Video versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Urgent Intubation of Newborn Infants.

BACKGROUND: Repeated attempts at endotracheal intubation are associated with increased adverse events in neonates. When clinicians view the airway directly with a laryngoscope, fewer than half of first attempts are successful. The use of a video laryngoscope, which has a camera at the tip of the blade that displays a view of the airway on a screen, has been associated with a greater percentage of successful intubations on the first attempt than the use of direct laryngoscopy in adults and children. The effect of video laryngoscopy among neonates is uncertain. METHODS: In this single-center trial, we randomly assigned neonates of any gestational age who were undergoing intubation in the delivery room or neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to the video-laryngoscopy group or the direct-laryngoscopy group. Randomization was stratified according to gestational age (<32 weeks or ≥32 weeks). The primary outcome was successful intubation on the first attempt, as determined by exhaled carbon dioxide detection. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 214 of the 226 neonates who were enrolled in the trial, 63 (29%) of whom were intubated in the delivery room and 151 (71%) in the NICU. Successful intubation on the first attempt occurred in 79 of the 107 patients (74%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 66 to 82) in the video-laryngoscopy group and in 48 of the 107 patients (45%; 95% CI, 35 to 54) in the direct-laryngoscopy group (P<0.001). The median number of attempts to achieve successful intubation was 1 (95% CI, 1 to 1) in the video-laryngoscopy group and 2 (95% CI, 1 to 2) in the direct-laryngoscopy group. The median lowest oxygen saturation during intubation was 74% (95% CI, 65 to 78) in the video-laryngoscopy group and 68% (95% CI, 62 to 74) in the direct-laryngoscopy group; the lowest heart rate was 153 beats per minute (95% CI, 148 to 158) and 148 (95% CI, 140 to 156), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among neonates undergoing urgent endotracheal intubation, video laryngoscopy resulted in a greater number of successful intubations on the first attempt than direct laryngoscopy. (Funded by the National Maternity Hospital Foundation; VODE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04994652.).

Clinical diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection: An observational study of respiratory tract infection in primary care in the early phase of the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, GPs had to distinguish SARS-CoV-2 from other aetiologies in patients presenting with respiratory tract infection (RTI) symptoms on clinical grounds and adapt management accordingly. OBJECTIVES: To test the diagnostic accuracy of GPs' clinical diagnosis of a SARS-CoV-2 infection in a period when COVID-19 was a new disease. To describe GPs' management of patients presenting with RTI for whom no confirmed diagnosis was available. To investigate associations between patient and clinical features with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: In April 2020-March 2021, 876 patients (9 countries) were recruited when they contacted their GP with symptoms of an RTI of unknown aetiology. A swab was taken at baseline for later analysis. Aetiology (PCR), diagnostic accuracy of GPs' clinical SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, and patient management were explored. Factors related to SARS-CoV-2 infection were determined by logistic regression modelling. RESULTS: GPs suspected SARS-CoV-2 in 53% of patients whereas 27% of patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. True-positive patients (23%) were more intensively managed for follow-up, antiviral prescribing and advice than true-negatives (42%). False negatives (5%) were under-advised, particularly for social distancing and isolation. Older age (OR: 1.02 (1.01-1.03)), male sex (OR: 1.68 (1.16-2.41)), loss of taste/smell (OR: 5.8 (3.7-9)), fever (OR: 1.9 (1.3-2.8)), muscle aches (OR: 2.1 (1.5-3)), and a known risk factor for COVID-19 (travel, health care worker, contact with proven case; OR: 2.7 (1.8-4)) were predictive of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Absence of loss of taste/smell, fever, muscle aches and a known risk factor for COVID-19 correctly excluded SARS-CoV-2 in 92.3% of patients, whereas presence of 3, or 4 of these variables correctly classified SARS-CoV-2 in 57.7% and 87.1%. CONCLUSION: Correct clinical diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, without POC-testing available, appeared to be complicated.

Artificial Intelligence to Improve Antibiotic Prescribing: A Systematic Review.

