Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 247
Filter
1.
NIHR Open Res ; 4: 18, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39145106

ABSTRACT

Background: There is strong evidence that those recruited into studies are not always representative of the population for whom the research is most relevant. Development of the study design and funding decisions are points in the research process where considerations about inclusion of under-served populations may usefully be made. Current practical guidance focuses on designing and modifying participant recruitment and retention approaches but an area that has not been addressed is recruitment site selection. Methods: We present case studies of three NIHR funded trials to demonstrate how publicly available UK population datasets can be used to facilitate the identification of under-served communities for inclusion in trials. The trials have different designs, address different needs and demonstrate recruitment planning across Trauma centres, NHS Trusts and special educational settings.We describe our use of national freely available datasets, such as those provided by NHS Digital and the Office for National Statistics, to identify potential recruitment sites with consideration of health status, socio-economic status and ethnicity as well as clinical and risk factors to support inclusivity.For all three studies, we produced lists of potential recruitment sites in excess of the number anticipated as necessary to meet the recruitment targets. Discussion: We reflect on the challenges to our approach and some potential future developments. The datasets used are all free to use but each has their limitations. Agreeing search parameters, acceptable proxies and identifying the appropriate datasets, then cross referencing between datasets takes considerable time and particular expertise. The case studies are trials, but the methods are generalisable for various other study types. Conclusion: Through these exemplars, we aim to build on the NIHR INCLUDE project, by providing trialists with a much needed practical approach to embedding EDI into trial design at the grant application stage.


For research to benefit the people it is most relevant to, the participants recruited to take part need to be representative of that population. This does not always happen and more needs to be done to include people from many different backgrounds and characteristics in research. An important starting point is to plan the research to take place across different sites so that researchers can approach different people to be involved. For example people from different educational backgrounds, ethnic groups and ages. We describe how in three studies, we chose where to base our research to help us reach as diverse a range of people as possible. One of the studies planned to include people with a collar bone fracture, the second included people in hospital carrying a bacteria resistant to penicilin, and the third, children with profound and multiple learning disabilities. We used free to access UK datasets like those provided by NHS Digital and the Office for National Statistics. We searched different datasets to identify potential study recruitment sites to find: the problem being addressed; risk factors for those with the problem; health status, socio-economic status and ethnicity. The searches were then combined to produce lists of potential trial recruitment sites serving areas where the most disadvantaged groups live. We produced lists of potential sites for our studies, but there are challenges to our approach, as the datasets each have their limitations. Agreeing items to use when searching the datasets was not straightforward, for example where items were unavailable a near alternative had to be used. Identifying the appropriate datasets, then cross referencing between datasets takes considerable time and particular expertise. Through these examples, we provide researchers with a practical approach to embedding equality, diversity and inclusivity early on in the research process.

2.
Ann Intern Med ; 2024 Jul 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39074374

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) are limited. Previous small studies suggest that the antirheumatic drug methotrexate may be a potential treatment for OA pain. OBJECTIVE: To assess symptomatic benefits of methotrexate in knee OA (KOA). DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial done between 13 June 2014 and 13 October 2017. (ISRCTN77854383; EudraCT: 2013-001689-41). SETTING: 15 secondary care musculoskeletal clinics in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 207 participants with symptomatic, radiographic KOA and knee pain (severity ≥4 out of 10) on most days in the past 3 months with inadequate response to current medication were approached for inclusion. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to oral methotrexate once weekly (6-week escalation 10 to 25 mg) or matched placebo over 12 months and continued usual analgesia. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was average knee pain (numerical rating scale [NRS] 0 to 10) at 6 months, with 12-month follow-up to assess longer-term response. Secondary end points included knee stiffness and function outcomes and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 155 participants (64% women; mean age, 60.9 years; 50% Kellgren-Lawrence grade 3 to 4) were randomly assigned to methotrexate (n = 77) or placebo (n = 78). Follow-up was 86% (n = 134; methotrexate: 66, placebo: 68) at 6 months. Mean knee pain decreased from 6.4 (SD, 1.80) at baseline to 5.1 (SD, 2.32) at 6 months in the methotrexate group and from 6.8 (SD, 1.62) to 6.2 (SD, 2.30) in the placebo group. The primary intention-to-treat analysis showed a statistically significant pain reduction of 0.79 NRS points in favor of methotrexate (95% CI, 0.08 to 1.51; P = 0.030). There were also statistically significant treatment group differences in favor of methotrexate at 6 months for Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index stiffness (0.60 points [CI, 0.01 to 1.18]; P = 0.045) and function (5.01 points [CI, 1.29 to 8.74]; P = 0.008). Treatment adherence analysis supported a dose-response effect. Four unrelated serious AEs were reported (methotrexate: 2, placebo: 2). LIMITATION: Not permitting oral methotrexate to be changed to subcutaneous delivery for intolerance. CONCLUSION: Oral methotrexate added to usual medications demonstrated statistically significant reduction in KOA pain, stiffness, and function at 6 months. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Versus Arthritis.

