Trial Forge Guidance 4: a guideline for reporting the results of randomised Studies Within A Trial (SWATs).

BACKGROUND: Evidence to support decisions on trial processes is minimal. One way to generate this evidence is to use a Study Within A Trial (SWAT) to test trial processes or explore methodological uncertainties. SWAT evidence relies on replication to ensure sufficient power and broad applicability of findings. Prompt reporting is therefore essential; however, SWAT publications are often the first to be abandoned in the face of other time pressures. Reporting guidance for embedded methodology trials does exist but is not widely used. We sought therefore to build on these guidelines to develop a straightforward, concise reporting standard, which remains adherent to the CONSORT guideline. METHODS: An iterative process was used to develop the guideline. This included initial meetings with key stakeholders, development of an initial guideline, pilot testing of draft guidelines, further iteration and pilot testing, and finalisation of the guideline. RESULTS: We developed a reporting guideline applicable to randomised SWATs, including replications of previous evaluations. The guideline follows the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and provides example text to ensure ease and clarity of reporting across all domains. CONCLUSIONS: The SWAT reporting guideline will aid authors, reviewers, and journal editors to produce and review clear, structured reports of randomised SWATs, whilst also adhering to the CONSORT guideline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EQUATOR Network - Guidelines Under Development ( https://www.equator-network.org/library/reporting-guidelines-under-development/reporting-guidelines-under-development-for-clinical-trials/#SWAT ). Registered on 25 March 2021.

The development and acceptability of an educational and training intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials: the TRAIN project.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal or slow recruitment affects 30-50% of trials. Education and training of trial recruiters has been identified as one strategy for potentially boosting recruitment to randomised controlled trials (hereafter referred to as trials). The Training tRial recruiters, An educational INtervention (TRAIN) project was established to develop and assess the acceptability of an education and training intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials. In this paper, we report the development and acceptability of TRAIN. METHODS: TRAIN involved three sequential phases, with each phase contributing information to the subsequent phase(s). These phases were 1) evidence synthesis (systematic review of the effectiveness of training interventions and a content analysis of the format, content, and delivery of identified interventions), 2) intervention development using a Partnership (co-design/co-creation) approach, and 3) intervention acceptability assessments with recruiters to neonatal trials. RESULTS: TRAIN, accompanied by a comprehensive intervention manual, has been designed for online or in-person delivery. TRAIN can be offered to recruiters before trial recruitment begins or as refresher sessions during a trial. The intervention consists of five core learning outcomes which are addressed across three core training units. These units are the trial protocol (Unit 1, 50 min, trial-specific), understanding randomisation (Unit 2, 5 min, trial-generic) and approaching and engaging with parents (Unit 3, 70 min, trial-generic). Eleven recruiters to neonatal trials registered to attend the acceptability assessment training workshops, although only four took part. All four positively valued the training Units and resources for increasing recruiter preparedness, knowledge, and confidence. More flexibility in how the training is facilitated, however, was noted (e.g., training divided across two workshops of shorter duration). Units 2 and 3 were considered beneficial to incorporate into Good Clinical Practice Training or as part of induction training for new staff joining neonatal units. CONCLUSION: TRAIN offers a comprehensive co-produced training and education intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials. TRAIN was deemed acceptable, with minor modification, to neonatal trial recruiters. The small number of recruiters taking part in the acceptability assessment is a limitation. Scale-up of TRAIN with formal piloting and testing for effectiveness in a large cluster randomised trial is required.