Introduction: The use of antibiotics leads to antibiotic resistance (ABR). Different methods have been used to predict and control ABR. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has been explored to improve antibiotic (AB) prescribing, and thereby control and reduce ABR. This review explores whether the use of AI can improve antibiotic prescribing for human patients. Methods: Observational studies that use AI to improve antibiotic prescribing were retrieved for this review. There were no restrictions on the time, setting or language. References of the included studies were checked for additional eligible studies. Two independent authors screened the studies for inclusion and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies using the National Institute of Health (NIH) Quality Assessment Tool for observational cohort studies. Results: Out of 3692 records, fifteen studies were eligible for full-text screening. Five studies were included in this review, and a narrative synthesis was carried out to assess their findings. All of the studies used supervised machine learning (ML) models as a subfield of AI, such as logistic regression, random forest, gradient boosting decision trees, support vector machines and K-nearest neighbours. Each study showed a positive contribution of ML in improving antibiotic prescribing, either by reducing antibiotic prescriptions or predicting inappropriate prescriptions. However, none of the studies reported the engagement of AB prescribers in developing their ML models, nor their feedback on the user-friendliness and reliability of the models in different healthcare settings. Conclusion: The use of ML methods may improve antibiotic prescribing in both primary and secondary settings. None of the studies evaluated the implementation process of their models in clinical practices. Prospero Registration: (CRD42022329049).

The experiences of patients ill with COVID-19-like symptoms and the role of testing for SARS-CoV-2 in supporting them: A qualitative study in eight European countries during the first wave of the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Access to testing during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was limited, impacting patients with COVID-19-like symptoms. Current qualitative studies have been limited to one country or were conducted outside Europe. OBJECTIVES: To explore - in eight European countries - the experiences of patients consulting in primary care with COVID-19-like symptoms during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: Sixty-six semi-structured interviews, informed by a topic guide, were conducted by telephone or in person between April and July 2020. Patients with COVID-19-like symptoms were purposively recruited in primary care sites in eight countries and sampled based on age, gender, and symptom presentation. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis techniques were used to develop a framework representing data across settings. Data adequacy was attained by collecting rich data. RESULTS: Seven themes were identified, which described the experiences of patients consulting. Two themes are reported in this manuscript describing the role of COVID-19 testing in this experience. Patients described significant distress due to their symptoms, especially those at higher risk of complications from COVID-19, and those with severe symptoms. Patients wanted access to testing to identify the cause of their illness and minimise the burden of managing uncertainty. Some patients testing positive for COVID-19 assumed they would be immune from future infection. CONCLUSION: Patients experiencing novel and severe symptoms, particularly those with comorbidities, experienced a significant emotional and psychological burden due to concerns about COVID-19. Testing provided reassurance over health status and helped patients identify which guidance to follow. Testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 led to some patients thinking they were immune from future infection, thus influencing subsequent behaviour.

Disease-Specific Quality Indicators for Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing for Respiratory Infections (ESAC Quality Indicators) Applied to Point Prevalence Audit Surveys in General Practices in 13 European Countries.

Up to 80% of antibiotics are prescribed in the community. An assessment of prescribing by indication will help to identify areas where improvement can be made. A point prevalence audit study (PPAS) of consecutive respiratory tract infection (RTI) consultations in general practices in 13 European countries was conducted in January-February 2020 (PPAS-1) and again in 2022 (PPAS-4). The European Surveillance of Antibiotic Consumption quality indicators (ESAC-QI) were calculated to identify where improvements can be made. A total of 3618 consultations were recorded for PPAS-1 and 2655 in PPAS-4. Bacterial aetiology was suspected in 26% (PPAS-1) and 12% (PPAS-4), and an antibiotic was prescribed in 30% (PPAS-1) and 16% (PPAS-4) of consultations. The percentage of adult patients with bronchitis who receive an antibiotic should, according to the ESAC-QI, not exceed 30%, which was not met by participating practices in any country except Denmark and Spain. For patients (≥1) with acute upper RTI, less than 20% should be prescribed an antibiotic, which was achieved by general practices in most countries, except Ireland (both PPAS), Croatia (PPAS-1), and Greece (PPAS-4) where prescribing for acute or chronic sinusitis (0-20%) was also exceeded. For pneumonia in adults, prescribing is acceptable for 90-100%, and this is lower in most countries. Prescribing for tonsillitis (≥1) exceeded the ESAC-QI (0-20%) in all countries and was 69% (PPAS-1) and 75% (PPAS-4). In conclusion, ESAC-QI applied to PPAS outcomes allows us to evaluate appropriate antibiotic prescribing by indication and benchmark general practices and countries.