3.
BJPsych Open ; 10(4): e123, 2024 Jun 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38826027

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: One in 57 children are diagnosed with autism in the UK, and the estimated cost for supporting these children in education is substantial. Social Stories™ is a promising and widely used intervention for supporting children with autism in schools and families. It is believed that Social Stories™ can provide meaningful social information to children that can improve social understanding and may reduce anxiety. However, no economic evaluation of Social Stories has been conducted. AIMS: To assess the cost-effectiveness of Social Stories through Autism Spectrum Social Stories in Schools Trial 2, a multi-site, pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial. METHOD: Children with autism who were aged 4-11 years were recruited and randomised (N = 249). Costs measured from the societal perspective and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) measured by the EQ-5D-Y-3L proxy were collected at baseline and at 6-month follow-up for primary analysis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated, and the uncertainty around incremental cost-effectiveness ratios was captured by non-parametric bootstrapping. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the primary findings. RESULTS: Social Stories is likely to result in a small cost savings (-£191 per child, 95% CI -767.7 to 337.7) and maintain similar QALY improvements compared with usual care. The probability of Social Stories being a preferred option is 75% if society is willing to pay £20 000 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analysis results aligned with the main study outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with usual care, Social Stories did not lead to an increase in costs and maintained similar QALY improvements for primary-aged children with autism.

4.
BMJ Open ; 14(6): e084997, 2024 Jun 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38910007

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) have revolutionised the treatment of inflammatory arthritis (IA). However, many people with IA still require planned orthopaedic surgery to reduce pain and improve function. Currently, bDMARDs are withheld during the perioperative period due to potential infection risk. However, this predisposes patients to IA flares and loss of disease control. The question of whether to stop or continue bDMARDs in the perioperative period has not been adequately addressed in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PERISCOPE is a multicentre, superiority, pragmatic RCT investigating the stoppage or continuation of bDMARDs. Participants will be assigned 1:1 to either stop or continue their bDMARDs during the perioperative period. We aim to recruit 394 adult participants with IA. Potential participants will be identified in secondary care hospitals in the UK, screened by a delegated clinician. If eligible and consenting, baseline data will be collected and randomisation completed. The primary outcome will be the self-reported PROMIS-29 (Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System) over the first 12 weeks postsurgery. Secondary outcome measures are as follows: PROMIS - Health Assessment Questionnaire (PROMIS-HAQ), EQ-5D-5L, Disease activity: generic global Numeric Rating Scale (patient and clinician), Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction scale, Health care resource use and costs, Medication use, Surgical site infection, delayed wound healing, Adverse events (including systemic infections) and disease-specific outcomes (according to IA diagnosis). The costs associated with stopping and continuing bDMARDs will be assessed. A qualitative study will explore the patients' and clinicians' acceptability and experience of continuation/stoppage of bDMARDs in the perioperative period and the impact postoperatively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study was received from the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee on 25 April 2023 (REC Ref: 23/WS/0049). The findings from PERISCOPE will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and feed directly into practice guidelines for the use of bDMARDs in the perioperative period. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN17691638.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , Orthopedic Procedures , Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans , United Kingdom , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Perioperative Care/methods , Perioperative Care/economics , Qualitative Research , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pilot Projects , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Biological Products/economics
5.
BMJ Open ; 14(5): e087175, 2024 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38806422

