Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 37
Filter
1.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil ; 105(4): 639-646, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37730193

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) compared with moderate intensity steady-state (MISS) training in people with coronary artery disease (CAD) attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR). DESIGN: Secondary cost-effectiveness analysis of a prospective, assessor-blind, parallel group, multi-center RCT. SETTING: Six outpatient National Health Service cardiac rehabilitation centers in England and Wales, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 382 participants with CAD (N=382). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to twice-weekly usual care (n=195) or HIIT (n=187) for 8 weeks. Usual care was moderate intensity continuous exercise (60%-80% maximum capacity, MISS), while HIIT consisted of 10 × 1-minute intervals of vigorous exercise (>85% maximum capacity) interspersed with 1-minute periods of recovery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of the HIIT or MISS UK trial. Health related quality of life was measured with the EQ-5D-5L to estimate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were estimated with health service resource use and intervention delivery costs. Cost-utility analysis measured the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Bootstrapping assessed the probability of HIIT being cost-effective according to the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) threshold value (£20,000 per QALY). Missing data were imputed. Uncertainty was estimated using probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Assumptions were tested using univariate/1-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: 124 (HIIT, n=59; MISS, n=65) participants completed questionnaires at baseline, 8 weeks, and 12 months. Mean combined health care use and delivery cost was £676 per participant for HIIT, and £653 for MISS. QALY changes were 0.003 and -0.013, respectively. For complete cases, the ICER was £1448 per QALY for HIIT compared with MISS. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, the probability of HIIT being cost-effective was 96% (95% CI, 0.90 to 0.95). CONCLUSION: For people with CAD attending CR, HIIT was cost-effective compared with MISS. These findings are important to policy makers, commissioners, and service providers across the health care sector.


Subject(s)
Cardiac Rehabilitation , Coronary Artery Disease , High-Intensity Interval Training , Humans , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cost-Effectiveness Analysis , Quality of Life , State Medicine , Prospective Studies , United Kingdom , Quality-Adjusted Life Years
2.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 283: 149-157, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36906411

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To explore the cost-effectiveness of a novel PPH device as compared with usual care. DESIGN: A decision analytical model was used to explore the cost-effectiveness of the PPH Butterfly device compared with usual care. This was part of a United Kingdom, UK, clinical trial ISRCTN15452399 using a matched historical cohort who had standard PPH management without the use of the PPH Butterfly device. The economic evaluation was conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. SETTING: Liverpool Women's Hospital, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 57 women with 113 matched controls. INTERVENTION: The PPH Butterfly is a novel device that has been invented and developed in the UK to facilitate bimanual compression of the uterus in the treatment of PPH. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcome measures included healthcare costs, blood loss, and maternal morbidity events. RESULTS: Mean treatment costs in the Butterfly cohort were £3,459.66 as compared with standard care £3,223.93. Treatment with the Butterfly device resulted in decreased total blood loss in comparison with standard care. The Butterfly device had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3,795.78 per PPH progression avoided (defined as ≤ 1000 ml additional blood loss from device insertion point). If the NHS is prepared to pay £8,500 per PPH progression avoided, then the Butterfly device is cost-effective with a probability of 87 percent. In the PPH Butterfly treatment arm there were 9% fewer cases of massive obstetric haemorrhage (severe PPH of more than 2000mls or more than 4 units of blood transfusion required) recorded as compared with the standard care historical cohort. As a low-cost device, the PPH Butterfly device is cost-effective but can be cost-saving to the NHS. CONCLUSION: The PPH pathway can result in high-cost resource use such as blood transfusion or high dependence unit hospital stays. The Butterfly device is a relative low-cost device in a UK NHS setting with a high probability of being cost-effective. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) can use this evidence in considering the adoption of innovative technologies such as the Butterfly device in the NHS. Extrapolation on an international scale to lower and middle-income countries could prevent mortality associated with PPH.


Subject(s)
Butterflies , Postpartum Hemorrhage , Pregnancy , Animals , Female , Humans , Postpartum Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Postpartum Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Cost-Benefit Analysis , State Medicine , United Kingdom
3.
Eur J Prev Cardiol ; 30(9): 745-755, 2023 07 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36753063