A randomised controlled trial of compression therapies for the treatment of venous leg ulcers (VenUS 6): study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, three-arm randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Venous leg ulcer(s) are common, recurring, open wounds on the lower leg, resulting from diseased or damaged leg veins impairing blood flow. Wound healing is the primary treatment aim for venous leg ulceration, alongside the management of pain, wound exudate and infection. Full (high) compression therapy delivering 40 mmHg of pressure at the ankle is the recommended first-line treatment for venous leg ulcers. There are several different forms of compression therapy available including wraps, two-layer hosiery, and two-layer or four-layer bandages. There is good evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of four-layer bandage and two-layer hosiery but more limited evidence for other treatments (two-layer bandage and compression wraps). Robust evidence is required to compare clinical and cost-effectiveness of these and to investigate which is the best compression treatment for reducing time to healing of venous leg ulcers whilst offering value for money. VenUS 6 will therefore investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of evidence-based compression, two-layer bandage and compression wraps for time to healing of venous leg ulcers. METHODS: VenUS 6 is a pragmatic, multi-centre, three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Adult patients with a venous leg ulcer will be randomised to receive (1) compression wraps, (2) two-layer bandage or (3) evidence-based compression (two-layer hosiery or four-layer bandage). Participants will be followed up for between 4 and 12 months. The primary outcome will be time to healing (full epithelial cover in the absence of a scab) in days since randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include key clinical events (e.g. healing of the reference leg, ulcer recurrence, ulcer/skin deterioration, amputation, admission/discharge, surgery to close/remove incompetent superficial veins, infection or death), treatment changes, adherence and ease of use, ulcer related pain, health-related quality of life and resource use. DISCUSSION: VenUS 6 will provide robust evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the different forms of compression therapies for venous leg ulceration. VenUS 6 opened to recruitment in January 2021 and is currently recruiting across 30 participating centres. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN67321719 . Prospectively registered on 14 September 2020.

Examining the effectiveness of Gateway-an out-of-court community-based intervention to reduce recidivism and improve the health and well-being of young adults committing low-level offences: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Young adult offenders represent a third of the UK prison population and are at risk of poor health outcomes including drug and alcohol misuse, self-harm and suicide. Court diversion interventions aim to reduce the negative consequences of formal criminal justice sanctions and focus resources on addressing the root causes of offending. Although diversions are widely used, evidence of their effectiveness has not yet been established. Hampshire Constabulary, working together with local charities, have developed the Gateway programme, an out-of-court intervention aimed at improving the life chances of young adults. Issued as a conditional caution, participants undertake a health and social care needs assessment, attend workshops encouraging analysis of own behaviour and its consequences and agree not to re-offend during the 16-week caution. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, multi-site, parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial with a target sample size of 334. Participants are aged 18-24, reside in Hampshire and Isle of Wight and are being questioned for an eligible low-level offence. Police investigators offer potential participants a chance to receive the Gateway caution, and those interested are also invited to take part in the study. Police officers obtain Stage 1 consent and carry out an eligibility check, after which participants are randomised on a 1:1 basis either to receive Gateway or follow the usual process, such as court appearance or a different conditional caution. Researchers subsequently obtain Stage 2 consent and collect data at weeks 4 and 16, and 1 year post-randomisation. The primary outcome is the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS). Secondary outcomes include health status, alcohol and drug use, recidivism and resource use. The primary analysis will compare the WEMWBS score between the two groups at 12 months. DISCUSSION: This pioneering trial aims to address the evidence gap surrounding diversion in 18-24-year-olds. The findings will inform law enforcement agencies, third sector organisations, policymakers and commissioners, as well as researchers working in related fields and with vulnerable target populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Register ( ISRCTN 11888938 ).

Correction to Effect of vitamin K on bone mineral density and fractures in adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Following the work of Avenell et al. that has raised concerns about the integrity of the Yamaguchi Osteoporosis Prevention Study (YOPS) conducted by Ishida and Kawai we issue here an adjustment to all meta-analysis estimates that contained this work within our systematic review.

Screening for high hip fracture risk does not impact on falls risk: a post hoc analysis from the SCOOP study.

A reduction in hip fracture incidence following population screening might reflect the effectiveness of anti-osteoporosis therapy, behaviour change to reduce falls, or both. This post hoc analysis demonstrates that identifying high hip fracture risk by FRAX was not associated with any alteration in falls risk. INTRODUCTION: To investigate whether effectiveness of an osteoporosis screening programme to reduce hip fractures was mediated by modification of falls risk in the screening arm. METHODS: The SCOOP study recruited 12,483 women aged 70-85 years, individually randomised to a control (n = 6250) or screening (n = 6233) arm; in the latter, osteoporosis treatment was recommended to women at high risk of hip fracture, while the control arm received usual care. Falls were captured by self-reported questionnaire. We determined the influence of baseline risk factors on future falls, and then examined for differences in falls risk between the randomisation groups, particularly in those at high fracture risk. RESULTS: Women sustaining one or more falls were slightly older at baseline than those remaining falls free during follow-up (mean difference 0.70 years, 95%CI 0.55-0.85, p < 0.001). A higher FRAX 10-year probability of hip fracture was associated with increased likelihood of falling, with fall risk increasing by 1-2% for every 1% increase in hip fracture probability. However, falls risk factors were well balanced between the study arms and, importantly, there was no evidence of a difference in falls occurrence. In particular, there was no evidence of interaction (p = 0.18) between baseline FRAX hip fracture probabilities and falls risk in the two arms, consistent with no impact of screening on falls in women informed to be at high risk of hip fracture. CONCLUSION: Effectiveness of screening for high FRAX hip fracture probability to reduce hip fracture risk was not mediated by a reduction in falls.