Collaboration to reduce antibiotic use and resistance and identify opportunities for improvement and awareness (CARA).

INTRODUCTION: CARA is a five-year Health Research Board (HRB) project. Superbugs cause resistant infections that are difficult to treat and pose a serious threat to human health. Providing tools to explore the prescription of antibiotics by GPs may help identify gaps where improvements can be made. CARA's aim is to combine, link and visualise data on infections, prescribing and other healthcare information. METHODS: The CARA team is creating a dashboard to provide GPs with a tool to visualise their own practice data and compare this with other GPs in Ireland. Anonymous patient data can be uploaded and visualised to show details, current trends and changes in infections and prescribing. The CARA platform will also provide easy options to generate audit reports. RESULTS: After registration, a tool for anonymous data upload will be provided. Through this uploader, data will be used to create instant graphs and overviews as well as comparisons with other GP practices. With selection options, graphical presentations can be further explored or audits generated. Currently, few GPs are involved in the development of the dashboard to ensure it will be efficient. Examples of the dashboard will be shown at the conference. DISCUSSION: The CARA project will provide GPs with a tool to access, analyse and understand their patient data. GPs will have secure accounts accessible through the CARA website to allow easy anonymous data upload in a few steps. The dashboard will show comparisons of their prescribing with other (unknown) practices, identify areas for improvement and conduct audit reports.

Initial symptoms and three months follow-up after acute COVID-19 in outpatients: An international prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Most studies on long-term follow-up of patients with COVID-19 focused on hospitalised patients. No prospective study with structured follow-up has been performed in non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: To assess long-COVID and post-COVID (WHO definition: symptomatic at least 12 weeks), describe lingering symptoms, their impact on daily activities, and general practice visits and explore risk factors for symptom duration in outpatients. METHODS: A prospective study of adult outpatients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptoms consistent with COVID-19 in 11 European countries, recruited during 2020 and 2021 from primary care and the community. Structured follow-up by phone interviews (symptom rating, symptom impact on daily activities and general practice visits) was performed at weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 by study personnel. Data was analysed descriptively by using correlation matrixes and Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 270 enrolled patients, 52% developed long-COVID and 32% post-COVID-syndrome. When only considering the presence of moderate or (very) severe symptoms at weeks 8 and 12, these percentages were 28% and 18%, respectively. Fatigue was the most often reported symptom during follow-up. The impact of lingering symptoms was most evident in sports and household activities. About half (53%) had at least one general practice contact during follow-up. Obese patients took twice as long to return to usual health (HR: 0.5, 95%CI: 0.3-0.8); no other risk profile could predict lingering symptoms. CONCLUSION: Long-COVID and post-COVID are also common in outpatients. In 32%, it takes more than 12 weeks to return to usual health.

The Effectiveness of Interactive Dashboards to Optimise Antibiotic Prescribing in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.

Governments and healthcare organisations collect data on antibiotic prescribing (AP) for surveillance. This data can support tools for visualisations and feedback to GPs using dashboards that may prompt a change in prescribing behaviour. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of interactive dashboards to optimise AP in primary care. Six electronic databases were searched for relevant studies up to August 2022. A narrative synthesis of findings was conducted to evaluate the intervention processes and results. Two independent reviewers assessed the relevance, risk of bias and quality of the evidence. A total of ten studies were included (eight RCTs and two non-RCTs). Overall, seven studies showed a slight reduction in AP. However, this reduction in AP when offering a dashboard may not in itself result in reductions but only when combined with educational components, public commitment or behavioural strategies. Only one study recorded dashboard engagement and showed a difference of 10% (95% CI 5% to 15%) between intervention and control. None of the studies reported on the development, pilot or implementation of dashboards or the involvement of stakeholders in design and testing. Interactive dashboards may reduce AP in primary care but most likely only when combined with other educational or behavioural intervention strategies.

Evidence for using point-of-care diagnostics in the management of respiratory tract infections in primary care: a scoping review protocol.

