Graded exercise therapy compared to activity management for paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis: pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

The MAGENTA pragmatic parallel groups randomized controlled trial compared graded exercise therapy (GET) with activity management (AM) in treating paediatric myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). Children aged 8-17 years with mild/moderate ME/CFS and presenting to NHS specialist paediatric services were allocated at random to either individualised flexible treatment focussing on physical activity (GET, 123 participants) or on managing cognitive, school and social activity (AM, 118 participants) delivered by NHS therapists. The primary outcome was the self-reported short-form 36 physical function subscale (SF-36-PFS) after 6 months, with higher scores indicating better functioning. After 6 months, data were available for 201 (83%) participants who received a mean of 3.9 (GET) or 4.6 (AM) treatment sessions. Comparing participants with measured outcomes in their allocated groups, the mean SF-36-PFS score changed from 54.8 (standard deviation 23.7) to 55.7 (23.3) for GET and from 55.5 (23.1) to 57.7 (26.0) for AM giving an adjusted difference in means of -2.02 (95% confidence interval -7.75, 2.70). One hundred thirty-five participants completed the mean SF-36-PFS at 12 months, and whilst further improvement was observed, the difference between the study groups remained consistent with chance. The two study groups showed similar changes on most of the secondary outcome measures: Chalder Fatigue, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: Depression, proportion of full-time school attended, a visual analogue pain scale, participant-rated change and accelerometer measured physical activity, whether at the 6-month or 12-month assessment. There was an isolated finding of some evidence of an improvement in anxiety in those allocated to GET, as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 6 months, with the 12-month assessment, and the Spence Children's Anxiety scale being aligned with that finding. There was weak evidence of a greater risk of deterioration with GET (27%) than with AM (17%; p = 0.069). At conventional UK cost per QALY thresholds, the probability that GET is more cost-effective than AM ranged from 18 to 21%. Whilst completion of the SF-36-PFS, Chalder Fatigue Scale and EQ-5D-Y was good at the 6-month assessment point, it was less satisfactory for other measures, and for all measures at the 12-month assessment.  Conclusion: There was no evidence that GET was more effective or cost-effective than AM in this setting, with very limited improvement in either study group evident by the 6-month or 12-month assessment points.  Trial registration: The study protocol was registered at www.isrctn.com (3rd September 2015; ISRCTN 23962803) before the start of enrolment to the initial feasibility phase.

Adherence to the national guidance on foods and drinks to limit or avoid during pregnancy in England: the PEAR Study.

OBJECTIVE: The National Health Service (NHS) England website provides guidance on foods/drinks to avoid or limit during pregnancy because of microbiological, toxicological or teratogenic hazards. The aims were to determine adherence and whether demographic characteristics were associated with adherence. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Online survey of postpartum women resident in England during pregnancy. PARTICIPANTS: Recently, postpartum women resident in England during their pregnancy (n 598; median age 33 (IQR 30-36) years) completed an online questionnaire (April-November 2022). Questions included those on consumption of twenty-one food/drink items that the NHS advises pregnant women to avoid/limit. The study is part of the Pregnancy, the Environment And nutRition (PEAR) Study. Summary statistics were used to determine proportions adhering to the guidance. Adjusted logistic regression was used to model the associations of adherence with demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Adherence was generally high (>90 % for eight of ten food/drink items to be avoided). However, among pre-pregnancy consumers, several items were not completely avoided, for example, 81 % (128/158) for game meat/gamebirds, 37 % (176/478) for cured meats and 17 % (81/467) for soft cheeses. Greater educational attainment (e.g. caffeinated soft drinks OR 2·25 (95 % CI 1·28, 3·94)), greater maternal age (e.g. oily fish 1·64 (1·05, 2·56)) and lower parity (e.g. caffeinated coffee 0.28 (0.11, 0.69)) were the most usual characteristics associated with adherence. CONCLUSION: Evidence of concerning levels of non-adherence for some food/drink items suggests a case for more education on some of the guidance, particularly for women with lower educational attainment, greater parity and greater maternal age. Further research on barriers to the implementation of the guidance is needed.