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Smoking during pregnancy is harmful to unborn babies, infants and women. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is offered as the usual stop-smoking support in the UK. However, this is often used in insufficient doses, intermittently or for too short a time to be effective. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) explores whether a bespoke intervention, delivered in pregnancy, improves adherence to NRT and is effective and cost-effective for promoting smoking cessation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-arm parallel-group RCT was conducted for pregnant women aged ≥16 years and who smoke ≥1 daily cigarette (pre-pregnancy smoked ≥5) and who agree to use NRT in an attempt to quit. Recruitment is from antenatal care settings and via social media adverts. Participants are randomised using blocked randomisation with varying block sizes, stratified by gestational age (<14 or ≥14 weeks) to receive: (1) usual care (UC) for stop smoking support or (2) UC plus an intervention to increase adherence to NRT, called 'Baby, Me and NRT' (BMN), comprising adherence counselling, automated tailored text messages, a leaflet and website. The primary outcome is biochemically validated smoking abstinence at or around childbirth, measured from 36 weeks gestation. Secondary outcomes include NRT adherence, other smoking measures and birth outcomes. Questionnaires collect follow-up data augmented by medical record information. We anticipate quit rates of 10% and 16% in the control and intervention groups, respectively (risk ratio=1.6). By recruiting 1320 participants, the trial should have 90% power (alpha=5%) to detect this intervention effect. An economic analysis will use the Economics of Smoking in Pregnancy model to determine cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by Bloomsbury National Health Service's Research Ethics Committee (21/LO/0123). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated to the public, funders, relevant practice/policy representatives, researchers and participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16830506. PROTOCOL VERSION: 5.0, 10 Oct 2023.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Humans , Pregnancy , Female , Smoking Cessation/methods , Adult , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Prenatal Care/methods , Pregnancy Complications/prevention & control , Counseling/methods , Smoking , Nicotine Replacement Therapy
6.
BMJ Open ; 14(4): e081179, 2024 Apr 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38670611

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Young adults who commit low-level offences commonly have a range of health and social needs and are significantly over-represented in the criminal justice system. These young adults may need to attend court and potentially receive penalties including imprisonment. Alternative routes exist, which can help address the underlying causes of offending. Some feel more should be done to help young adults entering the criminal justice system. The Gateway programme was a type of out-of-court disposal developed by Hampshire Constabulary, which aimed to address the complex needs of young adults who commit low-level crimes. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Gateway programme, issued as a conditional caution, compared with usual process. METHODS: The Gateway study was a pragmatic, parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial that recruited young adults who had committed a low-level offence from four sites covering Hampshire and Isle of Wight. The primary outcome was mental health and well-being measured using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, alcohol and drug use, and recidivism. Outcomes were measured at 4, 16 and 52 weeks postrandomisation. RESULTS: Due to issues with retention of participants and low data collection rates, recruitment ended early, with 191 eligible participants randomised (Gateway 109; usual process 82). The primary outcome was obtained for 93 (48.7%) participants at 4 weeks, 93 (48.7%) at 16 weeks and 43 (22.5%) at 1 year. The high attrition rates meant that effectiveness could not be assessed as planned. CONCLUSIONS: Gateway is the first trial in a UK police setting to have a health-related primary outcome requiring individual data collection, rather than focusing solely on recidivism. We demonstrated that it is possible to recruit and randomise from the study population, however follow-up rates were low. Further work is needed to identify ways to facilitate engagement between researchers and vulnerable populations to collect data. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11888938.


Subject(s)
Mental Health , Quality of Life , Humans , Male , Young Adult , Female , Adult , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Adolescent , Crime , Substance-Related Disorders , Recidivism/prevention & control , Criminals/psychology
7.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594045

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: National and international guidelines recommend that psychosocial support should be a key component of the care offered to children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. However, specific approaches or interventions are not recommended. AIM: To identify and summarise evidence on the outcomes of psychosocial support interventions for children and adolescents (age 0-18) experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Database searches (MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; PsycINFO; Web of Science) were performed in April 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles reporting the results of studies measuring outcomes of psychosocial support interventions were included. Quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. Half were conducted in the US, with others from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK. Six were pre-post analyses or cohort studies, three were mixed methods, and one was a secondary analysis of intervention data from four trials. Most studies were of low quality. Most analyses of mental health and psychosocial outcomes showed either benefit or no change, with none indicating negative or adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: The small number of low-quality studies limits conclusions about the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for children/adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. Clarity on the intervention approach as well as the core outcomes would support the future aggregation of evidence. More robust methodology and reporting is required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.

8.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594046

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children/adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. Services and practice guidelines are responding to these changes. AIM: This systematic review examines the numbers and characteristics of children/adolescents (under 18) referred to specialist gender or endocrinology services. METHODS: Database searches were performed (April 2022), with results assessed independently by two reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles providing at least birth-registered sex or age at referral were included. Demographic, gender-related, mental health, neurodevelopmental conditions and adverse childhood experience data were extracted. A narrative approach to synthesis was used and where appropriate proportions were combined in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: 143 studies from 131 articles across 17 countries were included. There was a twofold to threefold increase in the number of referrals and a steady increase in birth-registered females being referred. There is inconsistent collection and reporting of key data across many of the studies. Approximately 60% of children/adolescents referred to services had made steps to present themselves in their preferred gender. Just under 50% of studies reported data on depression and/or anxiety and under 20% reported data on other mental health issues and neurodevelopmental conditions. Changes in the characteristics of referrals over time were generally not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Services need to capture, assess and respond to the potentially co-occurring complexities of children/adolescents being referred to specialist gender and endocrine services. Agreement on the core characteristics for collection at referral/assessment would help to ensure services are capturing data as well as developing pathways to meet the needs of these children.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021289659.