Background:  Antimicrobial resistance (AmR) is widely considered a global health threat and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality and costs. Inappropriate antimicrobial use is the most important modifiable risk factor for AmR. Most human antimicrobial medicines use occurs in primary care [prescribed by general practitioners (GPs), dispensed by community pharmacists (CPs)]. However, up to 50% of use is deemed inappropriate. Point-of-care diagnostic tests are used as a basis for antimicrobial stewardship interventions to improve the diagnostic certainty of respiratory tract infections (RTIs), and therefore ensure prudent antimicrobial use. However, there is a lack of guidance on their use, and they are therefore not routinely used in clinical practice. Objective: A scoping review will be conducted to synthesise the available evidence to inform the development of best practice guidance for using point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted following guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and reported using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Databases including Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, the International HTA database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as grey literature, will be searched. Screening will be undertaken independently by two reviewers to identify studies and literature reporting the use of point-of-care diagnostics in the management of RTIs in primary care by GPs and/ or CPs. Findings will be described using narrative synthesis. Conclusion:  The findings of this scoping review will be used to produce draft guidance on the use of point-of-care diagnostic tests in primary care, which will undergo further development using a Delphi consensus methodology involving experts in the field of RTIs, antimicrobial stewardship, point-of-care diagnostics and primary care.

COSUTI: A Core Outcome Set (COS) for Interventions for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) in Adults.

Background: Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common presentations of bacterial infections in the outpatient setting. The variation of outcomes reported in trials to assess the most effective treatment interventions for uncomplicated UTIs has meant that comparing and synthesising the outcomes across trials is challenging and limits the reliability of evidence which would otherwise inform healthcare decisions. Objective: Develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for interventions for the treatment of uncomplicated UTIs in otherwise healthy adults. Methods: The COS development consisted of three phases: (1) A systematic review to identify outcomes reported in randomised trials and systematic reviews of randomised trials comparing the effectiveness of any interventions for the treatment of uncomplicated UTI in otherwise healthy adults; (2) Outcomes identified in the systematic review were prioritised in an online 3-round modified Delphi survey with healthcare practitioners (n = 68), researchers (n = 5), and people who have experienced or cared for someone experiencing a UTI (n = 180); (3) An online consensus meeting to determine the final COS with healthcare practitioners and policymakers (n = 9), researchers (n = 4), and people who have experienced or cared for someone experiencing a UTI (n = 7). Results: We identified a large number of outcomes. Through the use of robust consensus methods, those outcomes were reduced to a core set of six outcomes that should, at a minimum, be measured and reported in randomised trials and systematic reviews of interventions treating uncomplicated UTIs in adults.

Topical interventions for the management of pain in chronic wounds: A protocol for a systematic review.

Background: Venous, arterial, diabetic and pressure ulcers, collectively known as chronic wounds, negatively impact individuals across psychological, social and financial domains. Chronic wounds can be painful and the nature, frequency and impact of pain can differ depending on wound aetiology, wound state and on numerous patient factors. While systemic pharmaceutical agents have some effect in managing pain, there is a need to examine topical agents applied to the wound bed for pain relief. The objective of this study is to examine and synthesise existing literature on the effectiveness of topical agents in managing pain in venous, diabetic, pressure, arterial and mixed venous/arterial ulcers. Methods: We will use Cochrane Systematic Review methodology to identify and synthesise eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of topical agents in reducing pain in chronic wounds. Embase, Medline, PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science will be searched from inception to end of June 2022 without language limits. We will independently extract data on the pharmaceutical agent, participant demographics, aetiology, condition of the wound, and type, nature and frequency of pain using a pre-designed data extraction form. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis will be performed to address heterogeneity across studies if appropriate. Further stratification and analyses will be based on included study variables and outcomes. Discussion: Wound pain is primarily managed via systemic pharmaceutical agents. However, patients express reluctance regarding systemic analgesic drugs, fearing addiction. Additionally, persons with chronic wounds have co-morbidities including hypertension, diabetes, or cardiovascular disease and are already taking multiple medications. Topical analgesia can potentially mitigate some of the perceived disadvantages of systemic agents but the available range of these agents and their effectiveness in managing pain in chronic wounds is not so well understood. This review will focus on such agents across a range of the most common chronic wounds.