Provision of information by midwives for pregnant women in England on guidance on foods/drinks to avoid or limit.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service (NHS) website gives guidance for pregnant women in England on foods/drinks to avoid or limit because of microbiological, toxicological or teratogenic hazards. These include, for example, some types of soft cheeses, fish/seafood and meat products. This website and midwives are trusted sources of information for pregnant women, but the ways in which midwives can be supported to provide clear and accurate information are unknown. AIMS: The aims were to: (1) determine midwives' accuracy of recall of information and confidence in delivering the guidance to women; (2) identify barriers to provision; (3) identify the ways in which midwives provide this information to women. METHODS: Registered Midwives practicing in England completed an online questionnaire. Questions included those on what information they provided and their confidence in delivering it, the ways they provided information on foods to avoid/limit, their recall of some of the guidance, and what resources they used. Ethics approval was given by the University of Bristol. RESULTS: More than 10% of midwives (n = 122) were 'Not at all confident/Don't know' in providing advice about ten items, including game meat/gamebirds (42% and 43%, respectively), herbal teas (14%) and cured meats (12%). Only 32% correctly recalled overall advice on eating fish, and only 38% the advice on tinned tuna. The main barriers to provision were lack of time in appointments and lack of training. The most usual methods of disseminating information were verbal (79%) and signposting to websites (55%). CONCLUSION: Midwives were often unconfident about their ability to provide accurate guidance, and recall on items tested was frequently mistaken. Delivery of guidance by midwives on foods to avoid or limit needs to be supported by appropriate training and access to resources, and sufficient time in appointments. Further research on barriers to the delivery and implementation of the NHS guidance is needed.

'Opportunity to bond and a sense of normality': Parent and staff views of cuddling babies undergoing therapeutic hypothermia in neonatal intensive care: 'CoolCuddle'.

BACKGROUND: Currently, parents whose sick babies are undergoing three days of cooling therapy for hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) are not permitted to cuddle their cooled babies, due to concerns of warming the baby or dislodging breathing tubes or vascular catheters. Parents want to stay and care for their cooled babies and have reported that bonding is adversely affected when they are not permitted to hold them. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Qualitative interviews with 21 parents of cooled babies in NICU (11 mothers and 10 fathers) and 10 neonatal staff (4 consultants and 6 nurses) explored their views and experiences of an intervention to enable parents to cuddle their cooled babies (CoolCuddle). Thematic analysis methods were used to develop the themes and compare them between parents and staff. RESULTS: Five themes were produced. Three themes were comparable between parents and staff: Closeness, a sense of normality and reassurance and support. An additional parent theme reflected their mixed feelings about initial participation as they were apprehensive, but felt that it was an amazing opportunity. Parents and staff described the closeness between parents and babies as important for bonding and breastfeeding. Fathers particularly appreciated the opportunity to hold and bond with their infants. Parents valued the reassurance and support received from staff, and the cuddles helped them feel more normal and more like a family at a very stressful time. In a final staff theme, they discussed the skills, number of staff and training needed to undertake CoolCuddle in NICU. CONCLUSIONS: Parents cuddling their babies during cooling therapy enhanced parent-infant bonding and family-centred care in NICU and was positively received. Adverse perinatal mental health, impaired mother-infant bonding and their effects on the establishment of breastfeeding may be ameliorated by introducing CoolCuddle. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: Our parent advisors contributed to the interview topic guides and endorsed the themes from the analysis.

'Asking for help': a qualitative interview study exploring the experiences of interpersonal counselling (IPC) compared to low-intensity cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for women with depression during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Treating depression early in pregnancy can improve health outcomes for women and their children. Current low-intensity psychological therapy for perinatal depression is a supported self-help approach informed by cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) principles. Interpersonal counselling (IPC) may be a more appropriate low-intensity talking therapy for addressing the problems experienced by pregnant women with depression. A randomised feasibility trial (ADAGIO) has compared the acceptability of offering IPC for mild-moderate antenatal depression in routine NHS services compared to low-intensity CBT. This paper reports on a nested qualitative study which explored women's views and expectations of therapy, experiences of receiving IPC, and Psychological Wellbeing Practitioners (PWPs - junior mental health workers) views of delivering the low-intensity therapy. METHODS: A qualitative study design using in-depth semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Thirty-two pregnant women received talking therapy within the ADAGIO trial; 19 contributed to the interview study from July 2019 to January 2020; 12 who had IPC and seven who had CBT. All six PWPs trained in IPC took part in a focus group or interview. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed, anonymised, and analysed using thematic methods. RESULTS: Pregnant women welcomed being asked about their mental health in pregnancy and having the chance to have support in accessing therapy. The IPC approach helped women to identify triggers for depression and explored relationships using strategies such as 'promoting self-awareness through mood timelines', 'identifying their circles of support', 'developing communication skills and reciprocity in relationships', and 'asking for help'. PWPs compared how IPC differed from their prior experiences of delivering low-intensity CBT. They reported that IPC included a useful additional emotional component which was relevant to the perinatal period. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying and treating depression in pregnancy is important for the future health of both mother and child. Low-intensity perinatal-specific talking therapies delivered by psychological wellbeing practitioners in routine NHS primary care services in England are acceptable to pregnant women with mild-moderate depression. The strategies used in IPC to manage depression, including identifying triggers for low mood, and communicating the need for help, may be particularly appropriate for the perinatal period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 11513120. 02/05/2019.

