Promoting physical activity in a multi-ethnic population at high risk of diabetes: the 48-month PROPELS randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity is associated with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease but limited evidence exists for the sustained promotion of increased physical activity within diabetes prevention trials. The aim of the study was to investigate the long-term effectiveness of the Walking Away programme, an established group-based behavioural physical activity intervention with pedometer use, when delivered alone or with a supporting mHealth intervention. METHODS: Those at risk of diabetes (nondiabetic hyperglycaemia) were recruited from primary care, 2013-2015, and randomised to (1) Control (information leaflet); (2) Walking Away (WA), a structured group education session followed by annual group-based support; or (3) Walking Away Plus (WAP), comprising WA annual group-based support and an mHealth intervention delivering tailored text messages supported by telephone calls. Follow-up was conducted at 12 and 48 months. The primary outcome was accelerometer measured ambulatory activity (steps/day). Change in primary outcome was analysed using analysis of covariance with adjustment for baseline, randomisation and stratification variables. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred sixty-six individuals were randomised (median age = 61 years, ambulatory activity = 6638 steps/day, women = 49%, ethnic minorities = 28%). Accelerometer data were available for 1017 (74%) individuals at 12 months and 993 (73%) at 48 months. At 12 months, WAP increased their ambulatory activity by 547 (97.5% CI 211, 882) steps/day compared to control and were 1.61 (97.5% CI 1.05, 2.45) times more likely to achieve 150 min/week of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Differences were not maintained at 48 months. WA was no different to control at 12 or 48 months. Secondary anthropometric and health outcomes were largely unaltered in both intervention groups apart from small reductions in body weight in WA (~ 1 kg) at 12- and 48-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Combining a pragmatic group-based intervention with text messaging and telephone support resulted in modest changes to physical activity at 12 months, but changes were not maintained at 48 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 83465245 (registered on 14 June 2012).

Exercise for people living with frailty and receiving haemodialysis: a mixed-methods randomised controlled feasibility study.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is highly prevalent in haemodialysis (HD) patients, leading to poor outcomes. This study aimed to determine whether a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of intradialytic exercise is feasible for frail HD patients, and explore how the intervention may be tailored to their needs. DESIGN: Mixed-methods feasibility. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Prevalent adult HD patients of the CYCLE-HD trial with a Clinical Frailty Scale Score of 4-7 (vulnerable to severely frail) were eligible for the feasibility study. INTERVENTIONS: Participants in the exercise group undertook 6 months of three times per week, progressive, moderate intensity intradialytic cycling (IDC). OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes were related to feasibility. Secondary outcomes were falls incidence measured from baseline to 1 year following intervention completion, and exercise capacity, physical function, physical activity and patient-reported outcomes measured at baseline and 6 months. Acceptability of trial procedures and the intervention were explored via diaries and interviews with n=25 frail HD patients who both participated in (n=13, 52%), and declined (n=12, 48%), the trial. RESULTS: 124 (30%) patients were eligible, and of these 64 (52%) consented with 51 (80%) subsequently completing a baseline assessment. n=24 (71% male; 59±13 years) dialysed during shifts randomly assigned to exercise and n=27 (81% male; 65±11 years) shifts assigned to usual care. n=6 (12%) were lost to follow-up. The exercise group completed 74% of sessions. 27%-89% of secondary outcome data were missing. Frail HD patients outlined several ways to enhance trial procedures. Maintaining ability to undertake activities of daily living and social participation were outcomes of primary importance. Participants desired a varied exercise programme. CONCLUSIONS: A definitive RCT is feasible, however a comprehensive exercise programme may be more efficacious than IDC in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN11299707; ISRCTN12840463.

Community-based testing of migrants for infectious diseases (COMBAT-ID): impact, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of identifying infectious diseases among migrants in primary care: protocol for an interrupted time-series, qualitative and health economic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Migration is a major global driver of population change. Certain migrants may be at increased risk of infectious diseases, including tuberculosis (TB), HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C, and have poorer outcomes. Early diagnosis and management of these infections can reduce morbidity, mortality and onward transmission and is supported by national guidelines. To date, screening initiatives have been sporadic and focused on individual diseases; systematic routine testing of migrant groups for multiple infections is rarely undertaken and its impact is unknown. We describe the protocol for the evaluation of acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an integrated approach to screening migrants for a range of infectious diseases in primary care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a mixed-methods study which includes an observational cohort with interrupted time-series analysis before and after the introduction of routine screening of migrants for infectious diseases (latent TB, HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C) when first registering with primary care within Leicester, UK. We will assess trends in the monthly number and rate of testing and diagnosis for latent TB, HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C to determine the effect of the policy change using segmented regression analyses at monthly time-points. Concurrently, we will undertake an integrated qualitative sub-study to understand the views of migrants and healthcare professionals to the new testing policy in primary care. Finally, we will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of combined infection testing for migrants in primary care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received HRA and NHS approvals for both the interrupted time-series analysis (16/SC/0127) and the qualitative sub-study (16/EM/0159). For the interrupted time-series analysis we will only use fully anonymised data. For the qualitative sub-study, we will gain written, informed, consent. Dissemination of the results will be through local and national meetings/conferences as well as publications in peer-reviewed journals.