An analysis of complaints about hospital care in the Republic of Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Patients and family members make complaints about their hospital care in order to express their dissatisfaction with the care received and prompt quality improvement. Increasingly, it is being understood that these complaints could serve as important data on how to improve care if analysed using a standardized tool. The use of the Healthcare Complaints Analysis Tool (HCAT) for this purpose has emerged internationally for quality and safety improvement. Previous work has identified hot spots (areas in care where harm occurs frequently) and blind spots (areas in care that are difficult for staff members to observe) from complaints analysis. This study aimed to (i) apply the HCAT to a sample of complaints about hospital care in the Republic of Ireland (RoI) to identify hot spots and blind spots in care and (ii) compare the findings of this analysis to a previously published study on hospital complaints in the UK. METHODS: A sample of complaints was taken from 16 hospitals in the RoI in Quarter 4 of 2019 (n = 641). These complaints were coded using the HCAT to classify complaints by domain, category, severity, stage of care and harm. Chi-squared tests were used to identify hot spots, and logistic regression was used to identify blind spots. The findings of this study were compared to a previously published UK study that used HCAT to identify hot spots and blind spots. RESULTS: Hot spots were identified in Irish hospital complaints while patients were receiving care on the ward, during initial examination and diagnosis, and while they were undergoing operations or procedures. This aligned with hot spots identified in the UK study. Blind spots were found for systemic problems, where patients experience multiple issues across their care. CONCLUSIONS: Hot spots and blind spots for patient harm can be identified in hospital care using the HCAT analysis. These in turn could be used to inform improvement interventions, and direct stakeholders to areas that require urgent attention. This study also highlights the promise of the HCAT for use across different healthcare systems, with similar results emerging from the RoI and the UK.

Public Health Interventions to Improve Antimicrobial Resistance Awareness and Behavioural Change Associated with Antimicrobial Use: A Systematic Review Exploring the Use of Social Media.

INTRODUCTION: Over the years there have been several interventions targeted at the public to increase their knowledge and awareness about Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR). In this work, we updated a previously published review by Price et al. (2018), on effectiveness of interventions to improve the public's antimicrobial resistance awareness and behaviours associated with prudent use of antimicrobials to identify which interventions work best in influencing public behaviour. METHODS: Five databases-Medline (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL-OVID)-were searched for AMR interventions between 2017 and 2021 targeting the public. All studies which had a before and after assessment of the intervention were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: In total, 17 studies were found to be eligible for inclusion in the review. Since there was a variety in the study interventions and in particular outcomes, a narrative synthesis approach was adopted for analysis. Whereas each study showed some impact on awareness and knowledge, none measured long-term impact on behaviours towards antibiotic use, awareness, or knowledge. Engagement was higher in interventions which included interactive elements such as games or videos. Social media was not used for recruitment of participants or as a mode of communication in any AMR interventions included in this review.

A systematic review of the outcomes reported in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infection clinical trials.

Background: Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) are amongst the most frequent infections presenting in the outpatient setting. A growing number of clinical trials are assessing the most effective treatment interventions for uncomplicated UTI. Due to the heterogeneity of the outcomes reported in these trials, however, comparing these outcomes is challenging. Objectives: Identify the core outcomes that have been reported in trials and systematic reviews of interventions treating uncomplicated UTI in adults. Methods: We conducted a systematic search for core outcomes used to evaluate treatments of UTIs. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed and Embase. One researcher independently screened each article for inclusion, and the Core Outcome Set for treatment of Urinary Tract Infections (COSUTI) team acted as second reviewers. All included articles were screened by two reviewers. All outcomes were extracted verbatim, and similar outcomes were grouped into domains and subdomains. Results: In total, 334 outcomes were reported across 41 papers, the average number of outcomes reported being 8. Outcomes were categorized across 18 domains, the majority of which were related to clinical cure outcomes. Many outcomes varied in the timepoints within which the outcome was measured and reported. Conclusions: Comparing the outcomes of trials investigating uncomplicated UTI treatment remains challenging due to the difference in outcomes currently reported. Consistency of reporting of outcomes would be improved by developing a minimum number of consistent outcomes that should be reported in all trials.