Patients' and health professionals' perceptions of the LoDED (limit of detection and ECG discharge) strategy for low-risk chest pain management: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid discharge strategies for patients with low-risk chest pain using high-sensitivity troponin assays have been extensively evaluated. The adherence to, and acceptability of such strategies, has largely been explored using quantitative data. The aims of this integrated qualitative study were to explore the acceptability of the limit of detection and ECG discharge strategy (LoDED) to patients and health professionals, and to refine a discharge information leaflet for patients with low-risk chest pain. METHODS: Patients with low-risk chest pain who consented to a semi-structured interview were purposively sampled for maximum variation from four of the participating National Health Service sites between October 2018 and May 2019. Two focus groups with ED health professionals at two of the participating sites were completed in April and June 2019. RESULTS: A discharge strategy based on a single undetectable hs-cTn test (LoDED) was acceptable to patients. They trusted the health professionals who were treating them and felt reassured by other tests, (ECG) alongside blood test(s), even when the clinical assessment did not provide a firm diagnosis. In contrast, health professionals had reservations about the LoDED strategy, including concern about identifying low-risk patients and a shortened patient observation period. Findings from 11 patient interviews and 2 staff focus groups (with 20 clinicians) centred around three overarching themes: acceptability of the LoDED strategy, perceptions of symptom severity and uncertainty, and patient discharge information. CONCLUSION: Rapid discharge for low-risk chest pain is acceptable to patients, but clinicians reported some reticence in implementing the LoDED strategy. Further work is required to optimise discharge discussions and information provision for patients.

Enhancing communication, informed consent and recruitment in a paediatric urgent care surgical trial: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Recruiting patients to paediatric trials can be challenging, especially in trials that compare markedly different management pathways and are conducted in acute settings. We aimed to enhance informed consent and recruitment in the CONTRACT trial (CONservative TReatment of Appendicitis in Children a randomised controlled Trial; ISRCTN15830435) - a feasibility trial that compared non-operative treatment (antibiotics) versus appendicectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. METHODS: Qualitative study embedded within CONTRACT and conducted across three UK children's hospitals. Data were transcribed audio-recordings of 85 CONTRACT recruitment consultations with 58 families; and semi-structured interviews with 35 health professionals and 28 families (34 parents, 14 children) invited to participate in CONTRACT. Data analysis drew on thematic approaches. Throughout CONTRACT, we used findings from the ongoing qualitative analysis to inform bespoke communication training for health professionals recruiting to CONTRACT. Before and after training we also examined qualitative changes in communication during consultations and quantitative changes in recruitment rates. RESULTS: Bespoke communication training focussed on presenting the trial arms in a balanced way, emphasising clinical equipoise, exploring family treatment preferences and managing families' expectations about the trial's treatment pathways. Analysis of recruitment consultations indicated that health professionals' presentation of treatment arms became increasingly balanced following training, (e.g. avoiding imbalanced terminology) and recruitment rose from 38 to 62%. However, they remained reluctant to explore families' treatment preferences and respond with further information to balance these preferences. Analyses of interviews identified the time constraints of the urgent care setting, concerns about coercion, and reservations about exposing children to conversations about treatment risks as reasons for this reluctance. Interviews with families indicated the importance of clear explanations of trial treatment timings and sensitive communication of treatment allocation for both recruitment and retention. CONCLUSIONS: Following bespoke training based on the qualitative analyses, health professionals presented CONTRACT to families in clearer and more balanced ways and this was associated with an increase in the recruitment rate. Despite training, health professionals remained reluctant to explore families' treatment preferences. We provide several recommendations to enhance communication, informed consent, recruitment and retention in future trials in urgent care settings.

