Group-based positive psychotherapy for people living with acquired brain injury: a protocol for a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Acquired brain injury (ABI) and other chronic conditions are placing unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems. In the UK, 1.3 million people live with the effects of brain injury, costing the UK economy approximately £15 billion per year. As a result, there is an urgent need to adapt existing healthcare delivery to meet increasing current and future demands. A focus on wellbeing may provide an innovative opportunity to reduce the pressure on healthcare services while also supporting patients to live more meaningful lives. The overarching aims of the study are as follows: (1) evaluate the feasibility of conducting a positive psychotherapy intervention for individuals with ABI and (2) ascertain under what conditions such an intervention would merit a fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared to a standard control group (TAU). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A randomised, two-arm feasibility trial involving allocation of patients to either a treatment group (positive psychotherapy) or control group (treatment as usual) group, according to a 1:1 ratio. A total of 60 participants at three sites will be recruited including 20 participants at each site. Assessments will be conducted at baseline, on completion of the 8-week intervention and 3 months following completion. These will include a range of questionnaire-based measures, psychophysiology and qualitative outcomes focusing on feasibility outcomes and participant experience. This study has been approved by the Wales Research Ethics Committee (IRAS project ID: 271,251, REC reference: 19/WA/0336). DISCUSSION: This study will be the first to examine the feasibility of an innovative, holistic positive psychotherapy intervention for people living with ABI, focused on individual, collective and planetary wellbeing, and will enable us to determine whether to proceed to a full randomised controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12690685 , registered 11th November 2020.

Patient and healthcare professionals' perceptions of a combined blood and faecal immunochemical test for excluding colorectal cancer diagnosis in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the perceptions of patients and healthcare professionals on Raman-faecal immunochemical test (FIT) as an alternative test for colorectal cancer exclusion in primary care. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews within a feasibility study. SETTING: Patients presenting to primary care with colorectal symptoms and healthcare professionals working in primary and secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 23 patients and 12 healthcare professionals. METHODS: Patient participants were asked to complete a novel combined Raman-FIT test before being seen in secondary care. This study sought their opinions about the test. We also sought the views of healthcare professionals. FINDINGS: Patients and healthcare professionals agreed that Raman-FIT was a suitable test to be given in primary care. It aligned with routine practice and was a simple test for most patients to complete. CONCLUSIONS: Patients are willing and able to complete the Raman-FIT test in primary care. Raman-FIT may accelerate access to diagnosis with the potential to improve cancer outcomes. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Lay members (J. H. and I. H.) with experience and knowledge of colorectal cancer and screening contributed to developing, undertaking, and disseminating all aspects of the research. They were supported to collaborate as equal members of the research team. They were involved in developing the study as coapplicants, using personal experience to ensure that the research and its methods were relevant to the patient and public needs. Both prepared participant information sheets, coanalysed data, and contributed to study reporting and dissemination through papers, conference presentations and a lay summary.

Risk factors that predict mortality in patients with blunt chest wall trauma: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Over the last 10 years, research has highlighted emerging potential risk factors for poor outcomes following blunt chest wall trauma. The aim was to update a previous systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk factors for mortality in blunt chest wall trauma patients. METHODS: A systematic review of English and non-English articles using MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library from January 2010 to March 2022 was completed. Broad search terms and inclusion criteria were used. All observational studies were included if they investigated estimates of association between a risk factor and mortality for blunt chest wall trauma patients. Where sufficient data were available, ORs with 95% CIs were calculated using a Mantel-Haenszel method. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: 73 studies were identified which were of variable quality (including 29 from original review). Identified risk factors for mortality following blunt chest wall trauma were: age 65 years or more (OR: 2.11; 95% CI 1.85 to 2.41), three or more rib fractures (OR: 1.96; 95% CI 1.69 to 2.26) and presence of pre-existing disease (OR: 2.86; 95% CI 1.34 to 6.09). Other new risk factors identified were: increasing Injury Severity Score, need for mechanical ventilation, extremes of body mass index and smoking status. Meta-analysis was not possible for these variables due to insufficient studies and high levels of heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this updated review suggest that despite a change in demographics of trauma patients and subsequent emerging evidence over the last 10 years, the main risk factors for mortality in patients sustaining blunt chest wall trauma remained largely unchanged. A number of new risk factors however have been reported that need consideration when updating current risk prediction models used in the ED. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021242063. Date registered: 29 March 2021. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/%23recordDetails.

A novel blood based triage test for colorectal cancer in primary care: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The majority of colorectal cancers (CRCs) are detected after symptomatic presentation to primary care. Given the shared symptoms of CRC and benign disorders, it is challenging to manage the risk of missed diagnosis. Colonoscopy resources cannot keep pace with increasing demand. There is a pressing need for access to simple triage tools in primary care to help prioritise patients for referral. AIM: To evaluate the performance of a novel spectroscopy-based CRC blood test in primary care. DESIGN & SETTING: Mixed-methods pilot study of test performance and GP focus group discussions in South Wales. METHOD: Patients on the urgent suspected cancer (USC) pathway were recruited for the Raman spectroscopy (RS) test coupled to machine learning classification ('Raman-CRC') to identify CRC within the referred population. Qualitative focus group work evaluated the acceptability of the test in primary care by thematic analysis of focus group theorising. RESULTS: A total of 532 patients aged ≥50 years referred on the USC pathway were recruited from 27 GP practices. Twenty-nine patients (5.0%) were diagnosed with CRC. Raman-CRC identified CRC with sensitivity 95.7%, specificity 69.3% with area under curve (AUC) of 0.80 compared with colonoscopy as the reference test (248 patients). Stage I and II cancers were detected with 78.6% sensitivity. Focus group themes underlined the convenience of a blood test for the patient and the test's value as a risk assessment tool in primary care. CONCLUSION: The findings support this novel, non-invasive, blood-based method to prioritise those patients most likely to have CRC. Raman-CRC may accelerate access to diagnosis with potential to improve cancer outcomes.