9.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594047

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Treatment to suppress or lessen effects of puberty are outlined in clinical guidelines for adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. Robust evidence concerning risks and benefits is lacking and there is a need to aggregate evidence as new studies are published. AIM: To identify and synthesise studies assessing the outcomes of puberty suppression in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Database searches (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were performed in April 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to appraise study quality. Only moderate-quality and high-quality studies were synthesised. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines were used. RESULTS: 11 cohort, 8 cross-sectional and 31 pre-post studies were included (n=50). One cross-sectional study was high quality, 25 studies were moderate quality (including 5 cohort studies) and 24 were low quality. Synthesis of moderate-quality and high-quality studies showed consistent evidence demonstrating efficacy for suppressing puberty. Height increased in multiple studies, although not in line with expected growth. Multiple studies reported reductions in bone density during treatment. Limited and/or inconsistent evidence was found in relation to gender dysphoria, psychological and psychosocial health, body satisfaction, cardiometabolic risk, cognitive development and fertility. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of high-quality research assessing puberty suppression in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. No conclusions can be drawn about the impact on gender dysphoria, mental and psychosocial health or cognitive development. Bone health and height may be compromised during treatment. More recent studies published since April 2022 until January 2024 also support the conclusions of this review. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.

10.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594049

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. There are various guidelines outlining approaches to the clinical care of these children and adolescents. AIM: To examine the quality and development of published guidelines or clinical guidance containing recommendations for managing gender dysphoria/incongruence in children and/or adolescents (age 0-18). A separate paper reports the synthesis of guideline recommendations. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were searched to April 2022 and web-based searches and contact with international experts continued to December 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation tool was used to examine guideline quality. RESULTS: Twenty-three guidelines/clinical guidance publications (1998-2022) were identified (4 international, 3 regional and 16 national). The quality and methods reporting in these varied considerably. Few guidelines systematically reviewed empirical evidence, and links between evidence and recommendations were often unclear. Although most consulted with relevant stakeholders, including 10 which involved service users or user representatives, it was often unclear how this influenced recommendations and only two reported including children/adolescents and/or parents. Guidelines also lacked clarity about implementation. Two international guidelines (World Professional Association for Transgender Health and Endocrine Society) formed the basis for most other guidance, influencing their development and recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinical guidance for managing children/adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence lacks an independent and evidence-based approach and information about how recommendations were developed. This should be considered when using these to inform service development and clinical practice. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.

11.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594051

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Over the last 10-15 years, there has been an increase in the number of children and adolescents referred to gender services, particularly among adolescent birth-registered females. This population shows a higher prevalence of co-occurring mental health difficulties and neurodevelopmental conditions. Some countries have recently restricted access to medical treatments in recognition of the uncertain evidence base. AIM: To understand the current provision of gender services for children and adolescents across the EU-15+ countries that have comparable high-income healthcare systems, to inform service development in the UK. METHODS: An e-survey of paediatric gender services was conducted between September 2022 and April 2023. It covered service structure, care pathways, interventions and data collection. Data were described and compared to identify similarities and differences among participating services. RESULTS: 15 services in eight countries (Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Northern Ireland, The Netherlands, Spain and Finland) responded. While a multidisciplinary team was present in all services, its composition and organisation varied. Clinical practice was informed by international guidelines, with four countries following their own national guidelines. Differences were observed in referral criteria, care pathways for prepubertal children and those with co-occurring conditions. Eligibility criteria for medical interventions also varied. Psychosocial support and interventions were limited, and outcome data collection was scarce. CONCLUSIONS: This survey revealed both similarities and key variations in the clinical practice of paediatric gender services across eight different countries. The study emphasises the need for service development that both considers the management of co-occurring conditions and embeds routine data collection in practice.