Recruiting Adolescents With Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis to Internet-Delivered Therapy: Internal Pilot Within a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) in adolescents is common and disabling. Teenagers in the United Kingdom are more likely to recover if they access specialist care, but most do not have access to a local specialist CFS/ME service. Delivering treatment remotely via the internet could improve access to treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess (1) the feasibility of recruitment and retention into a trial of internet-delivered specialist treatment for adolescents with CFS/ME and (2) the acceptability of trial processes and 2 web-based treatments (to inform continuation to full trial). METHODS: This study is an internal pilot for the initial 12 months of a full randomized controlled trial (RCT), with integrated qualitative methods (analysis of recruitment consultations and participant and clinician interviews). Recruitment and treatment were delivered remotely from a specialist pediatric CFS/ME treatment service within a hospital in South West United Kingdom. Adolescents (aged 11-17 years) from across the United Kingdom with a diagnosis of CFS/ME and no access to local specialist treatment were referred by their general practitioner to the treatment center. Eligibility assessment and recruitment were conducted via remote methods (telephone and on the web), and participants were randomized (via a computer-automated system) to 1 of 2 web-based treatments. The trial intervention was Fatigue in Teenagers on the InterNET in the National Health Service, a web-based modular CFS/ME-specific cognitive behavioral therapy program (designed to be used by young people and their parents or caregivers) supported by individualized clinical psychologist electronic consultations (regular, scheduled therapeutic message exchanges between participants and therapist within the platform). The comparator was Skype-delivered activity management with a CFS/ME clinician (mainly a physiotherapist or occupational therapist). Both treatments were intended to last for up to 6 months. The primary outcomes were (1) the number of participants recruited (per out-of-area referrals received between November 1, 2016, to October 31, 2017) and the proportion providing 6-month outcome data (web-based self-report questionnaire assessing functioning) and (2) the qualitative outcomes indicating the acceptability of trial processes and treatments. RESULTS: A total of 89 out of 150 (59.3% of potentially eligible referrals) young people and their parents or caregivers were recruited, with 75 out of 89 (84.2%) providing 6-month outcome data. Overall, web-based treatment was acceptable; however, participants and clinicians described both the advantages and disadvantages of remote methods. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting young people (and their parents or caregivers) into an RCT of web-based treatment via remote methods is feasible and acceptable. Delivering specialist treatment at home via the internet is feasible and acceptable, although some families prefer to travel across the United Kingdom for face-to-face treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 18020851; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN18020851. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13063-018-2500-3.

Obstacles to recruitment in paediatric studies focusing on mental health in a physical health context: the experiences of clinical gatekeepers in an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Studies in both paediatric and psychiatric settings often experience problems in recruitment. This can compromise the ability of the study to recruit to target, meaning studies are potentially underpowered. It can also result in a biased sample if a non-representative group are selectively recruited. Recruitment to studies in health contexts often depends on healthcare professionals, who act as gatekeepers by screening patients for eligibility and obtaining consent for the research team to contact them. The experience of health professionals as gatekeepers in paediatric studies is poorly understood and may affect whether recruitment is successful or not. METHODS: Six out of seven eligible healthcare professionals from a specialist paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) team were interviewed. All participants were undertaking initial clinical assessments within which they were asked to identify eligible patients for an observational study of co-morbid mental health problems in adolescents with confirmed CFS/ME. This study had experienced particular recruitment problems, more so than other studies in the same service. Interview questions were designed to explore perceptions of research, and barriers and facilitators of recruitment. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used. RESULTS: Participants espoused their commitment to the value of research. However, they perceived there to be a number of barriers to recruitment. Barriers within the clinical context included time pressures and the emotional nature of initial clinical assessments. Barriers posed by the wider research context included recruiting to multiple studies at the same time. Factors specific to the observational study of mental health in CFS/ME included aspects of the study design, such as the name and nature of the study, as well as the focus of the study itself. Participants made a number of recommendations about how recruitment barriers could be overcome. CONCLUSIONS: The current study highlights the need to carefully consider, at design stage, how to overcome potential barriers to recruitment. Gatekeepers should be actively involved at this stage to ensure that the study is set up in such a way to best enable recruitment activities within the clinical setting.

"Giving us hope": Parent and neonatal staff views and expectations of a planned family-centred discharge process (Train-to-Home).

BACKGROUND: Preparing families and preterm infants for discharge is relatively unstructured in many UK neonatal units (NNUs). Family-centred neonatal care and discharge planning are recommended but variable. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Qualitative interviews with 37 parents of infants in NNUs, and 18 nursing staff and 5 neonatal consultants explored their views of discharge planning and perceptions of a planned family-centred discharge process (Train-to-Home). Train-to-Home facilitates communication between staff and parents throughout the neonatal stay, using a laminated train and parent booklets. RESULTS: Parents were overwhelmingly positive about Train-to-Home. They described being given hope, feeling in control and having something visual to show their baby's progress. They reported positive involvement of fathers and families, how predicted discharge dates helped them prepare for home and ways staff engaged with Train-to-Home when communicating with them. Nursing staff reactions were mixed-some were uncertain about when to use it, but found the visual images powerful. Medical staff in all NNUs were positive about the intervention recognizing that it helped in communicating better with parents. CONCLUSIONS: Using a parent-centred approach to communication and informing parents about the needs and progress of their preterm infant in hospital is welcomed by parents and many staff. This approach meets the recommended prioritization of family-centred care for such families. Predicted discharge dates helped parents prepare for home, and the ways staff engaged with Train-to-Home when communicating with them helped them feel more confident as well as having something visual to show their baby's progress.