Cardiac Remodelling in Patients Undergoing in-Centre Nocturnal Haemodialysis: Results from the MIDNIGHT Study, a Non-Randomized Controlled Trial.

Evidence suggests extended-hours haemodialysis (HD) may improve cardiovascular, medical and quality-of-life outcomes. In-centre nocturnal haemodialysis (INHD) is an established but underutilized method of providing extended-hours treatment. This 6-month, non-randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN16672784) recruited 13 INHD patients and 12 control patients on conventional HD. The effects of treatment on left ventricular (LV) structure, function and myocardial fibrosis were assessed using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and native T1 mapping. Quality-of-life and clinical measures were also collected. INHD led to significant reductions in LV mass (-14.75 vs. +6.54 g; p = 0.02), global T1 (-30.62 vs. 0.4 ms; p = 0.05) and non-septal native T1 values (-30.93 vs. 8.96 ms; p = 0.02) over time. There were also significant improvements in serum phosphate (-0.39 vs. +0.02 mmol/L; p = 0.03) and reductions in ultrafiltration rates (-2.32 vs. +0.70 mL/h/kg p = 0.05) between INHD and controls. Six-months of INHD was associated with favourable LV remodelling and reduced myocardial fibrosis compared to patients on conventional haemodialysis.

The use of feasibility studies for stepped-wedge cluster randomised trials: protocol for a review of impact and scope.

INTRODUCTION: The stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial (SW-CRT) is a complex design, for which many decisions about key design parameters must be made during the planning. These include the number of steps and the duration of time needed to embed the intervention. Feasibility studies are likely to be useful for informing these decisions and increasing the likelihood of the main trial's success. However, the number of feasibility studies being conducted for SW-CRTs is currently unknown. This review aims to establish the number of feasibility studies being conducted for SW-CRTs and determine which feasibility issues are commonly investigated. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fully published feasibility studies for SW-CRTs will be identified, according to predefined inclusion criteria, from searches conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase and PsycINFO. To also identify and gain information on unpublished feasibility studies the following will be contacted: authors of published SW-CRTs (identified from the most recent systematic reviews); contacts for registered SW-CRTs (identified from clinical trials registries); lead statisticians of UK registered clinical trials units and researchers known to work in the area of SW-CRTs.Data extraction will be conducted independently by two reviewers. For the fully published feasibility studies, data will be extracted on the study characteristics, the rationale for the study, the process for determining progression to a main trial, how the study informed the main trial and whether the main trial went ahead. The researchers involved in the unpublished feasibility studies will be contacted to elicit the same information.A narrative synthesis will be conducted and provided alongside a descriptive analysis of the study characteristics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethical approval, as no individual patient data will be used. The results of this review will be published in an open-access peer-reviewed journal.

"And now for the good news..." the impact of negative and positive messages in self-management education for people with Type 2 diabetes: A qualitative study in an ethnically diverse population.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the impact of Diabetes Education and Self Management for Ongoing and Newly Diagnosed (DESMOND) Foundation education, particularly from interviewees' narratives regarding recall of good and bad news messages and behaviour changes. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample (n=19) of people who had attended education sessions as part of a randomised controlled trial in two UK sites with ethnically diverse populations. Data collection and analysis were informed by the constant comparative approach and facilitated through charting. RESULTS: Findings were similar in people from different ethnic backgrounds. Exploration of levels of recall of the sessions suggested that this was variable and sometimes very limited, but that interviewees had all assimilated some relevant learning. Key themes emerged relating to the way in which interviewees recalled and had been influenced by positive (good news) and negative (bad news) messages within the education sessions, including biomedical explanations. Both types of message appeared to have an important role in terms of motivation to change behaviour, but a notable observation was that none of the interviewees recalled receiving bad news messages when diagnosed. DISCUSSION: Our findings have highlighted the importance of providing and combining both negative and positive messages within education designed to promote self-management behaviour change.