Systematic screening using FRAX® leads to increased use of, and adherence to, anti-osteoporosis medications: an analysis of the UK SCOOP trial.

In the large community-based SCOOP trial, systematic fracture risk screening using FRAX® led to greater use of AOM and greater adherence, in women at high fracture risk, compared with usual care. INTRODUCTION: In the SCreening of Older wOmen for Prevention of fracture (SCOOP) trial, we investigated the effect of the screening intervention on subsequent long-term self-reported adherence to anti-osteoporosis medications (AOM). METHODS: SCOOP was a primary care-based UK multicentre trial of screening for fracture risk. A total of 12,483 women (70-85 years) were randomised to either usual NHS care, or assessment using the FRAX® tool ± dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), with medication recommended for those found to be at high risk of hip fracture. Self-reported AOM use was obtained by postal questionnaires at 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months. Analysis was limited to those who initiated AOM during follow-up. Logistic regression was used to explore baseline determinants of adherence (good ≥ 80%; poor < 80%). RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of participants was 75.6 (4.2) years, with 6233 randomised to screening and 6250 to the control group. Of those participants identified at high fracture risk in the screening group, 38.2% of those on treatment at 6 months were still treated at 60 months, whereas the corresponding figure for the control group was 21.6%. Older age was associated with poorer adherence (OR per year increase in age 0.96 [95% CI 0.93, 0.99], p = 0.01), whereas history of parental hip fracture was associated with greater rate adherence (OR 1.67 [95% CI 1.23, 2.26], p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Systematic fracture risk screening using FRAX® leads to greater use of AOM and greater adherence, in women at high fracture risk, compared with usual care.

Effect of vitamin K on bone mineral density and fractures in adults: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Vitamin K may affect bone mineral density and fracture incidence. Since publication of a previous systematic review the integrity of some of the previous evidence has been questioned and further trials have been published. Therefore an update to the systematic review was required. INTRODUCTION: This systematic review was designed to assess the effectiveness of oral vitamin K supplementation for increasing bone mineral density and reducing fractures in adults. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, clinicaltrials.gov, and WHO-ICTRP were searched for eligible trials. Randomised controlled trials assessing oral vitamin K supplementation that assessed bone mineral density or fractures in adult populations were included. A total of 36 studies were identified. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a piloted extraction form. RESULTS: For post-menopausal or osteoporotic patients, meta-analysis showed that the odds of any clinical fracture were lower for vitamin K compared to controls (OR, 0.72, 95%CI 0.55 to 0.95). Restricting the analysis to low risk of bias trials reduced the OR to 0.76 (95%CI, 0.58 to 1.01). There was no difference in vertebral fractures between the groups (OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.11). In the bone mineral density meta-analysis, percentage change from baseline at the lumbar spine was higher at 1 year (MD 0.93, 95%, CI - 0.02 to 1.89) and 2 years (MD 1.63%, 95%CI 0.10 to 3.16) for vitamin K compared to controls; however, removing trials at high risk of bias tended to result in smaller differences that were not statistically significant. At 6 months, it was higher in the hip (MD 0.42%, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.83) and femur (MD 0.29%, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.42). There was no significant difference at other anatomical sites. CONCLUSIONS: For post-menopausal or osteoporotic patients, there is no evidence that vitamin K affects bone mineral density or vertebral fractures; it may reduce clinical fractures; however, the evidence is insufficient to confirm this. There are too few trials to draw conclusions for other patient groups.

A cluster randomized trial of strategies to increase uptake amongst young women invited for their first cervical screen: The STRATEGIC trial.