Adult patients' experiences of NHS specialist services for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS/ME): a qualitative study in England.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have explored patients' experiences of treatment for CFS/ME. This study aims to fill this gap by capturing the perspective of patients who have been treated by NHS specialist CFS/ME services in England. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted during the period June-September 2014 with 16 adults who were completing treatment at one of three outpatient NHS specialist CFS/ME services. Interviews were analysed thematically using constant comparison techniques, with particular attention paid to contrasting views. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: 'Journey to specialist services'; 'Things that help or hinder treatment'; and 'Support systems'. Within these themes nine sub-themes were identified. A wide range of factors was evident in forming participants' experiences, including personal characteristics such as perseverance and optimism, and service factors such as flexibility and positive, supportive relationships with clinicians. Participants described how specialist services played a unique role, which was related to the contested nature of the condition. Many participants had experienced a lack of validation and medical and social support before attending a specialist service. Patients' experiences of life before referral, and the concerns that they expressed about being discharged, highlighted the hardship and obstacles which people living with CFS/ME continue to experience in our society. CONCLUSIONS: The experiences of CFS/ME patients in our study showed that NHS specialist CFS/ME services played a vital role in patients' journeys towards an improved quality of life. This improvement came about through a process which included validation of patients' experiences, acceptance of change, practical advice and support, and therapeutic outcomes.

Fish Consumption during Pregnancy in Relation to National Guidance in England in a Mixed-Methods Study: The PEAR Study.

Guidance on foods to limit or avoid in pregnancy is provided on the NHS website for England. Advice on fish consumption is related to exposure to mercury, dioxins and polychlorinated biphenyls, which may have adverse effects on fetal neurodevelopment. Our aim was to provide evidence on the effectiveness of the guidance in minimising exposure to toxins while maximising nutrient intake in a mixed-methods study. An online questionnaire on fish consumption before/during pregnancy was completed by postpartum women (≤12 months) in England (n = 598). A subsample of participants was invited to take part in an interview (n = 14). Women who ate fish before pregnancy reduced their intakes of both oily and white fish during pregnancy, with some avoiding it altogether. Women did not exceed the limit on tinned tuna, but there was evidence of mis-recall on the suggested limit. Overall intakes of fish were below that recommended during pregnancy (36% compliance for pre-pregnancy consumers). Barriers to fish consumption included risk aversion, confusion over specific details of the guidance, cost, availability, family preferences and smell/taste. Clarity and simplicity of the NHS guidance, with an overall message on the number of portions of fish a week advised prominently shown, would help pregnant women to benefit from the nutrients in fish while minimising exposure to toxins. The guidance on the number of cans of tuna advised per week is poorly recalled and needs to be disseminated accurately. The guidance on shark/marlin/swordfish could receive less prominence as it is rarely eaten by pregnant women in England.

Autistic adults' views on the design and processes within randomised controlled trials: The APRiCoT study.

LAY ABSTRACT: Large randomised controlled trials are used to test healthcare treatments. Yet there are no large randomised controlled trials on effective treatments for common mental health issues affecting autistic adults. The purpose of this study was to learn what autistic adults think about randomised controlled trials in preparation for a randomised controlled trial testing a medication for anxiety. This means we wanted to know their opinions about the way randomised controlled trials are done, such as how people are chosen to be in the study and how the study is carried out. We did this by talking to 49 autistic adults individually and asking them questions. We found that most of the people we talked to were okay with the way randomised controlled trials are done. They thought it was fair and they liked that it was based on evidence. However, some autistic people might find it hard to take part in randomised controlled trials. Some people did not like the uncertainty of not knowing what treatment they would receive in a randomised controlled trial. Others felt too vulnerable and may have had bad experiences with healthcare in the past. We found that it is important to involve autistic people early on and at every stage when designing a clinical trial. Care about how clear and precise the study communication is will build trust and improve access to research. Our study indicates that it is possible to conduct large randomised controlled trials with and for autistic people. This can ultimately contribute to the improvement of healthcare outcomes for this population.

Lockdown Experiences and Views on Future Research Participation of Autistic Adults in the UK During the First 6 Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in large-scale public health restrictions and lockdowns across many countries. There is an increasing literature on the varied impact of such lockdowns in autistic adults. However, there is very little research on how the pandemic and related public health measures may impact the willingness of autistic people in engaging and taking part in research. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore autistic adults' experiences of the COVID-19 lockdown and how the pandemic may affect future research participation. Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews with 31 autistic adults between March and July 2020. Transcripts were analyzed thematically within a critical realism framework. Results: Participants identified positive aspects of lockdown such as enjoying the lack of social pressures and using their well-developed skills for dealing with uncertainty. Autistic people also shared challenges of adjusting to lockdown, for example, rapid change in daily routines. While hopeful about the freedom gained from easing restrictions, participants were concerned about the inconsistent communication and application of rules during the transition out of lockdown. This may have exacerbated already rising mental health issues among autistic people. The participants viewed research participation and engagement with increased relevance during the pandemic and welcomed efforts to conduct research using online methods of communication. Conclusion: The COVID-19 lockdown had a varied effect in the lives and routines of autistic people. However, health care providers and researchers need to be mindful of rising mental health issues in the aftermath of the pandemic, especially for people who were already vulnerable. The response to the pandemic may have offered opportunities for innovation in research processes enabling more autistic people to engage with research and making studies more inclusive.

