Validation of the familial chylomicronaemia syndrome (FCS) score in an ethnically diverse cohort from UK FCS registry: Implications for diagnosis and differentiation from multifactorial chylomicronaemia syndrome (MCS).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prognosis and management differ between familial chylomicronaemia syndrome (FCS), a rare autosomal recessive disorder, and multifactorial chylomicronaemia syndrome (MCS) or severe mixed hyperlipidaemia. A clinical scoring tool to differentiate these conditions has been devised but not been validated in other populations. The objective of this study was to validate this score in the UK population and identify any additional factors that might improve it. METHODS: A retrospective validation study was conducted using data from 151 patients comprising 75 FCS and 76 MCS patients. All participants had undergone genetic testing for genes implicated in FCS. Validation was performed by standard methods. Additional variables were identified from clinical data by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: At the recommended FCS score threshold ≥10 points, the sensitivity and specificity of the score in the UK population were 96% and 75%, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.94, p < 0.001). This study identified non-European (predominantly South Asian) ethnicity, parental consanguinity, body mass index (BMI) < 25 kg/m2, and recurrent pancreatitis as additional positive predictors, while BMI >30 kg/m2 was found to be a negative predictor for FCS. However, inclusion of additional FCS predictors had no significant impact on performance of standard FCS score. CONCLUSIONS: Our study validates the FCS score in the UK population to distinguish FCS from MCS. While additional FCS predictors were identified, they did not improve further the score diagnostic performance.

Severe Hypertriglyceridaemia and Chylomicronaemia Syndrome-Causes, Clinical Presentation, and Therapeutic Options.

We have reviewed the genetic basis of chylomicronaemia, the difference between monogenic and polygenic hypertriglyceridaemia, its effects on pancreatic, cardiovascular, and microvascular complications, and current and potential future pharmacotherapies. Severe hypertriglyceridaemia (TG > 10 mmol/L or 1000 mg/dL) is rare with a prevalence of <1%. It has a complex genetic basis. In some individuals, the inheritance of a single rare variant with a large effect size leads to severe hypertriglyceridaemia and fasting chylomicronaemia of monogenic origin, termed as familial chylomicronaemia syndrome (FCS). Alternatively, the accumulation of multiple low-effect variants causes polygenic hypertriglyceridaemia, which increases the tendency to develop fasting chylomicronaemia in presence of acquired factors, termed as multifactorial chylomicronaemia syndrome (MCS). FCS is an autosomal recessive disease characterized by a pathogenic variant of the lipoprotein lipase (LPL) gene or one of its regulators. The risk of pancreatic complications and associated morbidity and mortality are higher in FCS than in MCS. FCS has a more favourable cardiometabolic profile and a low prevalence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared to MCS. The cornerstone of the management of severe hypertriglyceridaemia is a very-low-fat diet. FCS does not respond to traditional lipid-lowering therapies. Several novel pharmacotherapeutic agents are in various phases of development. Data on the correlation between genotype and phenotype in FCS are scarce. Further research to investigate the impact of individual gene variants on the natural history of the disease, and its link with ASCVD, microvascular disease, and acute or recurrent pancreatitis, is warranted. Volanesorsen reduces triglyceride concentration and frequency of pancreatitis effectively in patients with FCS and MCS. Several other therapeutic agents are in development. Understanding the natural history of FCS and MCS is necessary to rationalise healthcare resources and decide when to deploy these high-cost low-volume therapeutic agents.

Maternity care during COVID-19: a qualitative evidence synthesis of women's and maternity care providers' views and experiences.

BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 continued to impact society and health, maternity care, as with many other healthcare sectors across the globe, experienced tumultuous changes. These changes have the potential to considerably impact on the experience of maternity care. To gain insight and understanding of the experience of maternity care during COVID-19, from the perspectives of women and maternity care providers, we undertook a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES). METHODS: The population of interest for the QES were pregnant and postpartum women, and maternity care providers, who provided qualitative data on their experiences of maternity care during COVID-19. The electronic databases of MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the Cochrane COVID study register were systematically searched from 01 Jan 2020 to 13 June 2021. The methodological quality of the included studies was appraised using a modified version of the quality assessment tool, based on 12-criteria, designed by the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information coordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre). Data were extracted by two reviewers independently and synthesised using the Thomas and Harden framework. Confidence in the findings was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual). RESULTS: Fifty records relating to 48 studies, involving 9,348 women and 2,538 maternity care providers, were included in the QES. The methodological quality of the studies varied from four studies meeting all 12 quality criteria to two studies meeting one quality criterion only. The synthesis revealed eight prominent themes. Five of these reflected women's experiences: 1) Altered maternity care (women), 2) COVID-related restrictions, 3) Infection prevention and risk, 4) 'the lived reality' - navigating support systems, and 5) Interactions with maternity services. Three themes reflected maternity care providers' experiences: 6) Altered maternity care (providers), 7) Professional and personal impact, and 8) Broader structural impact. Confidence in the findings was high or moderate. CONCLUSION: Although some positive experiences were identified, overall, this QES reveals that maternity care during COVID-19 was negatively experienced by both women and maternity care providers. The pandemic and associated changes evoked an array of emotive states for both populations, many of which have the potential to impact on future health and wellbeing. Resource and care planning to mitigate medium- and longer-term adverse sequelae are required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42021232684.

Maternity care during COVID-19: a protocol for a qualitative evidence synthesis of women's and maternity care providers' views and experiences.

Background: Considerable changes in maternity care provision internationally were implemented in response to COVID-19. Such changes, often occurring suddenly with little advance warning, have had the potential to affect women's and maternity care providers experience of maternity care, both positively and negatively. For this reason, to gain insight and understanding of personal and professional experiences, we will perform a synthesis of the available qualitative evidence on women and maternity care providers' views and experiences of maternity care during COVID-19. Methods and analysis: A qualitative evidence synthesis will be conducted. Studies will be eligible if they include pregnant or postpartum women (up to six months) and maternity care providers who received or provided care during COVID-19. To retrieve relevant literature the electronic databases of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane COVID study register ( https://covid-19.cochrane.org/) will be searched from 01-Jan-2020 to date of search. A combination of search terms based on COVID-19, pregnancy, childbirth and maternity care, and study design, will be used to guide the search.  The methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed by at least two reviewers using the Evidence for Policy and Practice Information (EPPI)-Centre 12-criteria quality assessment tool. The Thomas and Harden approach to thematic synthesis will be used for data synthesis. This will involve line by line coding of extracted data, establishing descriptive themes, and determining analytical themes. Confidence in the findings of the review will be assessed by two reviewers independently using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual).   Conclusion: The proposed synthesis of evidence will help identify maternity care needs during a global pandemic from the perspectives of those receiving and providing care. The evidence will inform and help enhance care provision into the future.

Assessing fetal movements in pregnancy: A qualitative evidence synthesis of women's views, perspectives and experiences.

BACKGROUND: Raising awareness of the importance of fetal movements (FMs) and advising women on the appropriate action to take if they experience reduced FMs, is important for minimising or avoiding adverse perinatal outcomes. To gain insight and understanding of women's perspectives of assessing FMs in pregnancy, we conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis. METHODS: A qualitative evidence synthesis using thematic synthesis was conducted. Studies were eligible if they included pregnant women who were at least 20 weeks gestation and reported qualitative data from women on assessing FMs in pregnancy. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Social Science Citation Index, from inception to July 2020, were searched. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed by at least two reviewers using an Evidence for Policy and Practice Information (EPPI)-Centre quality assessment tool. Data synthesis, using the Thomas and Harden framework, involved line by line coding of extracted data, establishing descriptive themes, and determining analytical themes. Confidence in the findings was assessed using GRADE CER-Qual. RESULTS: Nine studies, involving 2193 women, were included in the review. The methodological quality of the studies was overall generally high. The synthesis revealed three dominant themes, and seven sub-themes that reflected women's perspectives of assessing FMs in pregnancy. These were; 1) How women engage with FMs, with subthemes of informal engagement, formal engagement, and strategies to stimulate FMs; 2) ' … like a feather inside my belly' - articulating and describing FMs, with sub-themes of sensations associated with FMs and timing and frequency of FMs; and 3) FMs and help/health seeking, with sub-themes of information sources and interacting with healthcare professionals. Confidence in the findings was either high or moderate, although two findings were rated low confidence and one very low. CONCLUSION: This qualitative evidence synthesis reveals that women informally engage with FMs during pregnancy. Women commonly adopt strategies to stimulate FMs when concerned. The use of the internet was a common source of obtaining information regarding FMs. Women require better support when contacting healthcare professionals about FMs. As only three of the nine included studies were exclusively qualitative in design, further qualitative studies exploring women's perspective of assessing FMs in pregnancy are required.

