Protocol for a parallel group, two-arm, superiority cluster randomised trial to evaluate a community-level complementary-food safety and hygiene and nutrition intervention in Mali: the MaaCiwara study (version 1.3; 10 November 2022).

BACKGROUND: Diarrhoeal disease remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality among the under-fives in many low- and middle-income countries. Changes to food safety practices and feeding methods around the weaning period, alongside improved nutrition, may significantly reduce the risk of disease and improve development for infants. We describe a protocol for a cluster randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-faceted community-based educational intervention that aims to improve food safety and hygiene behaviours and enhance child nutrition. METHODS: We describe a mixed-methods, parallel group, two-arm, superiority cluster randomised controlled trial with baseline measures. One hundred twenty clusters comprising small urban and rural communities will be recruited in equal numbers and randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either treatment or control arms. The community intervention will be focussed around an ideal mother concept involving all community members during campaign days with dramatic arts and pledging, and follow-up home visits. Participants will be mother-child dyads (27 per cluster period) with children aged 6 to 36 months. Data collection will comprise a day of observation and interviews with each participating mother-child pair and will take place at baseline and 4 and 15 months post-intervention. The primary analysis will estimate the effectiveness of the intervention on changes to complementary-food safety and preparation behaviours, food and water contamination, and diarrhoea. Secondary outcomes include maternal autonomy, enteric infection, nutrition, child anthropometry, and development scores. A additional structural equation analysis will be conducted to examine the causal relationships between the different outcomes. Qualitative and health economic analyses including process evaluation will be done. CONCLUSIONS: The trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of community-based behavioural change interventions designed to reduce the burden of diarrhoeal disease in the under-fives and how effectiveness varies across different contexts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN14390796. Registration date December 13, 2021.

Overnight auto-adjusting continuous airway pressure + standard care compared with standard care alone in the prevention of morbidity in sickle cell disease phase II (POMS2b): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In addition to pain, sickle cell anaemia (HbSS) complications include neurocognitive difficulties in attention and processing speed associated with low daytime and night-time oxygen saturation compounded by obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). In the general population OSA is treated with continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP). The aim of this single-blind, randomised, controlled phase II trial is to compare auto-adjusting CPAP (APAP) with standard care to standard care alone in individuals with HbSS to determine whether the intervention improves attention and processing speed, brain structure, pain and quality of life. METHODS/DESIGN: Eligibility criteria include: ability to provide informed consent; age > 8 years; diagnosis of HbSS; and mean overnight saturation of < 90% for < 30% of the night (i.e. not meeting current criteria for overnight oxygen therapy). Key exclusion criteria are: overnight respiratory support; respiratory or decompensated cardiac failure; chronic transfusion; or contraindications to APAP therapy or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Sixty individuals with HbSS (30 children and 30 adults) will be randomised to standard care + APAP or standard care alone for six months. Minimisation factors are: age group (8-11, 12-15, 16-22 and > 23 years); silent infarction on MRI; minimum overnight oxygen saturation > 90% or < 90%; and hydroxyurea use. For APAP individuals, the intervention is administered at home. Adherence and effectiveness are recorded using software documenting hours of use each night and overnight oximetry. Participant support in terms of appropriate facemask and facilitating adherence are provided by an unblinded sleep physiologist. The primary outcome is change in the cancellation subtest from the Wechsler scales. Secondary outcomes include general cognitive functioning, quantitative brain MRI, blood and urine chemistry, quality of life and daily pain via a smartphone App (GoMedSolutions, Inc) and, where possible MRI heart, echocardiography, and 6-min walk. These outcomes will be assessed at baseline and after six months of treatment by assessors blind to treatment assignment. DISCUSSION: Altering oxygen saturation in HbSS may lead to bone marrow suppression. This risk will be reduced by monitoring full blood counts at baseline, two weeks, three months and six months, providing treatment as appropriate and reporting as safety events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN46012373 . Registered on 10 July 2015. Protocol Version: 6.0 Date: 24th December 2015 Sponsor: University Hospital Southampton. Sponsor's protocol code: RHMCHIOT53.