Why is this an important issue?: We did not know how the pandemic and the strict restrictions that followed would affect autistic people's well-being and mental health.Also, there was a worry that the pandemic would affect the number of volunteers taking part in research that matters the most to autistic people. Thus, it was important to understand any implications for the way we conduct research with the autistic community after the pandemic. What was the purpose of this study?: We explored the experiences of autistic people living through the first 6 months of the COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom. We were particularly interested in autistic people's views on how the pandemic may affect them taking part in research. What did the researchers do?: We co-produced this interview study to answer our research questions. We carried out in-depth interviews with 31 autistic people. We looked for patterns or themes in what the participants said. What were the results of the study?: Autistic people we interviewed reported being able to enjoy a quieter pace of life. They felt less anxious early in the lockdown. But they also faced great challenges adjusting to changes in their daily routines. Inconsistent public health communication caused worry during the transition out of lockdown. Unnecessary stress might have led to worsening of mental health issues in some people. Our participants held positive views on taking part in and engage with research, despite the pandemic. We identified opportunities that could make research more inclusive for autistic people, for example, online methods for taking consent and taking part in research remotely. What do these findings add to what was already known?: Our study adds to the evidence of the varied responses of autistic people to the pandemic and the public health measures that it led to. One important strength of our work is our focus on the impact of the pandemic on research and implications of future research. We learnt that autistic people welcome and value the use of online technology to reach study participants. Wider use of remote technology can make research more inclusive and participatory. What are potential weaknesses in the study?: Many of our participants were already had experience participating in research. Also most had relatively high education levels. We did not include autistic people with intellectual disabilities. We did not collect information on ethnicity. Our sample is likely to have little ethnic diversity. How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future?: We describe the experiences of autistic people in the face of unprecedented circumstances. We found the need for clear public health communication to avoid unnecessary stress. The pandemic has provided the opportunity for a wider use of remote methods of research, even in areas where this was not done in the past (e.g., clinical trials). Our study found that such approaches would make research more inclusive.

Flash glucose monitoring in young people with type 1 diabetes-a qualitative study of young people, parents and health professionals: 'It makes life much easier'.

OBJECTIVES: Flash glucose monitoring for patients with T1 diabetes avoids frequent painful finger-prick testing, thus potentially improving frequency of glucose self-monitoring. Our study aimed to explore experiences of young people using Freestyle Libre sensors and their parents, and to identify benefits and challenges to National Health Service (NHS) staff of its adoption in their care provision. PARTICIPANTS: Young people with T1 diabetes, their parents and healthcare professionals were interviewed between February and December 2021. Participants were recruited via social media and through NHS diabetes clinic staff. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews were conducted online and analysed using thematic methods. Staff themes were mapped onto normalisation process theory (NPT) constructs. RESULTS: Thirty-four participants were interviewed: 10 young people, 14 parents and 10 healthcare professionals. Young people reported that life was much easier since changing to flash glucose monitoring, increasing confidence and independence to manage their condition. Parents' quality of life improved and they appreciated access to real-time data. Using the NPT concepts to understand how technology was integrated into routine care proved useful; health professionals were very enthusiastic about flash glucose monitoring and coped with the extra data load to facilitate more tailored patient support within and between clinic visits. CONCLUSION: This technology empowers young people and their parents to understand their diabetes adherence more completely; to feel more confident about adjusting their own care between clinic appointments; and provides an improved interactive experience in clinic. Healthcare teams appear committed to delivering improving technologies, acknowledging the challenge for them to assimilate new information required to provide expert advice.

Patient-centred outcomes following non-operative treatment or appendicectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children.

While non-operative treatment has emerged as an alternative to surgery for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children, comparative patient-centred outcomes are not well documented. We investigated these in a feasibility randomised trial. Of 57 randomised participants, data were available for 26. Compared with appendicectomy, children allocated to non-operative treatment reported higher short-term quality of life scores, shorter duration of requiring analgesia, more rapid return to normal activities and shorter parental absence from work. These preliminary data suggest differences exist in recovery profile and quality of life between these treatments that are important to measure in a larger RCT. Trial registration number is ISRCTN15830435.