12.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594052

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. However, little is currently known about the proportions accessing different types of care and treatment following referral. AIM: This systematic review examines the range of care pathways of children/adolescents (under 18) referred to specialist gender or endocrinology services. METHODS: Database searches were performed (April 2022), with results assessed independently by two reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles providing data for numbers of children and/or adolescents at referral/assessment and their treatment pathways were included. A narrative approach to synthesis was used and where appropriate proportions were combined in a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: 23 studies across nine countries were included, representing 6133 children and/or adolescents with a median age at assessment of 14-16 and overall a higher percentage of birth-registered females. Of those assessed, 36% (95% CI 27% to 45%) received puberty suppression, 51% (95% CI 40% to 62%) received masculinising or feminising hormones, 68% (95% CI 57% to 77%) received puberty suppression and/or hormones and 16% (95% CI 10% to 24%) received surgery. No study systematically reported information about the full pathway or psychological care received by children/adolescents. Follow-up in many studies was insufficient or unclear. Reasons for discontinuation were rarely provided. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective studies with long-term follow-up reporting information about the full range of pathways are needed to understand what happens to children and adolescents referred to specialist gender services. Information about provision of psychological care is needed considering high rates of psychosocial difficulties in this population.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021289659.

13.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594048

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services and there are various published guidelines outlining approaches to clinical care. AIM: To examine the recommendations about the management of children and/or adolescents (age 0-18) experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence in published guidelines or clinical guidance. A separate paper examines the quality and development of guidelines. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were searched to April 2022 and web-based searches and contact with international experts continued to December 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation tool was used to examine guideline quality. RESULTS: 23 guidelines/clinical guidance publications (1998-2022) were identified (4 international, 3 regional, 16 national). Guidelines describe a similar care pathway starting with psychosocial care for prepubertal children, puberty suppressants followed by hormones for eligible adolescents and surgical interventions as these adolescents enter adulthood. In general, there is consensus that adolescents should receive a multidisciplinary assessment, although clear guidance about the purpose or approach is lacking. There are differing recommendations about when and on what basis psychological and medical interventions should be offered. There is limited guidance about what psychological care should be provided, about the management of prepubertal children or those with a non-binary gender identity, nor about pathways between specialist gender services and other providers. CONCLUSIONS: Published guidance describes a similar care pathway; however, there is no current consensus about the purpose and process of assessment for children or adolescents with gender dysphoria/incongruence, or about when psychological or hormonal interventions should be offered and on what basis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.

14.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594053

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines outline the use of hormones for masculinisation/feminisation in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence. Robust evidence concerning risks and benefits is lacking. There is a need to aggregate evidence as research becomes available. AIM: Identify and synthesise studies assessing the outcomes of hormones for masculinisation/feminisation in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Database searches (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were performed in April 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for Cohort Studies was used to assess study quality. Moderate- and high-quality studies were synthesised. RESULTS: 12 cohort, 9 cross-sectional and 32 pre-post studies were included (n=53). One cohort study was high-quality. Other studies were moderate (n=33) and low-quality (n=19). Synthesis of high and moderate-quality studies showed consistent evidence demonstrating induction of puberty, although with varying feminising/masculinising effects. There was limited evidence regarding gender dysphoria, body satisfaction, psychosocial and cognitive outcomes, and fertility. Evidence from mainly pre-post studies with 12-month follow-up showed improvements in psychological outcomes. Inconsistent results were observed for height/growth, bone health and cardiometabolic effects. Most studies included adolescents who received puberty suppression, making it difficult to determine the effects of hormones alone. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of high-quality research assessing the use of hormones in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. Moderate-quality evidence suggests mental health may be improved during treatment, but robust study is still required. For other outcomes, no conclusions can be drawn. More recent studies published since April 2022 until January 2024 also support the conclusions of this review.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021289659.

15.
Arch Dis Child ; 2024 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38594055

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. Historically, social transitioning prior to assessment was rare but it is becoming more common. AIM: To identify and synthesise studies assessing the outcomes of social transition for children and adolescents (under 18) experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative sythesis. Database searches (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were perfomed in April 2022. Studies reporting any outcome of social transition (full or partial) for children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence were included. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to appraise study quality. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included (children (n=8) and adolescents (n=3)) and most were of low quality. The majority were from the US, featured community samples and cross-sectional analyses. Different comparator groups were used, and outcomes related to mental health and gender identity reported. Overall studies consistently reported no difference in mental health outcomes for children who socially transitioned across all comparators. Studies found mixed evidence for adolescents who socially transitioned. CONCLUSIONS: It is difficult to assess the impact of social transition on children/adolescents due to the small volume and low quality of research in this area. Importantly, there are no prospective longitudinal studies with appropriate comparator groups assessing the impact of social transition on mental health or gender-related outcomes for children/adolescents. Professionals working in the area of gender identity and those seeking support should be aware of the absence of robust evidence of the benefits or harms of social transition for children and adolescents. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.

