.3% vs. 46.7%, respectively), Grade 2 (10% vs. 20%), and ≥Grade 3 (3% vs. 16.1%) irritancy scores after 21 days of application. The mean irritation score across the study was 0.40 for the ibuprofen medicated plaster and 1.18 for the placebo plaster. The irritation score on Day 22 of the study was 0.53 for the ibuprofen medicated plaster and 1.50 for placebo. The placebo plaster was associated with a higher number of stopped applications due to Grade 3 or above skin reactions compared with the ibuprofen medicated plaster (5 vs. 1, respectively). CONCLUSION: The ibuprofen medicated plaster was well tolerated and was associated with lower irritancy than the placebo plaster.

Efficacy and tolerability of a new ibuprofen 200mg plaster in patients with acute sports-related traumatic blunt soft tissue injury/contusion.

BACKGROUND: Ibuprofen is used for the treatment of non-serious pain. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of a new ibuprofen plaster for the treatment of pain associated with acute sports impact injuries/contusions. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, multi-centre, placebo controlled, parallel group study, adults (n = 130; 18-58 years of age) diagnosed with acute sports-related blunt soft tissue injury/contusion were randomized to receive either ibuprofen 200 mg plaster or placebo plaster. Plasters were administered once daily for five consecutive days. The primary assessment was area under the visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain on movement (POM) over 0 to three days (VAS AUC0-3d). Other endpoints included algometry AUC from 0 to three days (AUC0-3d) and 0 to five days (AUC0-5d), to evaluate improvement of sensitivity at the injured site, and patient and investigator global assessment of efficacy. Safety was monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: The ibuprofen plaster resulted in superior reduction in AUC0-3d compared with placebo; the Least Squares (LS) mean difference was 662.82 mm*h in favour of the ibuprofen 200mg plaster (P = 0.0011). The greater improvement in VAS AUC of POM was also observed after 12 h, 24 h, and five days of therapy. Tenderness also significantly improved with the ibuprofen plaster compared with placebo; LS mean difference in algometry/tenderness AUC0-3d was 1.87 N/cm2*d and AUC0-5d was 1.87 N/cm2*d (P values ≤0.0004). At all study timepoints, a greater percentage of patients and investigators rated the effectiveness of the ibuprofen 200 mg plaster as good/excellent than the placebo plaster. Treatment-emergent adverse events for the ibuprofen plaster were few (≤1.5%) and were mild in severity. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate 200 mg plaster is effective and safe for the treatment of pain due to acute sports-related traumatic blunt soft tissue injury/contusion in adults.

Efficacy and safety assessment of acute sports-related traumatic soft tissue injuries using a new ibuprofen medicated plaster: results from a randomized controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of a recently developed ibuprofen medicated plaster in the treatment of acute sports impact injuries/contusions. METHODS: In this double-blind, multi-center, placebo-controlled, parallel group, phase 3 study (EudraCT Number: 2012-003257-2) patients (n = 132; ages 18 to 60 years) diagnosed with acute sports-related traumatic blunt soft tissue injury/contusion to the upper or lower limbs were randomized to receive either ibuprofen 200 mg plaster (n = 64) or placebo plaster (n = 68). Plasters were administered once daily for five consecutive days. The primary assessment was the area under the curve (AUC) of the visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain on movement (POM) over 0 to 72 h (VAS0-72). RESULTS: The ibuprofen medicated plaster was associated with a reduction in pain on movement (POM) based on lower VAS AUC0-72h (2399.4 mm*h) compared with placebo (4078.9 mm*h) (least squares mean difference: - 1679.5 mm*h; P < 0.0001). The reduction in AUC of POM was also significantly greater for the ibuprofen medicated plaster compared with placebo at 12, 48, 24, and 120 h (P < 0.0001). Algometry/tenderness measurements found that the ibuprofen medicated plaster was associated with greater reduction in tenderness/pain than placebo at each timepoint (P values <0.0001). Seven patients experienced drug-related adverse events (n = 1 [1.6%] for the ibuprofen plaster, and n = 6 [8.8%] for placebo). All drug-related AEs were administration site reactions and were mild in intensity. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that ibuprofen medicated plaster results in rapid and clinically relevant reduction of pain in patients suffering from blunt musculoskeletal injuries or recurrent pain. The ibuprofen medicated plaster was well tolerated.