The challenge of equipoise: qualitative interviews exploring the views of health professionals and women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer on recruitment to a surgical randomised controlled feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: A multicentre feasibility trial (MIAMI), comparing outcomes and quality of life of women with multiple ipsilateral breast cancer randomised to therapeutic mammoplasty or mastectomy, was conducted from September 2018 to March 2020. The MIAMI surgical trial aimed to investigate recruitment of sufficient numbers of women. Multidisciplinary teams at 10 breast care centres in the UK identified 190 with MIBC diagnosis; 20 were eligible for trial participation but after being approached only four patients were recruited. A nested qualitative study sought to understand the reasons for this lack of recruitment. METHODS: Interviews were conducted from November 2019 to September 2020 with 17 staff from eight hospital-based breast care centres that recruited and attempted to recruit to MIAMI; and seven patients from four centres, comprising all patients who were recruited to the trial and some who declined to take part. Interviews were audio-recorded, anonymised and analysed using thematic methods of building codes into themes and sub-themes using the process of constant comparison. RESULTS: Overarching themes of (1) influences on equipoise and recruitment and (2) effects of a lack of equipoise were generated. Within these themes, health professional themes described the barriers to recruitment as 'the treatment landscape has changed', 'staff preferences and beliefs' which influenced equipoise and patient advice; and how different the treatments were for patients. Patient themes of 'altruism and timing of trial approach', 'influences from consultants and others' and 'diagnostic journey doubts' all played a part in whether patients agreed to take part in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to recruiting to breast cancer surgical trials can be significant, especially where there are substantial differences between the treatments being offered and a lack of equipoise communicated by healthcare professionals to patients. Patients can become overwhelmed by numerous requests for participation in research trials and inappropriate timing of trial discussions. Alternative study designs to the gold standard randomised control trial for surgical interventions may be required to provide the high-quality evidence on which to base practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ( ISRCTN17987569 ) registered on April 20, 2018, and ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03514654 ).

A Smartphone App for Supporting the Self-management of Daytime Urinary Incontinence in Adolescents: Development and Formative Evaluation Study of URApp.

BACKGROUND: Daytime urinary incontinence (UI) is common in childhood and often persists into adolescence. UI in adolescence is associated with a range of adverse outcomes, including depressive symptoms, peer victimization, poor self-image, and problems with peer relationships. The first-line conservative treatment for UI is bladder training (standard urotherapy) that aims to establish a regular fluid intake and a timed schedule for toilet visits. The success of bladder training is strongly dependent on good concordance, which can be challenging for young people. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to describe the development of a smartphone app (URApp) that aims to improve concordance with bladder training in young people aged 11 to 19 years. METHODS: URApp was designed by using participatory co-design methods and was guided by the person-based approach to intervention design. The core app functions were based on clinical guidance and included setting a daily drinking goal that records fluid intake and toilet visits, setting reminders to drink fluids and go to the toilet, and recording progress toward drinking goals. The development of URApp comprised the following four stages: a review of current smartphone apps for UI, participatory co-design workshops with young people with UI for gathering user requirements and developing wireframes, the development of a URApp prototype, and the user testing of the prototype through qualitative interviews with 23 young people with UI or urgency aged 10 to 19 years and 8 clinicians. The app functions and additional functionalities for supporting concordance and behavior change were iteratively optimized throughout the app development process. RESULTS: Young people who tested URApp judged it to be a helpful way of supporting their concordance with a timed schedule for toilet visits and drinking. They reported high levels of acceptability and engagement. Preliminary findings indicated that some young people experienced improvements in their bladder symptoms, including a reduction in UI. Clinicians reported that URApp was clinically appropriate and aligned with the best practice guidelines for bladder training. URApp was deemed age appropriate, with all clinicians reporting that they would use it within their own clinics. Clinicians felt URApp would be of particular benefit to patients whose symptoms were not improving or those who were not engaging with their treatment plans. CONCLUSIONS: The next stage is to evaluate URApp in a range of settings, including pediatric continence clinics, primary care, and schools. This research is needed to test whether URApp is an effective (and cost-effective) solution for improving concordance with bladder training, reducing bladder symptoms, and improving the quality of life.

CONservative TReatment of Appendicitis in Children: a randomised controlled feasibility Trial (CONTRACT).

OBJECTIVE: To establish the feasibility of a multicentre randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a non-operative treatment pathway compared with appendicectomy in children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. DESIGN: Feasibility randomised controlled trial with embedded qualitative study to inform recruiter training to optimise recruitment and the design of a future definitive trial. SETTING: Three specialist paediatric surgery centres in the UK. PATIENTS: Children (aged 4-15 years) with a clinical diagnosis of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. INTERVENTIONS: Appendicectomy or a non-operative treatment pathway (comprising broad-spectrum antibiotics and active observation). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was the proportion of eligible patients recruited. Secondary outcomes evaluated adherence to interventions, data collection during follow-up, safety of treatment pathways and clinical course. RESULTS: Fifty per cent of eligible participants (95% CI 40 to 59) approached about the trial agreed to participate and were randomised. Repeated bespoke recruiter training was associated with an increase in recruitment rate over the course of the trial from 38% to 72%. There was high acceptance of randomisation, good patient and surgeon adherence to trial procedures and satisfactory completion of follow-up. Although more participants had perforated appendicitis than had been anticipated, treatment pathways were found to be safe and adverse event profiles acceptable. CONCLUSION: Recruitment to a randomised controlled trial examining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a non-operative treatment pathway compared with appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children is feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15830435.