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of international consensus regarding the prescription of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) for people with coronary artery disease (CAD) attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR). AIMS: To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of low-volume HIIT compared with moderate-intensity steady-state (MISS) exercise training for people with CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a multi-centre RCT, recruiting 382 patients from 6 outpatient CR centres. Participants were randomized to twice-weekly HIIT (n = 187) or MISS (n = 195) for 8 weeks. HIIT consisted of 10 × 1 min intervals of vigorous exercise (>85% maximum capacity) interspersed with 1 min periods of recovery. MISS was 20-40 min of moderate-intensity continuous exercise (60-80% maximum capacity). The primary outcome was the change in cardiorespiratory fitness [peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak)] at 8 week follow-up. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular disease risk markers, cardiac structure and function, adverse events, and health-related quality of life. At 8 weeks, VO2peak improved more with HIIT (2.37 mL.kg-1.min-1; SD, 3.11) compared with MISS (1.32 mL.kg-1.min-1; SD, 2.66). After adjusting for age, sex, and study site, the difference between arms was 1.04 mL.kg-1.min-1 (95% CI, 0.38 to 1.69; P = 0.002). Only one serious adverse event was possibly related to HIIT. CONCLUSIONS: In stable CAD, low-volume HIIT improved cardiorespiratory fitness more than MISS by a clinically meaningful margin. Low-volume HIIT is a safe, well-tolerated, and clinically effective intervention that produces short-term improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness. It should be considered by all CR programmes as an adjunct or alternative to MISS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02784873. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02784873.


Cardiac rehabilitation exercise training can improve cardiorespiratory fitness and quality of life for people with coronary artery disease, but sometimes, it is not effective. The intensity of the exercise training may be important. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to test if moderate-intensity exercise or high-intensity exercise was better.High-intensity interval training was more effective than moderate-intensity exercise training for improving cardiorespiratory fitness in people with coronary artery disease attending cardiac rehabilitation.High-intensity interval training was safe and well tolerated.


Subject(s)
Cardiac Rehabilitation , Cardiorespiratory Fitness , Coronary Artery Disease , High-Intensity Interval Training , Humans , Cardiac Rehabilitation/methods , Quality of Life , High-Intensity Interval Training/methods , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis
4.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol ; 283: 142-148, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36732101

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the safety, efficacy, and acceptability of a new device designed to facilitate uterine compression in women with postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). METHODS: A prospective, phase two clinical device trial with concurrent qualitative study, conducted in a UK consultant obstetric unit. The device was used in addition to standard care in women unresponsive to initial oxytocin therapy. The primary effectiveness outcome was additional blood loss of over 1000mls, whilst safety was assessed through adverse events. Interviews assessed device feasibility and acceptability, and were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: We recruited 57 women with clinical PPH after vaginal birth; 67% were primiparous and 47% had undergone operative birth. All but two (96%) had atony as a cause of the haemorrhage; in addition, 30% also had bleeding from lacerations and 11% had retained tissue. After device use, only one woman had additional blood loss over 1000mls, although 3 women (7%) needed a Bakri balloon and 14% received a blood transfusion. All but one clinician felt that the device was easy to use. Clinicians stated that the device assisted management in 85% of cases. All 56 women who responded stated that if they bled in a future birth they would want the device to be used again. There were no serious adverse events related to the device. However, 3 events were judged as 'possibly' being caused by the device - 2 minor vaginal grazes and one postnatal episiotomy infection and breakdown. Lax vaginal tissue complicated the use of the device in three women. In 47 interviews, participants, birth partners, clinician users and attending midwives viewed the device positively. Clinicians found it useful as a way of stopping blood loss and as an aid to diagnose the source of bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: The PPH Butterfly may provide a rapid, acceptable and effective treatment for postpartum haemorrhage. Clinical Trial Registration prospective with ISRCTN15452399 11/09/2017 (www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15452399).


Subject(s)
Postpartum Hemorrhage , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Postpartum Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Prospective Studies , Oxytocin/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
5.
Trials ; 23(1): 99, 2022 Jan 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35101110

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Neovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration (AMD) can be associated with large submacular haemorrhage (SMH). The natural history of SMH is very poor, with typically marked and permanent loss of central vision in the affected eye. Practice surveys indicate varied management approaches including observation, intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy, intravitreal gas to pneumatically displace SMH, intravitreal alteplase (tissue plasminogen activator, TPA) to dissolve the clot, subretinal TPA via vitrectomy, and varying combinations thereof. No large, published, randomised controlled trials have compared these management options. METHODS: TIGER is a phase 3, pan-European, two-group, active-control, observer-masked, superiority, randomised controlled surgical trial. Eligible participants have large, fovea-involving SMH of no more than 15 days duration due to treatment-naïve or previously treated neovascular AMD, including idiopathic polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy and retinal angiomatous proliferation. A total of 210 participants are randomised in a 1:1 ratio to pars plana vitrectomy, off-label subretinal TPA up to 25 µg in 0.25 ml, intravitreal 20% sulfahexafluoride gas and intravitreal aflibercept, or intravitreal aflibercept monotherapy. Aflibercept 2 mg is administered to both groups monthly for 3 doses, then 2-monthly to month 12. The primary efficacy outcome is the proportion of participants with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) gain of ≥ 10 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy (ETDRS) letters in the study eye at month 12. Secondary efficacy outcomes (at 6 and 12 months unless noted otherwise) are proportion of participants with a BCVA gain of ≥ 10 ETDRS letters at 6 months, mean ETDRS BCVA, Radner maximum reading speed, National Eye Institute 25-item Visual Function Questionnaire composite score, EQ-5D-5L with vision bolt-on score, Short Warwick and Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing score, scotoma size on Humphrey field analyser, and presence/absence of subfoveal fibrosis and/or atrophy and area of fibrosis/atrophy using independent reading centre multimodal image analysis (12 months only). Key safety outcomes are adverse events, serious adverse events, and important medical events, coded using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities Preferred Terms. DISCUSSION: The best management of SMH is unknown. TIGER aims to establish if the benefits of SMH surgery outweigh the risks, relative to aflibercept monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04663750 ; EudraCT: 2020-004917-10.