Explaining engagement in self-monitoring among participants of the DESMOND Self-monitoring Trial: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Education and Self-Management for Ongoing and Newly Diagnosed (DESMOND) Self-monitoring Trial reported that people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes attending community-based structured education and randomized to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) or urine monitoring had comparable improvements in biomedical outcomes, but differences in satisfaction with, and continued use of monitoring method, well-being and perceived threat from diabetes. OBJECTIVES: To explore experiences of SMBG and urine monitoring following structured education. We specifically addressed the perceived usefulness of each monitoring method and the associated well-being. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with 18 adults with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes participating in the DESMOND Self-monitoring Trial (SMBG, N=10; urine monitoring, N=8)~12 months into the trial. Analysis was informed by the constant comparative approach. RESULTS: Interviewees reported SMBG as accurate, convenient and useful. Declining use was explained by having established a pattern of managing blood glucose with less frequent monitoring or lack of feedback or encouragement from health care professionals. Many initially positive views of urine monitoring progressively changed due to perceived inaccuracy, leading some to switch to SMBG. Perceiving diabetes as less serious was attributable to lack of symptoms, treatment with diet alone and-in the urine-monitoring group-consistently negative readings. Urine monitoring also provided less visible evidence of diabetes and of the effect of behaviour on glucose. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the importance for professionals of considering patients' preferences when using self-monitoring technologies, including how these change over time, when supporting the self-care behaviours of people with type 2 diabetes.

The face of equipoise--delivering a structured education programme within a randomized controlled trial: qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In trials of behavioural interventions, the individuals who deliver the intervention are in a position of key influence on the success of the trial. Their fidelity to the intervention is crucial. Yet little is understood about the experiences of this group of trial personnel. This study aimed to investigate the views and experiences of educators who delivered a structured education intervention to people with type 2 diabetes, which incorporated training in self-monitoring of either blood glucose (SMBG) or urine glucose (SMUG) as part of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: Educators' views were explored through focus groups before and after training (N=18) and approximately 1 year into the trial (N=14), and semi-structured telephone interviews at approximately 2 years (N=7). Analysis was based on the constant comparative method. RESULTS: Educators held preferences regarding the intervention variants; thus, they were not in individual equipoise. Training raised awareness of preferences and their potential to impact on delivery. Educators were confident in their unbiased delivery, but acknowledged the challenges involved. Concealing their preferences was helped by a sense of professionalism, the patient-centred nature of the intervention, and concessions in the trial protocol (enabling participants to swap monitoring methods if needed). Commitment to unbiased delivery was explained through a desire for evidence-based knowledge in the contentious area of SMBG. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide insight into a previously unexplored group of trial personnel--intervention deliverers in trials of behavioural interventions--which will be useful to those designing and running similar trials. Rather than individual equipoise, it is intervention deliverers' awareness of personal preferences and their potential impact on the trial outcome that facilitates unbiased delivery. Further, awareness of community equipoise, the need for evidence, and relevance to the individual enhance commitment to the RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN95696668.

Does self monitoring of blood glucose as opposed to urinalysis provide additional benefit in patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes receiving structured education? The DESMOND SMBG randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in people with type 2 diabetes on diet or oral agents other than sulphonylureas remains uncertain. Trials of interventions incorporating education about self-monitoring of blood glucose have reported mixed results. A recent systematic review concluded that SMBG was not cost-effective. However, what was unclear was whether a cheaper method of self-monitoring (such as urine glucose monitoring) could produce comparable benefit and patient acceptability for less cost. METHODS/DESIGN: The DESMOND SMBG trial is comparing two monitoring strategies (blood glucose monitoring and urine testing) over 18 months when incorporated into a comprehensive self-management structured education programme. It is a multi-site cluster randomised controlled trial, conducted across 8 sites (7 primary care trusts) in England, UK involving individuals with newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes.The trial has 80% power to demonstrate equivalence in mean HbA1c (the primary end-point) at 18 months of within ± 0.5% assuming 20% drop out and 20% non-consent. Secondary end-points include blood pressure, lipids, body weight and psychosocial measures as well as a qualitative sub-study.Practices were randomised to one of two arms: participants attend a DESMOND programme incorporating a module on self-monitoring of either urine or blood glucose. The programme is delivered by accredited educators who received specific training about equipoise. Biomedical data are collected and psychosocial scales completed at baseline, and 6, 12, and 18 months post programme. Qualitative research with participants and educators will explore views and experiences of the trial and preferences for methods of monitoring. DISCUSSION: The DESMOND SMBG trial is designed to provide evidence to inform the debate about the value of self-monitoring of blood glucose in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Strengths include a setting in primary care, a cluster design, a health economic analysis, a comparison of different methods of monitoring while controlling for other components of training within the context of a quality assured structured education programme and a qualitative sub-study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN95696668.