16.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(15): 1-67, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38512076

ABSTRACT

Background: Lateral compression type-1 pelvic fractures are a common fragility fracture in older adults. Patients who do not mobilise due to ongoing pain are at greater risk of immobility-related complications. Standard treatment in the United Kingdom is provision of pain relief and early mobilisation, unlike fragility hip fractures, which are usually treated surgically based on evidence that early surgery is associated with better outcomes. Currently there is no evidence on whether patients with lateral compression type-1 fragility fractures would have a better recovery with surgery than non-surgical management. Objectives: To assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of surgical fixation with internal fixation device compared to non-surgical management of lateral compression type-1 fragility fractures in older adults. Design: Pragmatic, randomised controlled superiority trial, with 12-month internal pilot; target sample size was 600 participants. Participants were randomised between surgical and non-surgical management (1 : 1 allocation ratio). An economic evaluation was planned. Setting: UK Major Trauma Centres. Participants: Patients aged 60 years or older with a lateral compression type-1 pelvic fracture, arising from a low-energy fall and unable to mobilise independently to a distance of 3 m and back due to pelvic pain 72 hours after injury. Interventions: Internal fixation device surgical fixation and non-surgical management. Participants, surgeons and outcome assessors were not blinded to treatment allocation. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome - average patient health-related quality of life, over 6 months, assessed by the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version utility score. Secondary outcomes (over the 6 months following injury) - self-rated health, physical function, mental health, pain, delirium, displacement of pelvis, mortality, complications and adverse events, and resource use data for the economic evaluation. Results: The trial closed early, at the end of the internal pilot, due to low recruitment. The internal pilot was undertaken in two separate phases because of a pause in recruitment due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The planned statistical and health economic analyses were not conducted. Outcome data were summarised descriptively. Eleven sites opened for recruitment for a combined total of 92 months. Three-hundred and sixteen patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 43 were eligible (13.6%). The main reason for ineligibility was that the patient was able to mobilise independently to 3 m and back (n = 161). Of the 43 eligible participants, 36 (83.7%) were approached for consent, of whom 11 (30.6%) provided consent. The most common reason for eligible patients not consenting to take part was that they were unwilling to be randomised to a treatment (n = 10). There were 11 participants, 5 randomised to surgical management with internal fixation device and 6 to non-surgical management. The average age of participants was 83.0 years (interquartile range 76.0, 89.0) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version utility score at 6 months post randomisation (n = 8) was 0.32 (standard deviation 0.37). A limitation of the trial was that study objectives were not addressed due to poor recruitment. Conclusions: It was not feasible to recruit to this trial in the current context. Further research to understand the treatment and recovery pathways of this group of patients, along with their outcomes, would be needed prior to undertaking a future trial. Future work: Exploration of equipoise across different healthcare professional groups. Investigate longer-term patient outcomes. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN16478561. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/167/57) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 15. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.


When older adults with weak bones fall onto their side, they can fracture the pelvis in a certain way known as a 'lateral compression type-1 fracture'; this summary will use 'pelvic fracture'. Pelvic fractures can heal without surgery; patients are offered pain relief and encouraged to move as much as they can after the injury. Pelvic fractures can be painful, and some people are not able to get up and walk for weeks. These fractures can cause health problems such as chest infections, urinary tract infections, pressure sores and blood clots. To avoid these problems, we are trying to find treatments to help people recover sooner. Pelvic surgeons think patients may benefit from surgery with an internal fixation device (a bar and screws) to stabilise the pelvis; however, there can be risks and complications with any surgery. This study aimed to find out which treatment is better for patients and better value for money for the National Health Service. This required 600 people aged over 60, in hospital with a pelvic fracture and having difficulty walking to take part. Three hundred would receive surgery and 300 would receive non-surgical treatment. Over 6 months, participants would complete questionnaires, a walking assessment and have X-rays to check healing. The trial had a 12-month run-in period to see if enough people would take part. The trial closed early as we were unable to recruit sufficient people into the study. Fewer older patients with pelvic fractures were identified than expected, 51% were able to walk after a few days and therefore were not eligible to be included in the study. Of the patients, 13.6% were eligible and 30.6% of those consented to take part. Restrictions on visitors during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic made it difficult to discuss the study with patients' families and fewer patients were admitted to hospital where the study was taking place. The research question could not be answered by this study at the present time.