Subject(s)
Tissue Plasminogen Activator , Wet Macular Degeneration , Angiogenesis Inhibitors/adverse effects , Fluorescein Angiography , Humans , Intravitreal Injections , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Retinal Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Retinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Tissue Plasminogen Activator/adverse effects , Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A , Visual Acuity , Vitrectomy
6.
Lancet ; 400 Suppl 1: S59, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36930005

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The percentage of people in Wales experiencing severe mental health issues more than doubled during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, hundreds of people in Wales wait more than a year for help with their mental health. The EmotionMind Dynamic (EMD) programme is a six-session programme over 3 months involving self-reflective introspection, self-analysis, problem solving, goal setting, and action taking. Furthermore, this programme challenges negative self-perception and increases self-awareness, self-confidence, and self-esteem. We aimed to estimate the social return on investment of EMD lifestyle coaching, both face-to-face and online formats, by comparing the costs of running the programme with the social value generated from clients as measured by improvement in self-confidence and mental wellbeing. METHODS: We included 15 clients from previous face-to-face EMD coaching and 17 clients from a new online version of EMD. For face-to-face clients, quantitative data were collected retrospectively with a one-time only questionnaire. For new online clients, quantitative data were collected from baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Qualitative data were collected after intervention from interviews with both groups. Outcomes from questionnaires for both groups included changes in mental wellbeing measured with the Short Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS) and self-efficacy assessed with the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES). FINDINGS: For every £1 invested, lifestyle coaching generated social values ranging from £4·12 to £7·08 for face-to-face clients compared with £2·37 to £3·35 for online participants. Quantitative and qualitative data from questionnaires and interviews indicated that many clients had improved mental wellbeing and self-efficacy. All 15 face-to-face clients and 11 (65%) of 17 online clients reported an increase of 5 points or more on the SWEMWBS questionnaire. Similarly, all 15 face-to-face clients and ten (59%) of 17 online clients reported an increase of 5 points or more on the GSES questionnaire. INTERPRETATION: The results showed that both face-to-face and online formats of the EMD lifestyle coaching generated a positive social return on investment ratios. With continued long waiting lists for people with mental health challenges, face-to-face and online lifestyle coaching might become more essential across statutory, private, and third sectors to meet the growing demand for mental health support. FUNDING: Accelerate: the Welsh Health Innovation and Technology Accelerator.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mentoring , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Life Style
7.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 21(1): 801, 2021 Aug 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34384422

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Selective lamellar corneal transplantation (keratoplasty) has overtaken full thickness penetrating keratoplasty as the graft choice for endothelial failure. Even more recently eye bank prepared tissues are becoming increasing popular as a way to reduce the risks of tissue loss and stress during endothelial keratoplasty preparation in the surgical theatre. This study compares costs between surgeon and eye bank prepared tissues for Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) and Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). METHODS: Retrospective study conducted at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital including endothelial keratoplasties with a minimum of 6 months follow-up time. Cost analysis included surgical expenses, tissue acquisition fees, cost of patient's ward admission and out-patient expenses, including cost of re-bubbling procedures, costs of visits, anterior segment imaging and optometrist visits within the first 6 months follow-up. RESULTS: Ninety-eight eyes of 98 patients were included in the study of which 42 underwent DSAEK surgery and 56 DMEK surgery. Cost analysis of surgical expenses in the DSAEK group showed a significant difference between using surgeon prepared and eye bank prepared tissue (£3866 ± 296 and £4389 ± 360, respectively; p < 0.01) and the same was found in the DMEK group (£3682 ± 167 and £4162 ± 167 for surgeon prepared and eye bank prepared tissues, respectively; p < 0.01). Cost of out-patient visits did not differ significantly in either group. CONCLUSIONS: At the Royal Liverpool University Hospital, eye bank prepared tissues had higher surgical expenses compared to those prepared by the surgeon, while the post-operative care expenses were similar between the two groups.


