A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of air filtration to prevent symptomatic winter respiratory infections (including COVID-19) in care homes (AFRI-c) in England: Trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory tract infections are readily transmitted in care homes. Airborne transmission of pathogens causing respiratory tract illness is largely unmitigated. Portable high-efficiency-particulate-air (HEPA) filtration units capture microbial particles from the air, but it is unclear whether this is sufficient to reduce infections in care home residents. The Air Filtration to prevent symptomatic winter Respiratory Infections (including COVID-19) in care homes (AFRI-c) randomized controlled trial will determine whether using HEPA filtration units reduces respiratory infection episodes in care home residents. METHODS: AFRI-c is a cluster randomized controlled trial that will be delivered in residential care homes for older people in England. Ninety-one care homes will be randomised to take part for one winter period. The intervention care homes will receive HEPA filtration units for use in communal areas and private bedrooms. Normal infection control measures will continue in all care homes. Anonymised daily data on symptoms will be collected for up to 30 residents. Ten to 12 of these residents will be invited to consent to a primary care medical notes review and (in intervention homes) to having an air filter switched on in their private room. The primary outcome will be number of symptomatic winter respiratory infection episodes. Secondary outcomes include specific clinical measures of infection, number of falls / near falls, number of laboratory confirmed infections, hospitalisations, staff sickness and cost-effectiveness. A mixed methods process evaluation will assess intervention acceptability and implementation. DISCUSSION: The results of AFRI-c will provide vital information about whether portable HEPA filtration units reduce symptomatic winter respiratory infections in older care home residents. Findings about effectiveness, fidelity, acceptability and cost-effectiveness will support stakeholders to determine the use of HEPA filtration units as part of infection control policies.

Who is accessing community lateral flow device testing and why? Characteristics and motivations of individuals participating in COVID-19 community testing in two English local authority areas.

BACKGROUND: Antigen testing using lateral flow devices (LFDs) plays an important role in the management of the novel coronavirus pandemic of 2019 (COVID-19) by rapidly identifying individuals who are asymptomatically carrying high levels of the virus. By January 2021, LFD community testing sites were set up across English local authority areas to support the management and containment of regional COVID-19 cases, initially targeting essential workers unable to work from home during the national lockdown. This study aimed to examine the characteristics and motivations of individuals accessing community LFD testing across two local authority areas (LAAs) in the South West of England. METHODS: Data were collected as part of a service evaluation from December 22nd 2020 until March 15th 2021 for two LAAs. Demographic and postcode data were collected from an online test appointment booking platform and the National Health Service testing service online system, with data accessed from Public Health England. An online survey was sent to individuals who made a testing appointment at an LAA1 site using the online booking platform, consisting of 12 questions to collect data on individual's motivations for and experiences of testing. RESULTS: Data were available for individuals who completed 12,516 tests in LAA1 and 12,327 tests in LAA2. Most individuals who engaged with testing were female, working age, white, and worked as early years or education staff, health and social care staff, and supermarket or food production staff. 1249 individuals completed the survey with 60% of respondents reported getting tested for work-related reasons. Individuals first heard about LFD testing through various channels including work, media, and word of mouth, and decided to get tested based on the ease and convenience of testing, workplace communications, and to identify asymptomatic cases to help stop the spread. Most tests were completed by individuals living in less deprived areas based on national deciles of deprivation. CONCLUSIONS: While national and local COVID-19 testing strategies have evolved, community and personal LFD testing remains a crucial pillar of the testing strategy. Future studies should collect quantitative and qualitative data from residents to most effectively shape testing offers based on the needs and preferences of their population.

Co-production of two whole-school sexual health interventions for English secondary schools: positive choices and project respect.