Exenatide once weekly versus placebo in Parkinson's disease: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Exenatide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, has neuroprotective effects in preclinical models of Parkinson's disease. We investigated whether these effects would be apparent in a clinical trial. METHODS: In this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients with moderate Parkinson's disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous injections of exenatide 2 mg or placebo once weekly for 48 weeks in addition to their regular medication, followed by a 12-week washout period. Eligible patients were aged 25-75 years, had idiopathic Parkinson's disease as measured by Queen Square Brain Bank criteria, were on dopaminergic treatment with wearing-off effects, and were at Hoehn and Yahr stage 2·5 or less when on treatment. Randomisation was by web-based randomisation with a two strata block design according to disease severity. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the adjusted difference in the Movement Disorders Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) motor subscale (part 3) in the practically defined off-medication state at 60 weeks. All efficacy analyses were based on a modified intention-to-treat principle, which included all patients who completed any post-randomisation follow-up assessments. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01971242) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between June 18, 2014, and March 13, 2015, 62 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 32 to exenatide and 30 to placebo. Our primary analysis included 31 patients in the exenatide group and 29 patients in the placebo group. At 60 weeks, off-medication scores on part 3 of the MDS-UPDRS had improved by 1·0 points (95% CI -2·6 to 0·7) in the exenatide group and worsened by 2·1 points (-0·6 to 4·8) in the placebo group, an adjusted mean difference of -3·5 points (-6·7 to -0·3; p=0·0318). Injection site reactions and gastrointestinal symptoms were common adverse events in both groups. Six serious adverse events occurred in the exenatide group and two in the placebo group, although none in either group were judged to be related to the study interventions. INTERPRETATION: Exenatide had positive effects on practically defined off-medication motor scores in Parkinson's disease, which were sustained beyond the period of exposure. Whether exenatide affects the underlying disease pathophysiology or simply induces long-lasting symptomatic effects is uncertain. Exenatide represents a major new avenue for investigation in Parkinson's disease, and effects on everyday symptoms should be examined in longer-term trials. FUNDING: Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research.

A multicenter dose-escalation study of the analgesic and adverse effects of an oral cannabis extract (Cannador) for postoperative pain management.

BACKGROUND: Cannabinoids have dose-related antinociceptive effects in animals. This clinical study aimed to investigate whether a single oral dose of cannabis plant extract (Cannador; Institute for Clinical Research, IKF, Berlin, Germany) could provide pain relief with minimal side effects for postoperative pain. METHODS: Patients (aged 18-75 yr) were recruited and consented before surgery if patient-controlled analgesia was planned for provision of postoperative pain relief. Each patient received a single dose of 5, 10, or 15 mg Cannador if he or she had at least moderate pain after stopping patient-controlled analgesia. Starting with 5 mg, dose escalation was based on the number of patients requesting rescue analgesia and adverse effects. Pain relief, pain intensity, and side effects were recorded over 6 h and analyzed using tests for trend with dose. RESULTS: Rescue analgesia was requested by all 11 patients (100%) receiving 5 mg, 15 of 30 patient (50%) receiving 10 mg, and 6 of 24 patients (25%) receiving 15 mg Cannador (log rank test for trend in time to rescue analgesia with dose P < 0.001). There were also significant trends across the escalating dose groups for decreasing pain intensity at rest (P = 0.01), increasing sedation (P = 0.03), and more adverse events (P = 0.002). The number needed to treat to prevent one rescue analgesia request for the 10-mg and 15-mg doses, relative to 5 mg, were 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.1) and 1.3 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.7), respectively. The study was terminated because of a serious vasovagal adverse event in a patient receiving 15 mg. CONCLUSION: These significant dose-related improvements in rescue analgesia requirements in the 10 mg and 15 mg groups provide a number needed to treat that is equivalent to many routinely used analgesics without frequent adverse effects.

Specialist neurocritical care and outcome from head injury.

OBJECTIVES: To document the effect of neurocritical care, delivered by specialist staff and based on protocol-driven therapy aimed at intracranial pressure (ICP) and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) targets, on outcome in acute head injury. DESIGN: Retrospective record review to compare presentation, therapy and outcome in patients with head injury referred to a regional neurosurgical centre, before and after establishment of protocol-driven therapy. SETTING: Neurosciences Critical Care Unit (NCCU). PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and eighty-five patients aged 18-65 years with at least one reactive pupil, referred with a diagnosis of head injury, requiring tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: Measurement of Glasgow Outcome Scale 6 months after injury. RESULTS: Patients from the two epochs were well matched for admission Glasgow Coma Scale and extracranial injuries. When all referred patients were considered, institution of protocol-driven therapy was not associated with a statistically significant increase in favourable outcomes (56.0% vs. 66.4%). However, we observed a significant increase in favourable outcomes in the severely head injured patients studied (40.4% vs. 59.6%). The proportion of favourable outcomes was also high (66.6%) in those presenting with evidence of raised ICP in the absence of a mass lesion and (60.0%) in those that required complex interventions to optimise ICP/CPP. CONCLUSIONS: Specialist neurocritical care with protocol-driven therapy is associated with a significant improvement in outcome for all patients with severe head injury. Such management may also benefit patients requiring no surgical therapy, some of whom may need complex therapeutic interventions. We found it impossible to predict need for such interventions from clinical features at presentation. These data suggest that specialist critical care with ICP/CPP guided therapy may benefit patients with severe head injury.