Subject(s)
Descemet Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty , Surgeons , Costs and Cost Analysis , Eye Banks , Humans , Retrospective Studies
8.
BMC Pediatr ; 20(1): 6, 2020 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31906913

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common experience in adolescence, with up to 44% of adolescents reporting chronic pain. For a significant minority, severe pain becomes an ongoing disabling problem. Treatment of adolescent chronic pain aims to reduce the impact of pain on adolescents' lives. Efficient, accurate assessment of the impact of pain is essential to treatment. The 'Bath Adolescent Pain Questionnaire' (BAPQ) is a psychometrically robust multidimensional self-report measure of adolescent functioning. Whilst widely used, the paper-based format of the BAPQ can present completion difficulties for adolescents experiencing chronic pain. To increase the accessibility and clinical utility of the BAPQ, an electronic version of the measure is needed. This study assesses the usability and feasibility of a computerized version of this measure (BAPQ-C) in an adolescent chronic pain population. METHODS: Fourteen adolescents (13 females; 13-16 years) were recruited from a hospital-based residential pain management programme. Participants completed a qualitative 'thinking aloud task' whilst completing the BAPQ-C. and, an acceptability questionnaire regarding the BAPQ-C. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, a widely used qualitative method of data analysis . RESULTS: Two themes labelled 'engagement and technological appeal' and 'accessibility and independence' were generated. Themes revealed numerous factors contributing to participants' preference for the BAPQ-C compared with the paper version of the BAPQ. Participants reported that the BAPQ-C was 'quicker' and 'easier' to complete than the BAPQ. Functional aspects of the BAPQ-C which included use of a touch screen rather than a pen and paper, font colours/styles, the zoom function and the spellchecker, provided participants with improved access. This subsequently increased participants' independence and confidence when completing the measure. CONCLUSION: The BAPQ-C is a feasible multidimensional tool for the assessment of functioning in adolescents who experience chronic pain. It was well-received by participants who were able to complete the measure more quickly, independently and confidently than the paper-based BAPQ. Increased speed, ease and accuracy of completion make the BAPQ-C an ideal tool for use in busy clinical and research settings. Findings highlight the potential benefits of adopting the BAPQ-C when assessing the impact of chronic pain on adolescents in clinic and home-based settings.


Subject(s)
Chronic Pain , Adolescent , Chronic Pain/diagnosis , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Pain Management , Pain Measurement , Surveys and Questionnaires
9.
BJGP Open ; 2(3): bjgpopen18X101595, 2018 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30564728

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: GPs can play an important role in achieving earlier cancer diagnosis to improve patient outcomes, for example through prompt use of the urgent suspected cancer referral pathway. Barriers to early diagnosis include individual practitioner variation in knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, professional expectations, and norms. AIM: This programme of work (Wales Interventions and Cancer Knowledge about Early Diagnosis [WICKED]) will develop a behaviour change intervention to expedite diagnosis through primary care and contribute to improved cancer outcomes. DESIGN & SETTING: Non-experimental mixed-method study with GPs and primary care practice teams from Wales. METHOD: Four work packages will inform the development of the behaviour change intervention. Work package 1 will identify relevant evidence-based interventions (systematic review of reviews) and will determine why interventions do or do not work, for whom, and in what circumstances (realist review). Work package 2 will assess cancer knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour of GPs, as well as primary care teams' perspectives on cancer referral and investigation (GP survey, discrete choice experiment [DCE], interviews, and focus groups). Work package 3 will synthesise findings from earlier work packages using the behaviour change wheel as an overarching theoretical framework to guide intervention development. Work package 4 will test the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and determine methods for measuring costs and effects of subsequent behaviour change in a randomised feasibility trial. RESULTS: The findings will inform the design of a future effectiveness trial, with concurrent economic evaluation, aimed at earlier diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive, evidence-based programme will develop a complex GP behaviour change intervention to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer, and may be applicable to countries with similar healthcare systems.

10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29760941

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health economic evaluations rely on the accurate measurement of health service resource use in order to calculate costs. These are usually measured with patient completed questionnaires using instruments such as the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI). These rely on participants' recall and can be burdensome to complete. Health service activity data are routinely captured by electronic databases.The aim was to test methods for obtaining these data and compare with those data collected using the CSRI, within a feasibility study of an enhanced rehabilitation intervention following hip fracture (Fracture in the Elderly Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation: FEMuR). METHODS: Primary care activity including prescribing data was obtained from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank and secondary care activity (Emergency Department attendances, out-patient visits and in-patient days) directly from Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board (BCUHB), North Wales, UK. These data were compared with patient responses from the CSRI using descriptive statistics and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: It was possible to compare health service resource use data for 49 out of 61 participants in the FEMuR study. For emergency department (ED) attendances, records matched in 23 (47%) cases, 21 (43%) over-reported on electronic records compared with CSRI and five participants (10%) under-reported, with an overall ICC of 0.42. For out-patient episodes, records matched in only six cases, 28 participants over-reported on electronic records compared with CSRI and 15 (12%) under-reported, with an overall ICC of only 0.27. For in-patient days, records matched exactly in only five cases (10%), but if an error margin of 7 days was allowed, then agreement rose to 39 (66%) cases, and the overall ICC for all data was 0.88.It was only possible to compare prescribing data for 12 participants. For prescribing data, the SAIL data reported 117 out of 118 items (99%) and the CSRI only 89 (79%) items. CONCLUSIONS: The use of routinely collected data has the potential to improve the efficiency of trials and other studies. Although the methodology to make the data available has been demonstrated, the data obtained was incomplete and the validity of using this method remains to be demonstrated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration: ISRCTN22464643 Registered 21 July 2014.