Barreras y facilitadores del cumplimiento por parte de los trabajadores sanitarios de las directrices de prevención y control de infecciones para las enfermedades infecciosas respiratorias: una síntesis rápida de pruebas cualitativas / Barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence with infection prevention and control guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases: a rapid qualitative evidence synthesis

¿CUÁL ES EL OBJETIVO DE ESTA REVISIÓN?: Esta revisión es una de una serie de revisiones rápidas que los colaboradores de Cochrane han preparado para informar sobre la pandemia de COVID-19 de 2020. El objetivo de esta revisión Cochrane de investigación cualitativa ("síntesis de pruebas cualitativas") es explorar los factores que influyen en el cumplimiento por parte de los trabajadores sanitarios de las directrices de prevención y control de infecciones (PCI) para las enfermedades infecciosas respiratorias. Para responder a esta pregunta, se buscaron y analizaron estudios cualitativos sobre este tema. MENSAJES CLAVE: Los trabajadores de la salud señalan varios factores que influyen en su capacidad y disposición para seguir las directrices de PCI cuando se trata de enfermedades infecciosas respiratorias. Entre ellos figuran factores relacionados con la propia directriz y la forma en que se comunica, el apoyo de los directivos, la cultura del lugar de trabajo, la capacitación, el espacio físico, el acceso a los equipos de protección personal (EPI) y la confianza en ellos, y el deseo de prestar una buena atención al paciente. El examen también destaca la importancia de incluir a todo el personal de las instalaciones, incluido el personal de apoyo, al aplicar las directrices de PCI. ¿QUÉ SE HA ESTUDIADO EN ESTA REVISIÓN?: Cuando las enfermedades infecciosas respiratorias se generalizan, como durante la pandemia COVID-19, el uso de las estrategias de PCI por parte de los trabajadores sanitarios se hace aún más importante. Estas estrategias incluyen el uso de EPI como mascarillas, protectores faciales, guantes y batas; separar a los pacientes con infecciones respiratorias de los demás; y rutinas de limpieza más estrictas. Explorar la forma en que los trabajadores sanitarios ven y experimentan estas estrategias puede ayudar a las autoridades y a los centros sanitarios a aprender más sobre la mejor forma de apoyar a los trabajadores sanitarios para aplicarlas. ¿CUÁLES SON LOS DESCUBRIMIENTOS PRINCIPALES DE ESTA REVISIÓN?: Se encontraron 36 estudios relevantes y se tomaron muestras de 20 de estos para su análisis. Diez estudios eran de Asia, 4 de África, 4 de América del Norte y 2 de Australia. Los estudios exploraron las opiniones y experiencias de enfermeros, médicos y otros trabajadores de la salud al tratar el SARS, el H1N1, el MERS, la tuberculosis o la gripe estacional. La mayoría de estos trabajadores de la salud trabajaban en hospitales; otros trabajaban en entornos de atención primaria y comunitaria. Esta revisión señaló varios factores que influyeron en el cumplimiento de las pautas de PCI por parte de los trabajadores de la salud. Los siguientes factores se basan en los hallazgos evaluados como de confianza moderada a alta.- Los trabajadores sanitarios se sintieron inseguros cuando las guías locales eran largas, poco claras o no coincidían con las guías nacionales o internacionales.- Podían sentirse abrumados porque las directrices locales cambiaban constantemente.- También describieron como las estrategias de PCI conducían a un aumento de la carga de trabajo y de la fatiga, por ejemplo, porque tenían que utilizar los EPI y asumir una limpieza adicional.- Los trabajadores de la salud describieron cómo sus respuestas a las directrices de PCI se veían afectadas por el nivel de apoyo que sentían que recibían de su equipo directivo.- Se consideró vital una comunicación clara sobre las directrices de PCI.- El personal sanitario señaló la falta de formación sobre la infección en sí misma y sobre cómo utilizar los EPI.- También pensaban que era un problema cuando la formación no era obligatoria.- Tener suficiente espacio para aislar a los pacientes se consideró vital.- Demasiadas pocas habitaciones de aislamiento, antecámaras (pequeñas habitaciones que van de un pasillo a una sala de aislamiento) y duchas fueron un problema.- Otras medidas prácticas importantes descritas por los trabajadores sanitarios incluían la reducción al mínimo de las aglomeraciones de personas, la aceleración de los pacientes infectados, la restricción de las visitas y la facilitación del acceso a las instalaciones para lavarse las manos.- La falta de EPI, o que este fuese de mala calidad, era una preocupación grave para los trabajadores y administradores de la atención de la salud.- También destacaron la necesidad de ajustar la cantidad de suministros a medida que continuaban los brotes de infección.- Los trabajadores de la salud creían que seguían más de cerca la orientación de PCI cuando veían su valor.- Otros trabajadores de la salud se sentían motivados a seguir la guía por temor a infectarse a sí mismos y a sus familias, o porque se sentían responsables de sus pacientes.- Algunos trabajadores de la salud encontraron difícil usar máscaras y otros equipos cuando hacía que los pacientes se sintieran aislados, asustados o estigmatizados.- Los trabajadores sanitarios también encontraron incómodo el uso de máscaras y otros equipos.- La cultura del lugar de trabajo también puede influir en que los trabajadores sanitarios sigan o no las directrices de PCI.- En muchos de los hallazgos, los trabajadores sanitarios señalaron la importancia de incluir a todo el personal, incluido el personal de limpieza, los porteros, el personal de cocina y otro personal de apoyo al implementar las directrices de PCI. ¿CÓMO DE ACTUALIZADA ESTÁ ESTA REVISIÓN?: Se buscaron los estudios que se hubiesen publicado hasta marzo de 2020