Accrual and drop out in a primary prevention randomised controlled trial: qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Recruitment and retention of participants are critical to the success of a randomised controlled trial. Gaining the views of potential trial participants who decline to enter a trial and of trial participants who stop the trial treatment is important and can help to improve study processes. Limited research on these issues has been conducted on healthy individuals recruited for prevention trials in the community. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with people who were eligible but had declined to participate in the Aspirin for Asymptomatic Atherosclerosis (AAA) trial (N = 11), and AAA trial participants who had stopped taking the trial medication (N = 11). A focus group with further participants who had stopped taking the trial medication (N = 6). (Total participants N = 28). RESULTS: Explanations for declining to participate could be divided into two groups: the first group were characterised by a lack of necessity to participate and a tendency to prioritise other largely mundane problems. The second group's concern was with a high level of perceived risk from participating.Explanations for stopping trial medication fell into four categories: side effects attributed to the trial medication; starting on aspirin or medication contraindicating to aspirin; experiencing an outcome event, and changing one's mind. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that when planning trials (especially in preventive medicine) particular attention should be given to designing appropriate recruitment materials and processes that fully inform potential recruits of the risks and benefits of participation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN66587262.

Are people with negative diabetes screening tests falsely reassured? Parallel group cohort study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether receiving a negative test result at primary care based stepwise diabetes screening results in false reassurance. DESIGN: Parallel group cohort study embedded in a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 15 practices (10 screening, 5 control) in the ADDITION (Cambridge) trial. PARTICIPANTS: 5334 adults (aged 40-69) in the top quarter for risk of having undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (964 controls and 4370 screening attenders). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived personal and comparative risk of diabetes, intentions for behavioural change, and self rated health measured after an initial random blood glucose test and at 3-6 and 12-15 months later (equivalent time points for controls). RESULTS: A linear mixed effects model with control for clustering by practice found no significant differences between controls and people who screened negative for diabetes in perceived personal risk, behavioural intentions, or self rated health after the first appointment or at 3-6 months or 12-15 months later. After the initial test, people who screened negative reported significantly (but slightly) lower perceived comparative risk (mean difference -0.16, 95% confidence interval -0.30 to -0.02; P=0.04) than the control group at the equivalent time point; no differences were evident at 3-6 and 12-15 months. CONCLUSIONS: A negative test result at diabetes screening does not seem to promote false reassurance, whether this is expressed as lower perceived risk, lower intentions for health related behavioural change, or higher self rated health. Implementing a widespread programme of primary care based stepwise screening for type 2 diabetes is unlikely to cause an adverse shift in the population distribution of plasma glucose and cardiovascular risk resulting from an increase in unhealthy behaviours arising from false reassurance among people who screen negative. Trial registration Current controlled trials ISRCTN99175498.

Psychological impact of screening for type 2 diabetes: controlled trial and comparative study embedded in the ADDITION (Cambridge) randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the psychological impact of primary care based stepwise screening for type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: Controlled trial and comparative study embedded in a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 15 practices (10 screening, five control) in the ADDITION (Cambridge) trial in the east of England. PARTICIPANTS: 7380 adults (aged 40-69) in the top fourth for risk of having undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (6416 invited for screening, 964 controls). INTERVENTIONS: Invited for screening for type 2 diabetes or not invited (controls), incorporating a comparative study of subgroups of screening attenders. Attenders completed questionnaires after a random blood glucose test and at 3-6 months and 12-15 months later. Controls were sent questionnaires at corresponding time points. Non-attenders were sent questionnaires at 3-6 months and 12-15 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: State anxiety (Spielberger state anxiety inventory), anxiety and depression (hospital anxiety and depression scale), worry about diabetes, and self rated health. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the screening and control participants at any time-for example, difference in means (95% confidence intervals) for state anxiety after the initial blood glucose test was -0.53, -2.60 to 1.54, at 3-6 months was 1.51 (-0.17 to 3.20), and at 12-15 months was 0.57, -1.11 to 2.24. After the initial test, compared with participants who screened negative, those who screened positive reported significantly poorer general health (difference in means -0.19, -0.25 to -0.13), higher state anxiety (0.93, -0.02 to 1.88), higher depression (0.32, 0.08 to 0.56), and higher worry about diabetes (0.25, 0.09 to 0.41), although effect sizes were small. Small but significant trends were found for self rated health across the screening subgroups at 3-6 months (P=0.047) and for worry about diabetes across the screen negative groups at 3-6 months and 12-15 months (P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Screening for type 2 diabetes has limited psychological impact on patients. Implementing a national screening programme based on the stepwise screening procedure used in the ADDITION (Cambridge) trial is unlikely to have significant consequences for patients' psychological health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99175498 [controlled-trials.com].