Patients' and clinicians' perspectives on the primary care consultations for acute respiratory infections during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: an eight-country qualitative study in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' and clinicians' perceptions of healthcare-seeking behaviour and delivery of care is unclear. The pandemic accelerated the use of remote care, and understanding its benefits and drawbacks may inform its implementation during current and future healthcare emergencies. AIM: To explore patients' and primary care professionals' (PCPs) experiences of primary care delivery in the first wave of the pandemic. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in primary care in eight European countries (England, Ireland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, Poland, Sweden, and Germany). METHOD: A total of 146 interviews were conducted with 80 PCPs and 66 patients consulting for respiratory tract infection (RTI) symptoms, in eight European countries. Data were collected between April and July 2020, and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: It was found that patients accepted telemedicine when PCPs spent time to understand and address their concerns, but a minority preferred in-person consultations. PCPs felt that remote consultations created emotional distance between themselves and patients, and they reported having to manage diverse COVID-19-related medical and social concerns. CONCLUSION: Remote consultations for RTI symptoms may be acceptable long term if both groups are happy to use this format, but it is important that PCPs take time to address patients' concerns and provide safety-netting advice.

Developing an online, searchable database to systematically map and organise current literature on retention research (ORRCA2).

BACKGROUND: Addressing recruitment and retention challenges in trials is a key priority for methods research, but navigating the literature is difficult and time-consuming. In 2016, ORRCA (www.orrca.org.uk) launched a free, searchable database of recruitment research that has been widely accessed and used to support the update of systematic reviews and the selection of recruitment strategies for clinical trials. ORRCA2 aims to create a similar database to map the growing volume and importance of retention research. METHODS: Searches of Medline (Ovid), CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection and the Cochrane Library, restricted to English language and publications up to the end of 2017. Hand searches of key systematic reviews were undertaken and randomised evaluations of recruitment interventions within the ORRCA database on 1 October 2020 were also reviewed for any secondary retention outcomes. Records were screened by title and abstract before obtaining the full text of potentially relevant articles. Studies reporting or evaluating strategies, methods and study designs to improve retention within healthcare research were eligible. Case reports describing retention challenges or successes and studies evaluating participant reported reasons for withdrawal or losses were also included. Studies assessing adherence to treatments, attendance at appointments outside of research and statistical analysis methods for missing data were excluded. Eligible articles were categorised into one of the following evidence types: randomised evaluations, non-randomised evaluations, application of retention strategies without evaluation and observations of factors affecting retention. Articles were also mapped against a retention domain framework. Additional data were extracted on research outcomes, methods and host study context. RESULTS: Of the 72,904 abstracts screened, 4,364 full texts were obtained, and 1,167 articles were eligible. Of these, 165 (14%) were randomised evaluations, 99 (8%) non-randomised evaluations, 319 (27%) strategies without evaluation and 584 (50%) observations of factors affecting retention. Eighty-four percent (n = 979) of studies assessed the numbers of participants retained, 27% (n = 317) assessed demographic differences between retained and lost participants, while only 4% (n = 44) assessed the cost of retention strategies. The most frequently reported domains within the 165 studies categorised as 'randomised evaluations of retention strategies' were participant monetary incentives (32%), participant reminders and prompts (30%), questionnaire design (30%) and data collection location and method (26%). CONCLUSION: ORRCA2 builds on the success of ORRCA extending the database to organise the growing volume of retention research. Less than 15% of articles were randomised evaluations of retention strategies. Mapping of the literature highlights several areas for future research such as the role of research sites, clinical staff and study design in enhancing retention. Future studies should also include cost-benefit analysis of retention strategies.