No disponible

A QuESt for speed: rapid qualitative evidence syntheses as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has created a sense of urgency in the research community in their bid to contribute to the evidence required for healthcare policy decisions. With such urgency, researchers experience methodological challenges to maintain the rigour and transparency of their work. With this in mind, we offer reflections on our recent experience of undertaking a rapid Cochrane qualitative evidence synthesis (QES). METHODS: This process paper, using a reflexive approach, describes a rapid QES prepared during, and in response to, the COVID-19 pandemic. FINDINGS: This paper reports the methodological decisions we made and the process we undertook. We place our decisions in the context of guidance offered in relation to rapid reviews and previously conducted QESs. We highlight some of the challenges we encountered in finding the balance between the time needed for thoughtfulness and comprehensiveness whilst providing a rapid response to an urgent request for evidence. CONCLUSION: The need for more guidance on rapid QES remains, but such guidance needs to be based on actual worked examples and case studies. This paper and the reflections offered may provide a useful framework for others to use and further develop.

Barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence with infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases: a rapid qualitative evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: This review is one of a series of rapid reviews that Cochrane contributors have prepared to inform the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. When new respiratory infectious diseases become widespread, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers' adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines becomes even more important. Strategies in these guidelines include the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) such as masks, face shields, gloves and gowns; the separation of patients with respiratory infections from others; and stricter cleaning routines. These strategies can be difficult and time-consuming to adhere to in practice. Authorities and healthcare facilities therefore need to consider how best to support healthcare workers to implement them. OBJECTIVES: To identify barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence to IPC guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases. SEARCH METHODS: We searched OVID MEDLINE on 26 March 2020. As we searched only one database due to time constraints, we also undertook a rigorous and comprehensive scoping exercise and search of the reference lists of key papers. We did not apply any date limit or language limits. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included qualitative and mixed-methods studies (with a distinct qualitative component) that focused on the experiences and perceptions of healthcare workers towards factors that impact on their ability to adhere to IPC guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases. We included studies of any type of healthcare worker with responsibility for patient care. We included studies that focused on IPC guidelines (local, national or international) for respiratory infectious diseases in any healthcare setting. These selection criteria were framed by an understanding of the needs of health workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors independently assessed the titles, abstracts and full texts identified by our search. We used a prespecified sampling frame to sample from the eligible studies, aiming to capture a range of respiratory infectious disease types, geographical spread and data-rich studies. We extracted data using a data extraction form designed for this synthesis. We assessed methodological limitations using an adapted version of the Critical Skills Appraisal Programme (CASP) tool. We used a 'best fit framework approach' to analyse and synthesise the evidence. This provided upfront analytical categories, with scope for further thematic analysis. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We examined each review finding to identify factors that may influence intervention implementation and developed implications for practice. MAIN RESULTS: We found 36 relevant studies and sampled 20 of these studies for our analysis. Ten of these studies were from Asia, four from Africa, four from Central and North America and two from Australia. The studies explored the views and experiences of nurses, doctors and other healthcare workers when dealing with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), H1N1, MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome), tuberculosis (TB), or seasonal influenza. Most of these healthcare workers worked in hospitals; others worked in primary and community care settings. Our review points to several