The Fiscal Consequences Attributed to Changes in Morbidity and Mortality Linked to Investments in Health Care: A Government Perspective Analytic Framework.

Governments have an enormous economic and political stake in the health of their populations. Population health is not only fundamental to economic growth but also affects short-term and long-term government expenditure on health care, disability, and other social programs and influences direct and indirect tax receipts. Fiscal transfers between citizen and state are mostly ignored in conventional welfare economics analyses based on the hypothesis that there are no winners or losers through transference of wealth. However, from the government perspective, this position is flawed, as disability costs and lost taxes attributed to poor health and reduced productive output represent real costs that pose budgetary and growth implications. To address the value of health and health care investments for government, we have developed a fiscal health analytic framework that captures how changes in morbidity and mortality influence tax revenue and transfer costs (e.g., disability, allowances, ongoing health costs). The framework can be used to evaluate the marginal impact of discrete investments or a mix of interventions in health care to inform governmental budgetary consequences. In this context, the framework can be considered as a fiscal budget impact and/or cost-benefit analysis model that accounts for how morbidity and mortality linked to specific programs represent both ongoing costs and tax revenue for government. Mathematical models identical to those used in cost-effectiveness analyses can be employed in fiscal analysis to reflect how disease progression influences public accounts (e.g., tax revenue and transfers).

A comparison of average wages with age-specific wages for assessing indirect productivity losses: analytic simplicity versus analytic precision.

OBJECTIVES: Numerous approaches are used to estimate indirect productivity losses using various wage estimates applied to poor health in working aged adults. Considering the different wage estimation approaches observed in the published literature, we sought to assess variation in productivity loss estimates when using average wages compared with age-specific wages. METHODS: Published estimates for average and age-specific wages for combined male/female wages were obtained from the UK Office of National Statistics. A polynomial interpolation was used to convert 5-year age-banded wage data into annual age-specific wages estimates. To compare indirect cost estimates, average wages and age-specific wages were used to project productivity losses at various stages of life based on the human capital approach. Discount rates of 0, 3, and 6 % were applied to projected age-specific and average wage losses. RESULTS: Using average wages was found to overestimate lifetime wages in conditions afflicting those aged 1-27 and 57-67, while underestimating lifetime wages in those aged 27-57. The difference was most significant for children where average wage overestimated wages by 15 % and for 40-year-olds where it underestimated wages by 14 %. CONCLUSIONS: Large differences in projecting productivity losses exist when using the average wage applied over a lifetime. Specifically, use of average wages overestimates productivity losses between 8 and 15 % for childhood illnesses. Furthermore, during prime working years, use of average wages will underestimate productivity losses by 14 %. We suggest that to achieve more precise estimates of productivity losses, age-specific wages should become the standard analytic approach.

Mesalamine once daily is more effective than twice daily in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Oral mesalamine (5-aminosalicylate) is the current standard of care for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. We investigated the efficacy and safety of once daily administration of prolonged-release mesalamine granules in maintenance of remission in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis, compared with the well established twice daily dosing regimen. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, single blind, noninferiority trial, 362 patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups that were given oral mesalamine 2 g, once daily, or 1 g, twice daily, for 12 months. The primary objective was to compare remission rates at 1 year, based on the ulcerative colitis disease activity index score, using Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS: At 1 year, 70.9% of the group given 2 g mesalamine once daily remained in remission vs 58.9% of the group given 1 g mesalamine twice daily; this difference was statistically significant (P = .024), indicating the increased efficacy of once daily, compared with twice daily, dosing. Self-reported adherence to therapy, measured by visual analog scale score after 4, 8, and 12 months, was significantly greater in the group given 2 g mesalamine once daily, compared with twice daily, at all but 1 study visit (P < .05). Compliance measured by medication taken was not significantly different between the groups. The difference between the 2 groups in overall incidence of adverse events was not statistically significant (P = .23). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ulcerative colitis given prolonged-release oral mesalamine 2 g once daily had better remission rates, acceptability, and self-reported adherence to therapy compared with patients given oral mesalamine 1 g twice daily.