BACKGROUND: Whole-school interventions represent promising approaches to promoting adolescent sexual health, but they have not been rigorously trialled in the UK and it is unclear if such interventions are feasible for delivery in English secondary schools. The importance of involving intended beneficiaries, implementers and other key stakeholders in the co-production of such complex interventions prior to costly implementation and evaluation studies is widely recognised. However, practical accounts of such processes remain scarce. We report on co-production with specialist providers, students, school staff, and other practice and policy professionals of two new whole-school sexual heath interventions for implementation in English secondary schools. METHODS: Formative qualitative inquiry involving 75 students aged 13-15 and 23 school staff. A group of young people trained to advise on public health research were consulted on three occasions. Twenty-three practitioners and policy-makers shared their views at a stakeholder event. Detailed written summaries of workshops and events were prepared and key themes identified to inform the design of each intervention. RESULTS: Data confirmed acceptability of addressing unintended teenage pregnancy, sexual health and dating and relationships violence via multi-component whole-school interventions and of curriculum delivery by teachers (providing appropriate teacher selection). The need to enable flexibility for the timetabling of lessons and mode of parent communication; ensure content reflected the reality of young people's lives; and develop prescriptive teaching materials and robust school engagement strategies to reflect shrinking capacity for schools to implement public-health interventions were also highlighted and informed intervention refinements. Our research further points to some of the challenges and tensions involved in co-production where stakeholder capacity may be limited or their input may conflict with the logic of interventions or what is practicable within the constraints of a trial. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-component, whole-school approaches to addressing sexual health that involve teacher delivered curriculum may be feasible for implementation in English secondary schools. They must be adaptable to individual school settings; involve careful teacher selection; limit additional burden on staff; and accurately reflect the realities of young people's lives. Co-production can reduce research waste and may be particularly useful for developing complex interventions, like whole-school sexual health interventions, that must be adaptable to varying institutional contexts and address needs that change rapidly. When co-producing, potential limitations in relation to the representativeness of participants, the 'depth' of engagement necessary as well as the burden on participants and how they will be recompensed must be carefully considered. Having well-defined, transparent procedures for incorporating stakeholder input from the outset are also essential. Formal feasibility testing of both co-produced interventions in English secondary schools via cluster RCT is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Project Respect: ISRCTN12524938 . Positive Choices: ISRCTN65324176.

A life fulfilled: positively influencing physical activity in older adults - a systematic review and meta-ethnography.

BACKGROUND: Increasing physical activity in older adults remains a key public health priority in countries with a high burden of non-communicable disease, yet current interventions have failed to substantially increase population uptake with UK data suggesting that only half of 65-74 year olds report meeting recommended levels. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic and inductive qualitative synthesis of the large body of qualitative research describing what influences physical activity at this age, and older adults' experiences of physical activity. METHODS: A qualitative meta-ethnography was chosen as the study design as this inductive approach can provide novel insights and generate new theory about physical activity and ageing. Papers were identified by searching electronic databases and key citations. Peer-reviewed primary qualitative studies and systematic reviews were included if they met the following inclusion criteria: community-dwelling participants aged 60 years or older or in the retirement transition period; reporting on leisure-time physical activity; utilising a rigorous qualitative methodology. A line of argument approach was employed to generate a theory about how older adults think and feel about physical activity. RESULTS: Thirty-nine papers met the inclusion criteria and were synthesised. The emergent theory suggested transition to older age can challenge people's sense of self and their role in life. Physical activity can help in regaining feelings of purpose, of being needed in collective group activity, and by creating habitual routine and structure to the day. In overcoming real and perceived barriers, and by taking up or sustaining physical activities, older adults can further build self-esteem all of which contributes to a fulfilling older age. CONCLUSION: Current failures to increase population levels of physical activity in older adults may be explained by an approach overly focused on the health benefits of activity. Insights from this study suggest we need to reframe our approach to consider the wider set of goals and aspirations which are of greater personal importance to older adults, and future interventions should focus on how physical activity can contribute to life satisfaction, sense of purpose, and sense of role fulfilment in older age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered prospectively on PROSPERO on 29th March 2013: CRD42013003796 .

A pilot randomised controlled trial of physical activity facilitation for older adults: feasibility study findings.