11.
J Rehabil Med ; 50(7): 636-642, 2018 Jul 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29756158

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: As part of a wider feasibility study, the feasibility of gaining older patients' views for hip fracture rehabilitation services was tested using a discrete choice experiment in a UK context. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment is a method used for eliciting individuals' preferences about goods and services. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: The discrete choice experiment was administered to 41 participants who had experienced hip fracture (mean age 79.3 years; standard deviation (SD) 7.5 years), recruited from a larger feasibility study exploring a new multidisciplinary rehabilitation for hip fracture. METHODS: Attributes and levels for this discrete choice experiment were identified from a systematic review and focus groups. The questionnaire was administered at the 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Participants indicated a significant preference for a fully-qualified physiotherapist or occupational therapist to deliver the rehabilitation sessions (ß = 0·605, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.462-0.879), and for their rehabilitation session to last less than 90 min (ß = -0.192, 95% CI -0.381 to -0.051). CONCLUSION: The design of the discrete choice experiment using attributes associated with service configuration could have the potential to inform service implementation, and assist rehabilitation service design that incorporates the preferences of patients.


Subject(s)
Hip Fractures/rehabilitation , Aged , Choice Behavior , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires
12.
Health Technol Assess ; 21(44): 1-528, 2017 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28836493

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral fracture is a major health problem in old age, with annual UK health and social care costs of £2.3B. Rehabilitation has the potential to maximise functional recovery and maintain independent living, but evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To develop an enhanced community-based rehabilitation package following surgical treatment for proximal femoral fracture and to assess acceptability and feasibility for a future definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) and economic evaluation. DESIGN: Phase I - realist review, survey and focus groups to develop the rehabilitation package. Phase II - parallel-group, randomised (using a dynamic adaptive algorithm) feasibility study with focus groups and an anonymised cohort study. SETTING: Recruitment was from orthopaedic wards of three acute hospitals in the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, North Wales. The intervention was delivered in the community following hospital discharge. PARTICIPANTS: Older adults (aged ≥ 65 years) who had received surgical treatment for hip fracture, lived independently prior to fracture, had mental capacity (assessed by the clinical team) and received rehabilitation in the North Wales area. INTERVENTIONS: Participants received usual care (control) or usual care plus an enhanced rehabilitation package (intervention). Usual care was variable and consisted of multidisciplinary rehabilitation delivered by the acute hospital, community hospital and community services depending on need and availability. The intervention was designed to enhance rehabilitation by improving patients' self-efficacy and increasing the amount and quality of patients' practice of physical exercise and activities of daily living. It consisted of a patient-held information workbook, a goal-setting diary and six additional therapy sessions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the Barthel Activities of Daily Living (BADL) index. The secondary outcome measures included the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people, General Self-Efficacy Scale, Falls Efficacy Scale - International (FES-I), Self-Efficacy for Exercise scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and service use measures. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and at 3-month follow-up by blinded researchers. RESULTS: Sixty-two participants were recruited (23% of those who were eligible), 61 were randomised (control, n = 32; intervention, n = 29) and 49 (79%) were followed up at 3 months. Compared with the cohort study, a younger, healthier subpopulation was recruited. There were minimal differences in most outcomes between the two groups, including the BADL index, with an adjusted mean difference of 0.5 (Cohen's d = 0.29). The intervention group showed a medium-sized improvement on the NEADL scale relative to the control group, with an adjusted mean difference between groups of 3.0 (Cohen's d = 0.63). There was a trend for greater improvement in FES-I and HADS in the intervention group, but with small effect sizes, with an adjusted mean difference of 4.2 (Cohen's d = 0.31) and 1.3 (Cohen's d = 0.20), respectively. The cost of delivering the intervention was £231 per patient. There was a possible small relative increase in quality-adjusted life-years in the intervention group. No serious adverse events relating to the intervention were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Trial methods were feasible in terms of eligibility, recruitment and retention, although recruitment was challenging. The NEADL scale was more responsive than the BADL index, suggesting that the intervention could enable participants to regain better levels of independence compared with usual care. This should be tested in a definitive Phase III RCT. There were two main limitations of the study: the feasibility study lacked power to test for differences between the groups and a ceiling effect was observed in the primary measure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN22464643. 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. 21, No. 44. See the NIHR Journals Library for further project information.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis/economics , Hip Fractures/rehabilitation , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Activities of Daily Living , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , United Kingdom
13.
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt ; 37(4): 370-384, 2017 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28497480

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To compare the performance of near vision activities using additional portable electronic vision enhancement systems (p-EVES), to using optical magnifiers alone, by individuals with visual impairment. METHODS: A total of 100 experienced optical aid users were recruited from low vision clinics at Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester, UK, to a prospective two-arm cross-over randomised controlled trial. Reading, performance of near vision activities, and device usage were evaluated at baseline; and at the end of each study arm (Intervention A: existing optical aids plus p-EVES; Intervention B: optical aids only) which was after 2 and 4 months. RESULTS: A total of 82 participants completed the study. Overall, maximum reading speed for high contrast sentences was not statistically significantly different for optical aids and p-EVES, although the critical print size and threshold print size which could be accessed with p-EVES were statistically significantly smaller (p < 0.001 in both cases). The optical aids were used for a larger number of tasks (p < 0.001), and used more frequently (p < 0.001). However p-EVES were preferred for leisure reading by 70% of participants, and allowed longer duration of reading (p < 0.001). During the study arm when they had a p-EVES device, participants were able to carry out more tasks independently (p < 0.001), and reported less difficulty with a range of near vision activities (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study provides evidence that p-EVES devices can play a useful role in supplementing the range of low vision aids used to reduce activity limitation for near vision tasks.


Subject(s)
Eyeglasses , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods , Sensory Aids , Vision, Low/rehabilitation , Visual Acuity , Visually Impaired Persons/rehabilitation , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Reading , Vision, Low/physiopathology , Young Adult
14.
Acta Ophthalmol ; 95(5): e415-e423, 2017 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27682985

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of portable electronic vision enhancement system (p-EVES) devices compared with optical low vision aids (LVAs), for improving near vision visual function, quality of life and well-being of people with a visual impairment. METHODS: An AB/BA randomized crossover trial design was used. Eighty-two participants completed the study. Participants were current users of optical LVAs who had not tried a p-EVES device before and had a stable visual impairment. The trial intervention was the addition of a p-EVES device to the participant's existing optical LVA(s) for 2 months, and the control intervention was optical LVA use only, for 2 months. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were conducted from a societal perspective. RESULTS: The mean cost of the p-EVES intervention was £448. Carer costs were £30 (4.46 hr) less for the p-EVES intervention compared with the LVA only control. The mean difference in total costs was £417. Bootstrapping gave an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £736 (95% CI £481 to £1525) for a 7% improvement in near vision visual function. Cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ranged from £56 991 (lower 95% CI = £19 801) to £66 490 (lower 95% CI = £23 055). Sensitivity analysis varying the commercial price of the p-EVES device reduced ICERs by up to 75%, with cost per QALYs falling below £30 000. CONCLUSION: Portable electronic vision enhancement system (p-EVES) devices are likely to be a cost-effective use of healthcare resources for improving near vision visual function, but this does not translate into cost-effective improvements in quality of life, capability or well-being.


Subject(s)
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/instrumentation , Myopia/rehabilitation , Optical Devices , Quality of Life , Sensory Aids/economics , Vision, Low/rehabilitation , Visual Acuity , Aged , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross-Over Studies , Equipment Design , Female , Humans , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/economics , Male , Myopia/physiopathology , Reading , Surveys and Questionnaires , Visually Impaired Persons/rehabilitation
15.
BMJ Open ; 6(10): e012422, 2016 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27707828

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a rigorous feasibility study for a future definitive parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT) and economic evaluation of an enhanced rehabilitation package for hip fracture. SETTING: Recruitment from 3 acute hospitals in North Wales. Intervention delivery in the community. PARTICIPANTS: Older adults (aged ≥65) who received surgical treatment for hip fracture, lived independently prior to fracture, had mental capacity (assessed by clinical team) and received rehabilitation in the North Wales area. INTERVENTION: Remote randomisation to usual care (control) or usual care+enhanced rehabilitation package (intervention), including six additional home-based physiotherapy sessions delivered by a physiotherapist or technical instructor, novel information workbook and goal-setting diary. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: Barthel Activities of Daily Living (BADL). Secondary measures included Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living scale (NEADL), EQ-5D, ICECAP capability, a suite of self-efficacy, psychosocial and service-use measures and costs. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and 3-month follow-up by blinded researchers. RESULTS: 62 participants were recruited, 61 randomised (control 32; intervention 29) and 49 (79%) completed 3-month follow-up. Minimal differences occurred between the 2 groups for most outcomes, including BADL (adjusted mean difference 0.5). The intervention group showed a medium-sized improvement in the NEADL relative to the control group, with an adjusted mean difference between groups of 3.0 (Cohen's d 0.63), and a trend for greater improvement in self-efficacy and mental health, but with small effect sizes. The mean cost of delivering the intervention was £231 per patient. There was a small relative improvement in quality-adjusted life year in the intervention group. No serious adverse events relating to the intervention were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The trial methods were feasible in terms of eligibility, recruitment and retention. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the rehabilitation package should be tested in a phase III RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN22464643; Results.


Subject(s)
Hip Fractures/rehabilitation , Physical Therapy Modalities , Activities of Daily Living , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Feasibility Studies , Female , Home Care Services/economics , Humans , Male , Physical Therapy Modalities/economics , Quality of Life , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Self Efficacy , Wales
16.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci ; 57(10): 4247-54, 2016 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27548898

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare two interventions for depression, problem solving treatment (PST) and referral to the patient's physician, with a waiting-list control group in people with sight loss and depressive symptoms. METHODS: This was an assessor-masked, exploratory, multicenter, randomized clinical trial, with concurrent economic analysis. Of 1008 consecutive attendees at 14 low-vision rehabilitation centers in Britain, 43% (n = 430) screened positive for depressive symptoms on the Geriatric Depression Scale and 85 of these attendees participated in the trial. Eligible participants were randomized in the ratio 1:1:1 to PST, referral to their physician, or a waiting-list control arm. PST is a manualized talking intervention delivered by a trained therapist who teaches people over six to eight sessions to implement a seven-step method for solving their problems. Referral to the physician involved sending a referral letter to the person's physician, encouraging him or her to consider treatment according to the stepped care protocol recommended by the U.K.'s National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. The primary outcome was change in depressive symptoms (6 months after baseline) as determined by the Beck Depression Inventory. RESULTS: At 6 months, Beck Depression Inventory scores reduced by 1.05 (SD 8.85), 2.11 (SD 7.60), and 2.68 (SD 7.93) in the waiting-list control, referral, and PST arms, respectively. The cost per patient of the PST intervention was £1176 in Wales and £1296 in London. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptoms improved most in the PST group and least in the control group. However, the change was small and the uncertainty of the measurements relatively large.


Subject(s)
Behavior Therapy/methods , Depression/therapy , Problem Solving/physiology , Vision, Low/complications , Aged , Behavior Therapy/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Depression/complications , Depression/diagnosis , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , London , Male , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Single-Blind Method , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Vision, Low/therapy
17.
PLoS One ; 11(4): e0152843, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27093052

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Joint reminiscence groups, involving people with dementia and family carers together, are popular, but the evidence-base is limited. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups as compared to usual care. METHODS: This multi-centre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial had two parallel arms: intervention group and usual-care control group. A restricted dynamic method of randomisation was used, with an overall allocation ratio of 1:1, restricted to ensure viable sized intervention groups. Assessments, blind to treatment allocation, were carried out at baseline, three months and ten months (primary end-point), usually in the person's home. Participants were recruited in eight centres, mainly through NHS Memory Clinics and NHS community mental health teams. Included participants were community resident people with mild to moderate dementia (DSM-IV), who had a relative or other care-giver in regular contact, to act as informant and willing and able to participate in intervention. 71% carers were spouses. 488 people with dementia (mean age 77.5)were randomised: 268 intervention, 220 control; 350 dyads completed the study (206 intervention, 144 control). The intervention evaluated was joint reminiscence groups (with up to 12 dyads) weekly for twelve weeks; monthly maintenance sessions for further seven months. Sessions followed a published treatment manual and were held in a variety of community settings. Two trained facilitators in each centre were supported by volunteers. Primary outcome measures were self-reported quality of life for the person with dementia (QoL-AD), psychological distress for the carer (General Health Questionnaire, GHQ-28). Secondary outcome measures included: autobiographical memory and activities of daily living for the person with dementia; carer stress for the carer; mood, relationship quality and service use and costs for both. RESULTS: The intention to treat analysis (ANCOVA) identified no differences in outcome between the intervention and control conditions on primary or secondary outcomes (self-reported QoL-AD mean difference 0.07 (-1.21 to 1.35), F = 0.48, p = 0.53). Carers of people with dementia allocated to the reminiscence intervention reported a significant increase in anxiety on a General Health Questionnaire-28 sub-scale at the ten month end-point (mean difference 1.25 (0.25 to 2.26), F = 8.28, p = 0.04). Compliance analyses suggested improved autobiographical memory, quality of life and relationship quality for people with dementia attending more reminiscence sessions, however carers attending more groups showed increased care-giving stress. Economic analyses from a public sector perspective indicated that joint reminiscence groups are unlikely to be cost-effective. There were no significant adverse effects attributed to the intervention. Potential limitations of the study include less than optimal attendance at the group sessions--only 57% of participants attended at least half of the intervention sessions over the 10 month period, and a higher rate of study withdrawal in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This trial does not support the clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups. Possible beneficial effects for people with dementia who attend sessions as planned are offset by raised anxiety and stress in their carers. The reasons for these discrepant outcomes need to be explored further, and may necessitate reappraisal of the movement towards joint interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN42430123.


Subject(s)
Caregivers/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis/economics , Dementia/economics , Dementia/therapy , Activities of Daily Living/psychology , Adaptation, Psychological/physiology , Affect/physiology , Aged , Anxiety Disorders/economics , Anxiety Disorders/psychology , Caregivers/psychology , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Female , Humans , Male , Memory/physiology , Psychological Tests , Quality of Life/psychology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Surveys and Questionnaires
19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27965792

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral fracture is a common, major health problem in old age resulting in loss of functional independence and a high-cost burden on society, with estimated health and social care costs of £2.3 billion per year in the UK. Rehabilitation has the potential to maximise functional recovery and maintain independent living, but evidence of effectiveness is lacking. Usual rehabilitation care is delivered by a multi-disciplinary team in the hospital and in the community. An 'enhanced rehabilitation' intervention has been developed consisting of a workbook, goal-setting diary and extra therapy sessions, designed to improve self-efficacy and increase the amount and quality of the practice of physical exercise and activities of daily living. METHODS/DESIGN: This paper describes the design of a phase II study comprising an anonymous cohort of all proximal femoral fracture patients admitted to the three acute hospitals in Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board over a 6-month period with a randomised feasibility study comparing the enhanced rehabilitation intervention with usual care. These will assess the feasibility of a future definitive randomised controlled trial and concurrent economic evaluation in terms of recruitment, retention, outcome measure completion, compliance with the intervention and fidelity of delivery, health service use data, willingness to be randomised and effect size for a future sample size calculation. Focus groups will provide qualitative data to contribute to the assessment of the acceptability of the intervention amongst patients, carers and rehabilitation professionals and the feasibility of delivering the planned intervention. The primary outcome measure is function assessed by the Barthel Index. Secondary outcomes measure the ability to perform activities of daily living, anxiety and depression, potential mediators of outcomes such as hip pain, self-efficacy and fear of falling, health utility, health service use, objectively assessed physical function and adverse events. Participants' preference for rehabilitation services will be assessed in a discrete choice experiment. DISCUSSION: Phase II studies are an opportunity to not only assess the feasibility of trial methods but also to compare different methods of outcome measurement and novel methods of obtaining health service use data from routinely collected patient information. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN22464643, UKCRN16677.

20.
J Adv Nurs ; 71(2): 430-40, 2015 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25069664

ABSTRACT

AIM: To undertake the pre-clinical and modelling phases of the Medical Research Council complex intervention framework to underpin development of child-centred 'keep-fit', exercise and physical activity interventions for children and young people who use wheelchairs. BACKGROUND: Children who use wheelchairs face many barriers to participation in physical activity, which compromises fitness, obesity, well-being and health. 'Keep-fit' programmes that are child-centred and engaging are urgently required to enhance participation of disabled children and their families as part of a healthy lifestyle. Nurses will likely be important in promoting and monitoring 'keep-fit' intervention(s) when implemented in the community. DESIGN: Mixed-method (including economic analysis) feasibility study to capture child and family preferences and keep-fit needs and to determine outcome measures for a 'keep-fit' intervention. METHODS: The study comprises three stages. Stage 1 includes a mixed-method systematic review of effectiveness, cost effectiveness and key stakeholder views and experiences of keep-fit interventions, followed by qualitative interviews with children, young people and their parents to explore preferences and motivations for physical activity. Stage 2 will identify standardized outcome measures and test their application with children who use wheelchairs to obtain baseline fitness data. Options for an exercise-based keep-fit intervention will then be designed based on Stage 1 and 2 findings. In stage 3, we will present intervention options for feedback and further refinement to children and parents/carers in focus groups. (Project funded October 2012). DISCUSSION: At completion, this study will lead to the design of the intervention and a protocol to test its efficacy.


Subject(s)
Exercise Therapy/methods , Wheelchairs , Adolescent , Attitude to Health , Body Composition , Child , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Disabled Children , Eating/physiology , Energy Metabolism/physiology , Exercise Therapy/economics , Feasibility Studies , Female , Health Status , Heart Rate/physiology , Humans , Male , Patient Satisfaction , Physical Fitness , Quality of Life , Spirometry
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...