Objectives To measure the feasibility and effectiveness of interventions to increase cervical screening uptake amongst young women. Methods A two-phase cluster randomized trial conducted in general practices in the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. In Phase 1, women in practices randomized to intervention due for their first invitation to cervical screening received a pre-invitation leaflet and, separately, access to online booking. In Phase 2, non-attenders at six months were randomized to one of: vaginal self-sample kits sent unrequested or offered; timed appointments; nurse navigator; or the choice between nurse navigator or self-sample kits. Primary outcome was uplift in intervention vs. control practices, at 3 and 12 months post invitation. Results Phase 1 randomized 20,879 women. Neither pre-invitation leaflet nor online booking increased screening uptake by three months (18.8% pre-invitation leaflet vs. 19.2% control and 17.8% online booking vs. 17.2% control). Uptake was higher amongst human papillomavirus vaccinees at three months (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.69-2.53, p < 0.001). Phase 2 randomized 10,126 non-attenders, with 32-34 clusters for each intervention and 100 clusters as controls. Sending self-sample kits increased uptake at 12 months (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.20-1.91, p = 0.001), as did timed appointments (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.14-1.74, p = 0.001). The offer of a nurse navigator, a self-sample kits on request, and choice between timed appointments and nurse navigator were ineffective. Conclusions Amongst non-attenders, self-sample kits sent and timed appointments achieved an uplift in screening over the short term; longer term impact is less certain. Prior human papillomavirus vaccination was associated with increased screening uptake.

The EVerT2 (Effective Verruca Treatments 2) trial: a randomized controlled trial of needling vs. nonsurgical debridement for the treatment of plantar verrucae.

BACKGROUND: Verrucae are a common foot skin pathology, which can in some cases persist for many years. Plantar verrucae can be unsightly and painful. There are a range of treatment options including needling. OBJECTIVES: The EVerT2 (Effective Verruca Treatments 2) trial aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the needling procedure for the treatment of plantar verrucae, relative to callus debridement. METHODS: This single-centre randomized controlled trial recruited 60 participants (aged ≥ 18 years with a plantar verruca). Participants were randomized 1 : 1 to the intervention group (needling) or the control group (debridement of the overlying callus). The primary outcome was clearance of the index verruca at 12 weeks after randomization. Secondary outcomes included recurrence of the verruca, clearance of all verrucae, number of verrucae, size of the index verruca, pain and participant satisfaction at 12 and 24 weeks. A cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out from the National Health Service perspective over 12 weeks. RESULTS: Sixty eligible patients were randomized (needling group n = 29, 48%; debridement group n = 31, 52%) and 53 were included in the primary analysis (needling n = 28, 97%; debridement n = 25, 81%). Clearance of the index verruca occurred in eight (15%) participants (needling n = 4, 14%; debridement n = 4, 16%; P = 0·86). The needling intervention costs were on average £14·33 (95% confidence interval 5·32-23·35) more per patient than for debridement. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that the needling technique is more clinically or cost-effective than callus debridement. The results show a significant improvement in pain outcomes after needling compared with the debridement treatment alone.

No difference found in time to publication by statistical significance of trial results: a methodological review.

OBJECTIVE: Time-lag from study completion to publication is a potential source of publication bias in randomised controlled trials. This study sought to update the evidence base by identifying the effect of the statistical significance of research findings on time to publication of trial results. DESIGN: Literature searches were carried out in four general medical journals from June 2013 to June 2014 inclusive (BMJ, JAMA, the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine). SETTING: Methodological review of four general medical journals. PARTICIPANTS: Original research articles presenting the primary analyses from phase 2, 3 and 4 parallel-group randomised controlled trials were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time from trial completion to publication. RESULTS: The median time from trial completion to publication was 431 days (n = 208, interquartile range 278-618). A multivariable adjusted Cox model found no statistically significant difference in time to publication for trials reporting positive or negative results (hazard ratio: 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.16, p = 0.32). CONCLUSION: In contrast to previous studies, this review did not demonstrate the presence of time-lag bias in time to publication. This may be a result of these articles being published in four high-impact general medical journals that may be more inclined to publish rapidly, whatever the findings. Further research is needed to explore the presence of time-lag bias in lower quality studies and lower impact journals.

Cost effectiveness of surgical versus non-surgical treatment of adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus: economic evaluation alongside the PROFHER trial.