BACKGROUND: More people are living longer lives leading to a growth in the population of older adults, many of whom have comorbidities and low levels of physical function. Physical activity in later life can prevent or delay age-related disability. Identifying a cost-effective means of increasing physical activity in older adults therefore remains an important public health priority.Physical Activity Facilitation (PAF) is an intervention shown to increase physical activity in adults with depression. The PAF model was modified for a population of older adults at risk of disability. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of undertaking a definitive RCT of the PAF intervention in the target population. METHODS: A pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) was delivered through primary care. Patients at risk of disability and who were not meeting recommended levels of physical activity were recruited through postal invitation and direct approach in the practice waiting room. Those meeting eligibility criteria were enrolled and randomised at a 2:1 ratio to the PAF intervention and control. Behaviour change techniques were used by facilitators with participants over the telephone and face-to-face for 6 months. Outcome measures including physical function, physical activity, depression, social support, and quality of life were collected at baseline and at 6 months. RESULTS: A high proportion of patients responded to the initial invitation (68%), yet many were ineligible due to high levels of self-reported physical activity and baseline physical function. Fifty-one participants were recruited to the trial, with an average age of 74 years (range 65-89), and there were high rates of adherence and retention to the study (94% follow-up at 6 months). The majority of outcome data collected from participants was complete; however, the validated scale used to measure self-reported physical activity was associated with high levels of missing data. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this pilot RCT suggest that it is feasible to deliver a definitive RCT of the PAF intervention in this population. Further work is required to improve the efficiency of recruitment and to minimise missing data from self-reported physical activity measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials ISRCTN80470273. Registered 25 October 2013.

Protocol for pilot cluster RCT of project respect: a school-based intervention to prevent dating and relationship violence and address health inequalities among young people.

BACKGROUND: Dating and relationship violence (DRV)-intimate partner violence during adolescence-encompasses physical, sexual and emotional abuse. DRV is associated with a range of adverse health outcomes including injuries, sexually transmitted infections, adolescent pregnancy and mental health issues. Experiencing DRV also predicts both victimisation and perpetration of partner violence in adulthood.Prevention targeting early adolescence is important because this is when dating behaviours begin, behavioural norms become established and DRV starts to manifest. Despite high rates of DRV victimisation in England, from 22 to 48% among girls and 12 to 27% among boys ages 14-17 who report intimate relationships, no RCTs of DRV prevention programmes have taken place in the UK. Informed by two school-based interventions that have shown promising results in RCTs in the USA-Safe Dates and Shifting Boundaries-Project Respect aims to optimise and pilot a DRV prevention programme for secondary schools in England. METHODS: Design: optimisation and pilot cluster RCT. Trial will include a process evaluation and assess the feasibility of conducting a phase III RCT with embedded economic evaluation. Cognitive interviewing will inform survey development.Participants: optimisation involves four schools and pilot RCT involves six (four intervention, two control). All are secondary schools in England. Baseline surveys conducted with students in years 8 and 9 (ages 12-14). Follow-up surveys conducted with the same cohort, 16 months post-baseline. Optimisation sessions to inform intervention and research methods will involve consultations with stakeholders, including young people.Intervention: school staff training, including guidance on reviewing school policies and addressing 'hotspots' for DRV and gender-based harassment; information for parents; informing students of a help-seeking app; and a classroom curriculum for students in years 9 and 10, including a student-led campaign.Primary outcome: the primary outcome of the pilot RCT will be whether progression to a phase III RCT is justified. Testing within the pilot will also determine which of two existing scales is optimal for assessing DRV victimisation and perpetration in a phase III RCT. DISCUSSION: This will be the first RCT of an intervention to prevent DRV in the UK. If findings indicate feasibility and acceptability, we will undertake planning for a phase III RCT of effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN 65324176. Registered 8 June 2017.