Corona citizens' science project-repeated surveys of the Irish response to COVID-19 and subsequent lockdown and restrictive measures.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, many people have been affected by COVID-19, a novel respiratory illness, caused by a new type of coronavirus SARS-CoV2. The COVID-19 outbreak is considered a pandemic and has created a number of challenges for the general population, patients, and healthcare professionals. Lockdowns have been implemented to slow down the spread of the virus with the expectation that these restrictions will limit the number of cases, and hence the number of hospitalizations and ICU admissions. However, these restrictions, and in particular lockdowns, impact on the life of everyone living in Ireland. AIM: To record how the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent restrictive measures impacted on people's activities, work, schooling, and childcare. METHODS: The Corona Citizens' Science Project was set up as a population-wide survey. A questionnaire was designed, and the survey was first launched on the 8th of April 2020. An overview of results was released in the press days later. Data was collected in four waves: April 8, April 22, May 6, and June 17, 2020. Each wave had core questions allowing to compare each wave, and wave-specific questions, to understand current impact of changing measures. RESULTS: Over four waves, 152,259 responses were collected. The mean age of respondents was 47 with about 10% over the age of 65. Around 75% were female and 85% had a higher degree. Nearly 70% of the respondents were in employment, and around 13% were retired. Up to 20% of the respondents were essential workers, and 10% of respondents indicated they were in receipt of the COVID-19 pandemic unemployment payment. Around 10% of the people who responded were living alone. The number of people talked to the previous day was on average 2.3 in the first survey; during the lockdown, this went up over time, and in the last survey, the mean was 3.9. The percentage of respondents who did not talk to anyone the previous day decreased from 40 to 22% over the waves. In the first wave, about 6% of respondents reported having had flu-like symptoms in the last 14 days, which declined to 3.3%, 2.5%, and 2.0% in waves 2, 3, and 4 respectively. Similarly, over the four waves, the respondents who indicated that someone they lived with had flu-like symptoms declined from 17 to 12%, 9%, and 11%. Throughout the four waves, nearly one third of people reported one or more underlying conditions. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of restrictive measures, in particular lockdown, were implemented in Ireland to protect populations and healthcare systems. To record some of the major impacts on society, we launched a Corona Citizens Science Project, with the aim to support decision-making. This report provides detail of its findings.

Point-of-care testing, antibiotic prescribing, and prescribing confidence for respiratory tract infections in primary care: a prospective audit in 18 European countries.

BACKGROUND: Between-country differences have been described in antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infection (RTI) in primary care, but not yet for diagnostic testing procedures and prescribing confidence. AIM: To describe between-country differences in RTI management, particularly diagnostic testing and antibiotic prescribing, and investigate which factors relate to antibiotic prescribing and GPs' prescribing confidence. DESIGN & SETTING: Prospective audit in 18 European countries. METHOD: An audit of GP-registered patient, clinical, and management characteristics for patients presenting with sore throat and/or lower RTI (n = 4982), and GPs' confidence in their antibiotic prescribing decision. Factors related to antibiotic prescribing and confidence were analysed using multi-level logistic regression. RESULTS: Antibiotic prescribing proportions varied considerably: <20% in four countries, and >40% in six countries. There was also considerable variation in point-of-care (POC) testing (0% in Croatia, Moldova, and Romania, and >65% in Denmark and Norway, mainly for C-reactive protein [CRP] and group A streptococcal [strep A] infection), and in laboratory or hospital-based testing (<3% in Hungary, the Netherlands, and Spain, and >30% in Croatia, Georgia, Greece, and Moldova, mainly chest X-ray and white blood cell counting). Antibiotic prescribing was related to illness severity, comorbidity, age, fever, and country, but not to having performed a POC test. In nearly 90% of consultations, GPs were confident in their antibiotic prescribing decision. CONCLUSION: Despite high confidence in decisions about antibiotic prescribing, there is considerable variation in the primary care of RTI in European countries, with GPs prescribing antibiotics overall more often than is considered appropriate. POC testing may enhance the quality of antibiotic prescribing decisions if it can safely reverse decisions confidently made on clinical grounds alone to prescribe antibiotics.

What are the predictors of hand hygiene compliance in the intensive care unit? A cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: Although appropriate hand hygiene (HH) practices are recognised as the most effective preventative strategy for infection, adherence is suboptimal. Previous studies in intensive care units (ICUs) have found differences in HH compliance between those moments that protect the patient, and those that protect the healthcare provider. However, such studies did not control for other variables known to impact HH compliance. AIM: To examine HH among healthcare workers (HCWs) in ICU settings, and identify whether there is a statistical difference in HH compliance between patient-protective and self-protective moments, while controlling for other variables known to influence HH compliance (i.e. professional role, unit and shift time). METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in four ICUs across three Irish hospitals. Compliance was assessed according to the WHO's 'five moments for hand hygiene'. HCW professional role, total number of 'opportunities' for HH and whether compliance was achieved were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 712 HH opportunities were recorded, with an overall compliance rate of 56.9%. Logistic regression analysis revealed that physicians, allied healthcare professionals and auxiliary staff were less likely than nurses to engage in HH. HCWs were more likely to comply during night shifts compared to morning shifts, and with self-protective as compared to patient-protective HH moments. CONCLUSION: The information provided in this study provides a data-driven approach that ICUs can use to tailor HH interventions to where, when and for whom they are most required.