AIMS: A pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial (PROFHER) was conducted in United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) hospitals to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of surgery compared with non-surgical treatment for displaced fractures of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck in adults. METHODS: A cost utility analysis from the NHS perspective was performed. Differences between surgical and non-surgical treatment groups in costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at two years were used to derive an estimate of the cost effectiveness of surgery using regression methods. RESULTS: Patients randomised to receive surgical intervention accumulated mean greater costs and marginally lower QALYs than patients randomised to non-surgery. The surgical intervention cost a mean of £1758 more per patient (95% confidence intervals (CI) £1126 to £2389). Total QALYs for the surgical group were smaller than those for non-surgery -0.0101 (95% CI -0.13 to 0.11). The probability of surgery being cost effective was less than 10% given the current NICE willingness to pay at a threshold of £20 000 for an additional QALY. The results were robust to sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: The results suggest that current surgical treatment is not cost effective for the majority of displaced fractures of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck in the United Kingdom's NHS. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: The results of this trial do not support the trend of increased surgical treatment for patients with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck within the United Kingdom NHS.

Holistic assessment of women with hyperemesis gravidarum: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hyperemesis gravidarum or severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy affects women's physical, social and psychological wellbeing and often requires frequent hospital admissions. Current standard care may be too medically focussed to meet all of women's complex needs. AIM: The aim of this study is to test where using a validated questionnaire, the Hyperemesis Impact of Symptoms tool, delivered by a nurse to assess the overall effect of hyperemesis on an individual woman's life and to provide advice tailored to her specific needs, will help her cope better with her symptoms and reduce admissions to hospital. DESIGN: This study was a two arm randomised controlled trial in which women with hyperemesis from four hospitals were randomly allocated to one of two groups: (1) usual care and (2) usual care plus assessment with the Hyperemesis Impact of Symptoms questionnaire and a care plan tailored to their responses. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Recruitment was from women who were admitted with hyperemesis gravidarum; diabetic women or those over 14 weeks gestation were excluded. Those who consented completed questionnaires to assess their quality of life and the severity of symptoms at baseline and at three time points over the following 6 weeks. RESULTS: Women's average social functioning, Hyperemesis Impact of Symptom scores and average number of admissions were not significantly different between either group. The average number of days in hospital for the questionnaire and tailored plan group was significantly lower, 4.97, compared with 6.14 in the usual care group. Using the questionnaire to plan individualised care was not associated with significant reduction in health care costs. CONCLUSION: Using the Hyperemesis Impact of Symptoms questionnaire to tailor a care plan to address women's individual needs was not associated with any significant improvements in the quality of life. The cost effectiveness analysis did not indicate that the questionnaire is cost saving. The Hyperemesis Impact of Symptoms questionnaire is a practical tool for nurses and midwives to assess the overall impact of hyperemesis gravidarum on the individual and could be useful for assessing symptoms and evaluating physical, social and psychological changes following treatment in either clinical or research settings.

The effect of supplementation with alkaline potassium salts on bone metabolism: a meta-analysis.

UNLABELLED: The role of acid-base metabolism in bone health is controversial. In this meta-analysis, potassium bicarbonate and potassium citrate lowered urinary calcium and acid excretion and reduced the excretion of the bone resorption marker NTX. These salts may thus be beneficial to bone health by conserving bone mineral. INTRODUCTION: The role of acid-base homeostasis as a determinant of bone health and the contribution of supplemental alkali in promoting skeletal integrity remain a subject of debate. The objective of this study was, therefore, to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the effects of supplemental potassium bicarbonate (KHCO3) and potassium citrate (KCitr) on urinary calcium and acid excretion, markers of bone turnover and bone mineral density (BMD) and to compare their effects with that of potassium chloride (KCl). METHODS: A total of 14 studies of the effect of alkaline potassium salts on calcium metabolism and bone health, identified by a systematic literature search, were analysed with Review Manager (Version 5; The Cochrane Collaboration) using a random-effects model. Authors were contacted to provide missing data as required. Results are presented as the standardised (SMD) or unstandardized mean difference (MD) (95 % confidence intervals). RESULTS: Urinary calcium excretion was lowered by intervention with both KHCO3 (P = 0.04) and KCitr (P = 0.01), as was net acid excretion (NAE) (P = 0.002 for KHCO3 and P = 0.0008 for KCitr). Both salts significantly lowered the bone resorption marker NTX (P < 0.00001). There was no effect on bone formation markers or BMD. KHCO3 and KCitr lowered calcium excretion to a greater extent than did KCl. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis confirms that supplementation with alkaline potassium salts leads to significant reduction in renal calcium excretion and acid excretion, compatible with the concept of increased buffering of hydrogen ions by raised circulating bicarbonate. The observed reduction in bone resorption indicates a potential benefit to bone health.