Conservative treatment for uncomplicated appendicitis in children: the CONTRACT feasibility study, including feasibility RCT.

BACKGROUND: Although non-operative treatment is known to be effective for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children, randomised trial data comparing important outcomes of non-operative treatment with those of appendicectomy are lacking. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to ascertain the feasibility of conducting a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a non-operative treatment pathway with appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children. DESIGN: This was a mixed-methods study, which included a feasibility randomised controlled trial, embedded and parallel qualitative and survey studies, a parallel health economic feasibility study and the development of a core outcome set. SETTING: This study was set in three specialist NHS paediatric surgical units in England. PARTICIPANTS: Children (aged 4-15 years) clinically diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis participated in the feasibility randomised controlled trial. Children, their families, recruiting clinicians and other health-care professionals involved in caring for children with appendicitis took part in the qualitative study. UK specialist paediatric surgeons took part in the survey. Specialist paediatric surgeons, adult general surgeons who treat children, and children and young people who previously had appendicitis, along with their families, took part in the development of the core outcome set. INTERVENTIONS: Participants in the feasibility randomised controlled trial were randomised to a non-operative treatment pathway (broad-spectrum antibiotics and active observation) or appendicectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the proportion of eligible patients recruited to the feasibility trial. DATA SOURCES: Data were sourced from NHS case notes, questionnaire responses, transcribed audio-recordings of recruitment discussions and qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Overall, 50% (95% confidence interval 40% to 59%) of 115 eligible patients approached about the trial agreed to participate and were randomised. There was high acceptance of randomisation and good adherence to trial procedures and follow-up (follow-up rates of 89%, 85% and 85% at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months, respectively). More participants had perforated appendicitis than had been anticipated. Qualitative work enabled us to communicate about the trial effectively with patients and families, to design and deliver bespoke training to optimise recruitment and to understand how to optimise the design and delivery of a future trial. The health economic study indicated that the main cost drivers are the ward stay cost and the cost of the operation; it has also informed quality-of-life assessment methods for future work. A core outcome set for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children and young people was developed, containing 14 outcomes. There is adequate surgeon interest to justify proceeding to an effectiveness trial, with 51% of those surveyed expressing a willingness to recruit with an unchanged trial protocol. LIMITATIONS: Because the feasibility randomised controlled trial was performed in only three centres, successful recruitment across a larger number of sites cannot be guaranteed. However, the qualitative work has informed a bespoke training package to facilitate this. Although survey results suggest adequate clinician interest to make a larger trial possible, actual participation may differ, and equipoise may have changed over time. CONCLUSIONS: A future effectiveness trial is feasible, following limited additional preparation, to establish appropriate outcome measures and case identification. It is recommended to include a limited package of qualitative work to optimise recruitment, in particular at new centres. FUTURE WORK: Prior to proceeding to an effectiveness trial, there is a need to develop a robust method for distinguishing children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis from those with more advanced appendicitis, and to reach agreement on a primary outcome measure and effect size that is acceptable to all stakeholder groups involved. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15830435. 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. 25, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Appendicitis is usually treated with an operation to remove the appendix. But we have learned, from other research, that some children with appendicitis may not need an operation, and could be treated with antibiotics instead. To find out how these two different treatments compare with one another, we need to do a big study. First, though, we need to see if doing that kind of study would even be possible (or 'feasible'). We carried out a feasibility study that had several parts. First, we did a small study with children who had appendicitis, whereby children were randomly allocated to have either antibiotics or an operation, with an equal chance of having either treatment. Second, we asked parents and health-care staff about why they wanted, or did not want, to take part in that small study. This helped us to understand how to make a bigger future study as acceptable as possible to children, families and surgeons. Third, we asked parents, patients and surgeons what they think are the most important things ­ or 'outcomes' ­ we should look at in future research on children who have appendicitis. From that, we developed a list of outcomes that should be included in our future big study, so we can be certain that the research we do is likely to help parents and surgeons. Overall, we established that a future big study is feasible and we have plenty of information to help us with how to plan it best, so that it has the greatest possible chance of success. We were also guided in all of these steps of the research by a group of parents, children and young people, some of whom had appendicitis and some of whom did not.