The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for a falls intervention in Parkinson's: A delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Falls are common in Parkinson's disease so any intervention that reduced falls risk would be of value. One potential intervention is the use of cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEi) drugs. OBJECTIVE: To establish the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for fall rates to inform the effect estimate for sample size calculations of future clinical trials. METHODS: We performed a Delphi study assembling a panel of experts in Parkinson's disease from academic and clinical medicine in order to reach a consensus of opinion. Responses from a panel were summarised and resent to the group, until consensus was reached. RESULTS: 780 clinicians, who had been caring for people with Parkinson's for an average of 14 years, were contacted via three routes. The median (Interquartile range (IQR)) MCID after round 1 was 25% (IQR 20-30%) which equates to the prevention of 5 (IQR 4-6) falls per year. Increasing consensus after round two confirmed the MCID of 25%, narrowing the (IQ) range to 20%-25%. This was unchanged when the panel were shown the number of participants that would need to be recruited to a clinical trial in order to achieve this difference. CONCLUSIONS: We have established that an expert panel of PD specialists consider that an intervention that demonstrated a 25% (IQR 20-25%) relative reduction in falls rate would be clinically meaningful. This estimate can be used to help determine the sample size for any future clinical trial.

Physical ACtivity facilitation for Elders (PACE): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: As people live longer, their risk of disability increases. Disability affects quality of life and increases health and social care costs. Preventing or delaying disability is therefore an important objective, and identifying an effective intervention could improve the lives of many older people. Observational and interventional evidence suggests that physical activity may reduce the risk of age-related disability, as assessed by physical performance measures. However it is unclear what approach is the most cost-effective intervention in changing long-term physical activity behaviour in older adults. A new theory-driven behavioural intervention has been developed, with the aim of increasing physical activity in the everyday lives of older adults at risk of disability. This pilot study tests the feasibility and acceptability of delivering this intervention to older adults. METHODS/DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial (RCT) design will be used in the pilot study. Sixty patients aged 65 years and older will be recruited from primary care practices. Patients will be eligible to participate if they are inactive, not disabled at baseline, are at risk of developing disability in the future (Short Physical Performance Battery score <10/12), and have no contraindications to physical activity. Following baseline measures, participants will be randomised in a 2:1 ratio to the intervention or to a control arm and all participants will be followed-up after 6 months. Those randomised to the intervention arm will receive sessions with a trained Physical Activity Facilitator, delivering an intervention based on self-determination theory. Control participants receive a booklet on healthy ageing. The main outcomes of interest are recruitment, adherence, retention and acceptability. Data will also be collected on: self-report and accelerometer-recorded physical activity; physical performance; depression; wellbeing; cognitive function; social support; quality of life, healthcare use, and attitudes to physical activity. A mixed-methods process evaluation will run alongside the RCT. DISCUSSION: The intervention, if effective, has the potential to reduce disability and improve quality of life in older adults. Before proceeding to a full-scale trial a pilot trial is necessary to ensure intervention feasibility and acceptability, and that the intervention shows evidence of promise. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN80470273 . Registered 25 October 2013.

Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: summary of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Vaccination of immunocompromised patients is recommended in many national guidelines to protect against severe or complicated influenza infection. However, due to uncertainties over the evidence base, implementation is frequently patchy and dependent on individual clinical discretion. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence for influenza vaccination in this patient group. Healthcare databases and grey literature were searched and screened for eligibility. Data extraction and assessments of risk of bias were undertaken in duplicate, and results were synthesised narratively and using meta-analysis where possible. Our data show that whilst the serological response following vaccination of immunocompromised patients is less vigorous than in healthy controls, clinical protection is still meaningful, with only mild variation in adverse events between aetiological groups. Although we encountered significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity in many of our meta-analyses, we advocate that immunocompromised patients should be targeted for influenza vaccination.

Vaccination of healthcare workers to protect patients at increased risk of acute respiratory disease: summary of a systematic review.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of exposure to respiratory pathogens and may transmit infection to vulnerable patients. This study summarises a recent systematic review, which aimed to assess evidence that influenza or pneumococcal vaccination of HCWs provides indirect protection for those patients most at risk of severe or complicated acute respiratory infection. A number of healthcare databases and sources of grey literature were searched using a predefined strategy, and citations screened for eligibility in accordance with specified inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using validated tools and results summarised qualitatively. Twenty papers were included in the final review, all of which considered influenza vaccination of HCW. As such, planned subanalysis of pneumococcal vaccination was discarded. The majority of primary research studies included (11/14) were conducted in long-term care facilities, but there was marked heterogeneity in terms of the population, intervention/exposure and outcomes considered. Consistency in the direction of effect was observed across several different outcome measures, suggesting that influenza vaccination of HCWs is likely to offer some protection. Further evidence is, however, required from acute care settings.