Compliance effects in a randomised controlled trial of yoga for chronic low back pain: a methodological study.

STUDY DESIGN: Methodological study nested within a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) of yoga plus usual general practitioner (GP) care vs usual GP care for chronic low back pain. OBJECTIVE: To explore the treatment effects of non-compliance using three approaches in an RCT evaluating yoga for low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A large multicentre RCT using intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis found that participants with chronic low back pain who were offered a 12-week progressive programme of yoga plus usual GP care had better back function than those offered usual GP care alone. However, ITT analysis can underestimate the effect of treatment in those who comply with treatment. As such, the data were analysed using other approaches to assess the problem of non-compliance. The main outcome measure was the self-reported Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). METHODS: Complier average causal effect (CACE) analysis, per-protocol analysis and on-treatment analysis were conducted on the data of participants who were fully compliant, predefined as attendance of at least three of the first six sessions and at least three other sessions. The analysis was repeated for participants who had attended at least one yoga session (i.e. any compliance), which included participants who were fully compliant. Each approach was described, including strengths and weaknesses, and the results of the different approaches were compared with those of the ITT analysis. RESULTS: For the participants who were fully compliant (n=93, 60%), a larger beneficial treatment effect was seen using CACE analysis compared with per-protocol, on-treatment and ITT analyses at 3 and 12 months. The difference in mean change in RMDQ score between randomised groups was -3.30 [95% confidence interval (CI) -4.90 to -1.70, P<0.001] at 3 months and -2.23 (95% CI -3.93 to -0.53, P=0.010) at 12 months for CACE analysis, -3.12 (95% CI -4.26 to -1.98, P<0.001) at 3 months and -2.11 (95% CI -3.33 to -0.89, P=0.001) at 12 months for per-protocol analysis, and -2.91 (95% CI -4.06 to -1.76, P<0.001) at 3 months and -2.10 (95% CI -3.31 to -0.89, P=0.001) at 12 months for on-treatment analysis. For the participants who demonstrated any compliance (n=133, 85%), the results were generally consistent with the fully compliant group at 3 months, but the treatment effect was smaller. The difference in mean change in RMDQ score between randomised groups was -2.45 (95% CI -3.67 to -1.24) for CACE analysis, -2.30 (95% CI -3.43 to 1.17) for per-protocol analysis and -2.15 (95% CI -3.25 to -1.06) for on-treatment analysis, which was slightly less than that for ITT analysis. In contrast, at 12 months, per-protocol and on-treatment analyses showed a larger treatment effect compared with CACE and ITT analyses: per protocol analysis -1.86 (95% CI -3.02 to -0.71), on-treatment analysis -1.99 (95% CI -3.13 to -0.86) and CACE analysis -1.67 (95% CI -2.95 to -0.40). CONCLUSION: ITT analysis estimated a slightly smaller treatment effect in participants who complied with treatment. When examining compliance, CACE analysis is more rigorous than per-protocol and on-treatment analyses. Using CACE analysis, the treatment effect was larger in participants who complied with treatment compared with participants who were allocated to treatment, and the difference between ITT and CACE analyses for the fully compliant group at 3 months was small but clinically important. Per-protocol and on-treatment analyses may produce unreliable estimates when the effect of treatment is small. INTERNATIONAL STANDARD RANDOMISED TRIAL NUMBER REGISTER: ISRCTN 81079604.

Patient-led training on patient safety: a pilot study to test the feasibility and acceptability of an educational intervention.

BACKGROUND: Training in patient safety is an important element of medical education. Most educational interventions on patient safety training adopt a 'health-professional lens' with limited consideration on the impact of safety lapses on the patient and their families and little or no involvement of patients in the design or delivery of the training. AIMS: This paper describes a pilot study to test the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a patient-led educational intervention to facilitate safety training amongst newly qualified doctors. METHOD: Patients and/or carers who had experienced harm during their care shared narratives of their stories with trainees; this was followed by a focused discussion on patient safety issues exploring the causes and consequences of safety incidents and lessons to be learned from these. RESULTS: The intervention, which will be further tested in an NIHR-funded randomised controlled trial (RCT), was successfully implemented into an existing training programme and found acceptance amongst the patients and trainees. CONCLUSION: The pilot study proved to be a useful step in refining the intervention for the RCT including identifying appropriate outcome measures and highlighting organisational issues.