barriers and facilitators that influenced healthcare workers' ability to adhere to IPC guidelines. The following factors are based on findings assessed as of moderate to high confidence. Healthcare workers felt unsure as to how to adhere to local guidelines when they were long and ambiguous or did not reflect national or international guidelines. They could feel overwhelmed because local guidelines were constantly changing. They also described how IPC strategies led to increased workloads and fatigue, for instance because they had to use PPE and take on additional cleaning. Healthcare workers described how their responses to IPC guidelines were influenced by the level of support they felt that they received from their management team. Clear communication about IPC guidelines was seen as vital. But healthcare workers pointed to a lack of training about the infection itself and about how to use PPE. They also thought it was a problem when training was not mandatory. Sufficient space to isolate patients was also seen as vital. A lack of isolation rooms, anterooms and shower facilities was a problem. Other important practical measures described by healthcare workers included minimising overcrowding, fast-tracking infected patients, restricting visitors, and providing easy access to handwashing facilities. A lack of PPE, and equipment that was of poor quality, was a serious concern for healthcare workers and managers. They also pointed to the need to adjust the volume of supplies as infection outbreaks continued. Healthcare workers believed that they followed IPC guidance more closely when they saw the value of it. Some healthcare workers felt motivated to follow the guidance because of fear of infecting themselves or their families, or because they felt responsible for their patients. Some healthcare workers found it difficult to use masks and other equipment when it made patients feel isolated, frightened or stigmatised. Healthcare workers also found masks and other equipment uncomfortable to use. The workplace culture could also influence whether healthcare workers followed IPC guidelines or not. Across many of the findings, healthcare workers pointed to the importance of including all staff, including cleaning staff, porters, kitchen staff and other support staff when implementing IPC guidelines. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers point to several factors that influence their ability and willingness to follow IPC guidelines when managing respiratory infectious diseases. These include factors tied to the guideline itself and how it is communicated, support from managers, workplace culture, training, physical space, access to and trust in personal protective equipment, and a desire to deliver good patient care. The review also highlights the importance of including all facility staff, including support staff, when implementing IPC guidelines.

'It's like sludge green': young people's perceptions of standardized tobacco packaging in the UK.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Standardized tobacco packaging was introduced in the United Kingdom in May 2016, together with larger graphic warnings. This study explored young Scottish people's awareness of and perceptions about standardized tobacco packaging in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: Qualitative study using 16 focus groups conducted February-March 2017. SETTING: Four schools in Scotland based in areas of differing socio-economic status (high versus medium/low) and two levels of urbanity (large urban versus small town/other urban). PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-two S2 (13-14 years) and S4 (15-16 years) students who were smokers or at-risk non-smokers. MEASUREMENTS: Focus groups explored perceptions of standardized packaging and health warnings. The qualitative data underwent thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Views about standardized packaging were generally negative. Packs were described as being unattractive, drab and less appealing than non-standardized versions. The new health warnings generated negative affective, often aversive, responses. These varied depending on the image's perceived 'gruesomeness' and authenticity. Most participants thought that the impact would be greatest on young non/occasional smokers. There were divergent views about whether established smokers would be affected. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of standardized tobacco packaging and new larger graphic health warnings in the United Kingdom seems have reduced the perceived attractiveness of cigarette packs among young people in the United Kingdom who smoke or are at elevated risk of becoming smokers, disrupting positive brand imagery (the brand heuristic), increasing the salience of health warnings and contributing to denormalizing smoking.

A concept analysis of 'trial recruitment' using the hybrid model.