Vaccination of health care workers to protect patients at increased risk for acute respiratory disease.

Health care workers (HCWs) may transmit respiratory infection to patients. We assessed evidence for the effectiveness of vaccinating HCWs to provide indirect protection for patients at risk for severe or complicated disease after acute respiratory infection. We searched electronic health care databases and sources of gray literature by using a predefined strategy. Risk for bias was assessed by using validated tools, and results were synthesized by using a narrative approach. Seventeen of the 12,352 identified citations met the full inclusion criteria, and 3 additional articles were identified from reference or citation tracking. All considered influenza vaccination of HCWs, and most were conducted in long-term residential care settings. Consistency in the direction of effect was observed across several different outcome measures, suggesting a likely protective effect for patients in residential care settings. However, evidence was insufficient for us to confidently extrapolate this to other at-risk patient groups.

Physical activity in middle-age and dementia in later life: findings from a prospective cohort of men in Caerphilly, South Wales and a meta-analysis.

Previous studies suggest that physical activity may be protective for dementia and cognitive impairment. We report findings comparing leisure-time and work-related physical activity from the Caerphilly Prospective study (CaPS) with dementia and cognitive impairment not dementia (CIND) after around 16 years of follow-up. We synthesized our results with a meta-analysis specifically testing if length of follow-up was associated with the size of any association. Age-adjusted models found no real association with dementia, and if anything increased risk for CIND (odds ratio (OR) highest versus lowest tertile 2.61, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.31), though this was attenuated after adjustment for other confounders (OR highest versus lowest tertile 1.38, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.44). There was no evidence that this differed by type (vascular versus non-vascular) of cognitive disease. Meta-analysis of other published effect estimates showed a protective effect of physical activity on cognitive impairment (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.85) but with significant heterogeneity which was partially explained by length of follow up (p = 0.03). A protective association was also seen for dementia (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65, 0.94), which did not appear to be related to follow-up length but there was evidence of small study bias (p = 0.002) suggesting an absence of small null studies. The apparent protective effects of physical activity on cognitive health may partially reflect reverse causation and current estimates may be overly optimistic in terms of cognitive benefits.

Influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients: systematic review and meta-analysis from a public health policy perspective.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised patients are vulnerable to severe or complicated influenza infection. Vaccination is widely recommended for this group. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients in terms of preventing influenza-like illness and laboratory confirmed influenza, serological response and adverse events. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Electronic databases and grey literature were searched and records were screened against eligibility criteria. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate. Results were synthesised narratively and meta-analyses were conducted where feasible. Heterogeneity was assessed using I(2) and publication bias was assessed using Begg's funnel plot and Egger's regression test. Many of the 209 eligible studies included an unclear or high risk of bias. Meta-analyses showed a significant effect of preventing influenza-like illness (odds ratio [OR]=0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.16-0.34; p<0.001) and laboratory confirmed influenza infection (OR=0.15; 95% CI=0.03-0.63; p=0.01) through vaccinating immunocompromised patie nts compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls. We found no difference in the odds of influenza-like illness compared to vaccinated immunocompetent controls. The pooled odds of seroconversion were lower in vaccinated patients compared to immunocompetent controls for seasonal influenza A(H1N1), A(H3N2) and B. A similar trend was identified for seroprotection. Meta-analyses of seroconversion showed higher odds in vaccinated patients compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls, although this reached significance for influenza B only. Publication bias was not detected and narrative synthesis supported our findings. No consistent evidence of safety concerns was identified. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Infection prevention and control strategies should recommend vaccinating immunocompromised patients. Potential for bias and confounding and the presence of heterogeneity mean the evidence reviewed is generally weak, although the directions of effects are consistent. Areas for further research are identified.