A pragmatic randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening older women for the prevention of fractures: rationale, design and methods for the SCOOP study.

SCOOP is a UK seven-centre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial with 5-year follow-up, including 11,580 women aged 70 to 85 years, to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a community-based screening programme to reduce fractures. It utilises the FRAX algorithm and DXA to assess the 10-year probability of fracture. Introduction Osteoporotic, or low-trauma, fractures present a considerable burden to the National Health Service and have major adverse effects on quality of life, disability and mortality for the individual. Methods Given the availability of efficacious treatments and a risk assessment tool based upon clinical risk factors and bone mineral density, a case exists to undertake a community-based controlled evaluation of screening for subjects at high risk of fracture, under the hypothesis that such a screening programme would reduce fractures in this population. Results This study is a UK seven-centre, unblinded, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial with a 5-year follow-up period. A total of 11,580 women, aged 70 to 85 years and not on prescribed bone protective therapy will be consented to the trial by post via primary care providing 90% power to detect an 18% decrease in fractures. Conclusions Participants will be randomised to either a screening arm or control. Those undergoing screening will have a 10-year fracture probability computed from baseline risk factors together with bone mineral density measured by DXA in selected subjects. Individuals above an age-dependent threshold of fracture probability will be recommended for treatment for the duration of the trial. Subjects in the control arm will receive 'usual care'. Participants will be followed up 6 months after randomisation and annually by postal questionnaires with independent checking of hospital and primary care records. The primary outcome will be the proportion of individuals sustaining fractures in each group. An economic analysis will be carried out to assess cost-effectiveness of screening. A qualitative evaluation will be conducted to examine the acceptability of the process to participants.

EVerT: cryotherapy versus salicylic acid for the treatment of verrucae--a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen versus patient daily self-treatment with 50% salicylic acid for the treatment of verrucae (plantar warts). DESIGN: A multicentre, pragmatic, open, two-armed randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation. Randomisation was simple, with the allocation sequence generated by a computer in a 1 : 1 ratio. SETTING: Podiatry clinics, university podiatry schools and primary care in England, Scotland and Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients were eligible if they presented with a verruca which, in the opinion of the health-care professional, was suitable for treatment with both salicylic acid and cryotherapy, and were aged 12 years and over. INTERVENTIONS: Cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen delivered by a health-care professional compared with daily patient self-treatment with 50% salicylic acid (Verrugon, William Ransom & Son Plc, Hitchin, UK) for a maximum of 8 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was complete clearance of all verrucae at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were complete clearance of all verrucae at 12 weeks, controlling for age, whether or not the verrucae had been previously treated and type of verrucae, with a second model to explore the effect of patient preferences, time to clearance of verrucae, clearance of verrucae at 6 months, number of verrucae at 12 weeks and patient satisfaction with the treatment. RESULTS: In total, 240 eligible patients were recruited, with 117 patients allocated to the cryotherapy group and 123 to the salicylic acid group. There was no evidence of a difference in clearance rates between the treatment groups in the primary outcome [17/119 (14.3%) in the salicylic acid group vs 15/110 (13.6%) in the cryotherapy group; p = 0.89]. The results of the study did not change when controlled for age, whether or not the verrucae had been previously treated and type of verrucae, or when patient preferences were explored. There was no evidence of a difference in time to clearance of verrucae between the two groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 1.25; p = 0.33] or in the clearance of verrucae at 6 months (33.7% cryotherapy vs 30.5% salicylic acid). There was no evidence of a difference in the number of verrucae at 12 weeks between the two groups (incidence rate ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.43; p = 0.62). Nineteen participants reported 28 adverse events, 14 in each group, with two treatment-related non-serious adverse events in the cryotherapy group. Cryotherapy was also associated with higher mean costs per additional healed patient (£101.17, 95% bias-corrected and accelerated CI £85.09 to £117.26). The probability of cryotherapy being cost-effective is 40% for a range of willingness-to-pay thresholds of £15,000-30,000 per patient healed. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence for a difference in terms of clearance of verrucae between cryotherapy and salicylic acid (at both 12 weeks and 6 months), number of verrucae at 12 weeks and time to clearance of verrucae. Cryotherapy was associated with higher mean costs per additional healed patient compared with salicylic acid. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18994246. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 15, No. 32. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

Economic evaluation of a randomized controlled trial of ultrasound therapy for hard-to-heal venous leg ulcers.