Background: The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) requires trials submitted for publication to be registered before enrolment of the first participant; however, there is ambiguity around the definition of recruitment and in anchoring the trial start date, end date, recruitment and enrolment, temporally to trial processes. There is potential for variation in how recruitment is reported and understood in trial protocols and trial reports. We report on Phase 1 of a concept analysis of 'trial recruitment' and develop a preliminary operational definition of 'trial recruitment'. Methods: A concept analysis using the hybrid model. We searched randomised and non-randomised trial reports published between January 2018 and June 2019. Included studies were sourced from the five top journals in the category of medicine with the highest impact factor. We examined how recruitment was defined temporally to four time points; screening, consent, randomisation, and allocation. Results: Of the 150 trial reports analysed, over half did not identify a clear time point of when recruitment took place in relation to any of screening/consent/randomisation/allocation. The majority of the assessed trials provided a time frame in relation to the trial (i.e. start/end date), the process that this time frame referred to differed between studies. There was variation across studies in the terminology used to describe entry to the trial and often multiple terms were used interchangeably. Conclusion: There is ambiguity around temporal descriptions of 'trial recruitment' in health care journals. Informed by the findings of Phase 1, we developed a preliminary temporal operational definition of trial recruitment based on i) trial recruitment of an individual or cluster and ii) the trial recruitment period. In Phase 2 this definition will be discussed in focus groups with healthcare workers involved in designing/implementing/reporting on trials; to contribute to the final phase (analytical phase) of this concept analysis.

Limited evidence exists on the effectiveness of education and training interventions on trial recruitment; a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of education and training interventions on recruitment to randomized and non-randomized trials. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of the effectiveness of education and training interventions for recruiters to trials. The review included randomized and non-randomized controlled trials of any type of education and training intervention for recruiters to trials, within any health care field. The primary outcome was recruitment rates, and secondary outcomes were quality of informed consent, recruiter self-confidence, understanding/knowledge of trial information, numbers of potential trial participants approached, satisfaction with training, and retention rates. RESULTS: Of the 19 records reviewed at full-text level, six met the inclusion criteria for our review. Owing to heterogeneity of outcomes and methods between the included studies, meta-analysis was not possible for the primary outcome. Of the three studies that reported recruitment rates, one favored the education and training intervention for increased recruitment; the remaining two found no differences between the groups. Of the reported secondary outcomes, quality of informed consent was improved, but no differences between groups in understanding/knowledge of trial information were found. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence of effectiveness on the impact of education and training interventions on trial recruitment. Further work on developing a substantial evidence base around the effectiveness of education and training interventions for recruiters to trials is required.

"Tell them you smoke, you'll get more breaks": a qualitative study of occupational and social contexts of young adult smoking in Scotland.

OBJECTIVE: To explore young adults' perceptions and experiences of smoking and their smoking trajectories in the context of their social and occupational histories and transitions, in a country with advanced tobacco control. DESIGN: Indepth qualitative interviews using day and life grids to explore participants' smoking behaviour and trajectories in relation to their educational, occupational and social histories and transitions. SETTING: Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen ever-smokers aged 20-24 years old in 2016-2017. RESULTS: Participants had varied and complex educational/employment histories. Becoming and/or remaining a smoker was often related to social context and educational/occupational transitions. In several contexts smoking and becoming a smoker had perceived benefits. These included getting work breaks and dealing with stress and boredom, which were common in the low-paid, unskilled jobs undertaken by participants. In some social contexts smoking was used as a marker of time out and sociability. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that while increased tobacco control, including smokefree policies, and social disapproval of smoking discourage smoking uptake and increase motivations to quit among young adults, in some social and occupational contexts smoking still has perceived benefits. This finding helps explain why smoking uptake continues into the mid-20s. It also highlights the importance of policies that reduce the perceived desirability of smoking and that create more positive working environments for young adults which address the types of working hours and conditions that may encourage smoking.

Adherence to the National Institute of Clinical Excellence guidance on parenteral nutrition screening is not enough to improve outcomes.

BACKGROUND & AIM: Majority of the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) nutrition guidance recommendations were based on Grade D evidence due to absence of randomised controlled trials. The aim was to assess outcomes of parenteral nutrition (PN) administration when the guidance was adhered to. METHODS: The prospective study included patients referred for PN. Patients were divided into two groups: guidance compliant and guidance non-compliant. Primary outcome measures were duration of PN treatment, number of PN bags used per patient, length of hospital stay and mortality. RESULTS: There were 262 patients, aged 54(42-67) [median (IQR)] years. The guidance compliant and the non-compliant groups consisted of 143 and 119 patients respectively. In the guidance compliant group all patients were screened on admission compared to 40% in the non-compliant group (p < 0.001). Among those malnourished/at risk of malnutrition all were referred for early dietetic assessment in the compliant group but only 14% in the non-compliant group (p < 0.001). There was no difference in any of the outcome measures between the groups. CONCLUSION: Compliance with the nutritional guidance in the UK was not enough to improve outcomes in patients requiring PN in our cohort. Evidence based changes to PN practice are required to optimise care.