Subject(s)
Hip Fractures , Quality of Life , Humans , Aged , Pelvis , Pelvic Pain , Pain Management
17.
Lancet Healthy Longev ; 5(2): e97-e107, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38310902

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Older adults were more likely to be socially isolated during the COVID-19 pandemic, with increased risk of depression and loneliness. We aimed to investigate whether a behavioural activation intervention delivered via telephone could mitigate depression and loneliness in at-risk older people during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: BASIL+ (Behavioural Activation in Social Isolation) was a pragmatic randomised controlled trial conducted among patients recruited from general practices in England and Wales, and was designed to assess the effectiveness of behavioural activation in mitigating depression and loneliness among older people during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eligible participants were aged 65 years and older, socially isolated, with a score of 5 or higher on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and had multiple long-term conditions. Participants were allocated in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention (behavioural activation) or control groups by use of simple randomisation without stratification. Behavioural activation was delivered by telephone; participants were offered up to eight weekly sessions with trained BASIL+ Support Workers. Behavioural activation was adapted to maintain social connections and encourage socially reinforcing activities. Participants in the control group received usual care with existing COVID-19 wellbeing resources. The primary clinical outcome was self-reported depression severity, assessed by the PHQ-9, at 3 months. Outcomes were assessed masked to allocation and analysis was by treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN63034289). FINDINGS: Between Feb 8, 2021, and Feb 28, 2022, 449 eligible participants were identified and 435 from 26 general practices were recruited and randomly assigned (1:1) to the behavioural activation intervention (n=218) or to the control group (usual care with signposting; n=217). The mean age of participants was 75·7 years (SD 6·7); 270 (62·1%) of 435 participants were female, and 418 (96·1%) were White. Participants in the intervention group attended an average of 5·2 (SD 2·9) of eight remote behavioural activation sessions. The adjusted mean difference in PHQ-9 scores between the control and intervention groups at 3 months was -1·65 (95% CI -2·54 to -0·75, p=0·0003). No adverse events were reported that were attributable to the behavioural activation intervention. INTERPRETATION: Behavioural activation is an effective and potentially scalable intervention that can reduce symptoms of depression and emotional loneliness in at-risk groups in the short term. The findings of this trial add to the range of strategies to improve the mental health of older adults with multiple long-term conditions. These results can be helpful to policy makers beyond the pandemic in reducing the global burden of depression and addressing the health impacts of loneliness, particularly in at-risk groups. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ocimum basilicum , Humans , Female , Aged , Male , Wales/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , England/epidemiology
18.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(2): 1-114, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38327177

ABSTRACT

Background: Randomised controlled trials ('trials') are susceptible to poor participant recruitment and retention. Studies Within A Trial are the strongest methods for testing the effectiveness of strategies to improve recruitment and retention. However, relatively few of these have been conducted. Objectives: PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to facilitate at least 25 Studies Within A Trial evaluating recruitment or retention strategies. We share our experience of delivering the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme, and the lessons learnt for undertaking randomised Studies Within A Trial. Design: A network of 10 Clinical Trials Units and 1 primary care research centre committed to conducting randomised controlled Studies Within A Trial of recruitment and/or retention strategies was established. Promising recruitment and retention strategies were identified from various sources including Cochrane systematic reviews, the Study Within A Trial Repository, and existing prioritisation exercises, which were reviewed by patient and public members to create an initial priority list of seven recruitment and eight retention interventions. Host trial teams could apply for funding and receive support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to undertake Studies Within A Trial. We also tested the feasibility of undertaking co-ordinated Studies Within A Trial, across multiple host trials simultaneously. Setting: Clinical trials unit-based trials recruiting or following up participants in any setting in the United Kingdom were eligible. Participants: Clinical trials unit-based teams undertaking trials in any clinical context in the United Kingdom. Interventions: Funding of up to £5000 and support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to design, implement and report Studies Within A Trial. Main outcome measures: Number of host trials funded. Results: Forty-two Studies Within A Trial were funded (31 host trials), across 12 Clinical Trials Units. The mean cost of a Study Within A Trial was £3535. Twelve Studies Within A Trial tested the same strategy across multiple host trials using a co-ordinated Study Within A Trial design, and four used a factorial design. Two recruitment and five retention strategies were evaluated in more than one host trial. PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial will add 18% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane systematic review of recruitment strategies, and 79% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane review of retention strategies. For retention, we found that pre-notifying participants by card, letter or e-mail before sending questionnaires was effective, as was the use of pens, and sending personalised text messages to improve questionnaire response. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others planning Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient and public involvement partners; prioritising and selecting strategies to evaluate and elements to consider when designing a Study Within A Trial; obtaining governance approvals; implementing Studies Within A Trial, including individual and co-ordinated Studies Within A Trials; and reporting Study Within A Trials. Limitations: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted five Studies Within A Trial, being either delayed (n = 2) or prematurely terminated (n = 3). Conclusions: PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial significantly increased the evidence base for recruitment and retention strategies. When provided with both funding and practical support, host trial teams successfully implemented Studies Within A Trial. Future work: Future research should identify and target gaps in the evidence base, including widening Study Within A Trial uptake, undertaking more complex Studies Within A Trial and translating Study Within A Trial evidence into practice. Study registration: All Studies Within A Trial in the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme had to be registered with the Northern Ireland Network for Trials Methodology Research Study Within A Trial Repository. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/55/80) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.