BACKGROUND: A pragmatic, multicentre randomized controlled trial (VenUS III) was conducted to determine whether low-dose ultrasound therapy increased the healing rate of hard-to-heal leg ulcers. This study was a cost-effectiveness analysis of the trial data. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were conducted alongside the VenUS III trial, in which patients were randomly allocated to either ultrasound treatment administered weekly for 12 weeks along with standard care, or standard care alone. The time horizon was 12 months and based on the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that ultrasound therapy added to standard care was likely to be more costly and provide no extra benefit over standard care alone. Individuals who received ultrasound treatment plus standard care took a mean of 14.7 (95 per cent confidence interval - 32.7 to 56.8) days longer to heal, had 0.009 (-0.042 to 0.024) fewer quality-adjusted life years and had higher treatment costs by £ 197.88 (-35.19 to 420.32). Based on these point estimates, ultrasound therapy plus standard care for leg ulcers was dominated by standard care alone. The analysis of uncertainty showed that this treatment strategy is unlikely to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound treatment was not cost-effective for hard-to-heal leg ulcers and should not be recommended for adoption in the NHS.

VenUS III: a randomised controlled trial of therapeutic ultrasound in the management of venous leg ulcers.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of low-dose ultrasound delivered in conjunction with standard care against standard care alone in the treatment of hard-to-heal venous ulcers. DESIGN: A multicentre, pragmatic, two-armed randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation. SETTING: Community nurse services; community leg ulcer clinics; hospital outpatient leg ulcer clinics, among both urban and rural settings in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with a venous leg ulcer of > 6 months' duration or > 5 cm2 and an ankle-brachial pressure index of ≥ 0.8. In total, 337 patients were recruited to the study. INTERVENTIONS: Participants in the intervention group received low-dose ultrasound (0.5 W/cm2) delivered at 1 MHz, pulsed pattern of 1 : 4, applied to periulcer skin (via a water-based contact gel) weekly for up to 12 weeks alongside standard care. Standard care consisted of low-adherent dressings and compression therapy, renewed as recommended by the patient's nurse and modified if required to reflect changes in ulcer and skin condition. The output of the ultrasound machines was checked every 3 months to confirm intervention fidelity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was time to healing of the largest eligible ulcer (reference ulcer). Secondary outcomes were time to healing of all ulcers, proportion of patients healed, percentage and absolute change in ulcer size, proportion of time patients were ulcer free, cost of treatments, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adverse events, withdrawal and loss to follow-up. RESULTS: There was a small, and statistically not significant, difference in the median time to complete ulcer healing of all ulcers in favour of standard care [median 328 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) 235 days, inestimable] compared with ultrasound (median 365 days, 95% CI 224 days, inestimable). There was no difference between groups in the proportion of patients with ulcers healed at 12 months (72/168 in ultrasound vs 78/169 standard care), nor in the change in ulcer size at 4 weeks. There was no evidence of a difference in recurrence of healed ulcers. There was no difference in HRQoL [measured using the Short Form questionnaire-12 items (SF-12)] between the two groups. There were more adverse events with ultrasound than with standard care. Ultrasound therapy as an adjuvant to standard care was found not to be a cost-effective treatment when compared with standard care. The mean cost of ultrasound was £197.88 (bias-corrected 95% CI -£35.19 to £420.32) higher than standard care per participant per year. There was a significant relationship between ulcer healing and area and duration at baseline. In addition, those centres with high recruitment rates had the highest healing rates. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose ultrasound, delivered weekly during dressing changes, added to the package of current best practice (dressings, compression therapy) did not increase ulcer healing rates, affect quality of life (QoL) or reduce recurrence. It was associated with higher costs and more adverse events. There is no evidence that adding low-dose ultrasound to standard care for 'hard-to-heal' ulcers aids healing, improves QoL or reduces recurrence. It increases costs and adverse events. The relationship between ulcer healing rates and patient recruitment is worthy of further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21175670. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 15, No. 13. See the HTA programme website for further project information.