A Study Within A Trial is a research study nested inside a larger 'host trial', promoting the use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to do Study Within A Trial routine practice in clinical trial units by funding and supporting at least 25 Studies Within A Trial. The best way to test health and social care treatments is to do a randomised controlled trial ('trial'), where some patients get the treatment being tested and some do not. The results of different groups are compared to see if the treatment improves care. Recruiting patients and keeping them involved in trials is often very difficult. Research teams often do not know how best to recruit and keep patients engaged as the methods have not been tested to see if they work. The best way to test these methods is by doing a Study Within A Trial. We test a programme of Studies Within A Trial for recruiting and keeping patients engaged in trials. Trial teams were able to apply for funding of up to £5000 and receive support from Promoting the use of Study Within A Trial team to do Studies Within A Trial. We used our experience of doing Studies Within A Trial to outline lessons learnt for doing Studies Within A Trial. We funded 42 Studies Within A Trial and gave teams necessary advice to do them. We significantly increased the knowledge for both recruitment and retention strategies, and found 'pre-notifying' before sending questionnaires, sending pens and personalised text messages were all effective for increasing responses by participants. We tested Studies Within A Trial across several different trials at the same time to find out more quickly whether their methods worked. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others doing Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient partners; picking the right strategy to test; getting ethical approvals; how to do and report Studies Within A Trial. Promoting the use of studies within a trial was successful and supported more Studies Within A Trial than planned. We hope our experience will support those doing Studies Within A Trial in the future.


Subject(s)
Exercise Therapy , Pandemics , Humans , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Feasibility Studies , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Design , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom
19.
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol ; 52(4): 469-478, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38189629

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This multicentre, assessor-blinded, two-arm cluster randomized trial evaluated the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a behaviour change intervention promoting toothbrushing for preventing dental caries in UK secondary schools. METHODS: Pupils aged 11-13 years with their own mobile telephone attending secondary schools with above average free school meals eligibility were randomized (at year-group level) to receive a lesson and twice-daily text messages or to usual care. Year-groups (n = 84) from 42 schools including 4680 pupils (intervention, n = 2262; control, n = 2418) were randomized. RESULTS: In 2383 participants with valid data at baseline and 2.5 years, the primary outcome of presence of at least one treated or untreated carious lesion (D4-6 MFT [Decayed, Missing and Filled Teeth] in permanent teeth using International Caries Detection and Assessment System) was 44.6% in the intervention group and 43.0% in control (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% CI 0.85-1.26, p = .72). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes of presence of at least one treated or untreated carious lesion (D1-6 MFT), number of D4-6 MFT and D1-6 MFT, plaque and bleeding scores or health-related- (Child Health Utility 9D) or oral health-related- quality of life (CARIES-QC). However, twice-daily toothbrushing, reported by 77.6% of pupils at baseline, increased at 6 months (intervention, 86.9%; control, 83.0%; OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.03-1.63, p = .03), but returned to no difference at 2.5 years (intervention, 81.0%; control, 79.9%; OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.84-1.30, p = .69). Estimated incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of the intervention, relative to control, were £1.02 (95% CI -1.29 to 3.23) and -0.003 (95% CI -0.009 to 0.002), respectively, with a 7% chance of being cost-effective (£20 000/QALY gained threshold). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of statistically significant difference for caries prevalence at 2.5-years. The intervention's positive 6-month toothbrushing behaviour change did not translate into caries reduction. (ISRCTN 12139369). COVID-19 pandemic adversly affected follow-up.


Subject(s)
Cost-Benefit Analysis , Dental Caries , Text Messaging , Toothbrushing , Humans , Dental Caries/prevention & control , Female , Male , Adolescent , Child , United Kingdom , Single-Blind Method , Health Behavior
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL