Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 84
Filtrar
1.
Lancet Respir Med ; 2021 Oct 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34634246

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Pleurodesis is done as an in-patient procedure to control symptomatic recurrent malignant pleural effusion (MPE) and has a success rate of 75-80%. Thoracic ultrasonography has been shown in a small study to predict pleurodesis success early by demonstrating cessation of lung sliding (a normal sign seen in healthy patients, lung sliding indicates normal movement of the lung inside the thorax). We aimed to investigate whether the use of thoracic ultrasonography in pleurodesis pathways could shorten hospital stay in patients with MPE undergoing pleurodesis. METHODS: The Efficacy of Sonographic and Biological Pleurodesis Indicators of Malignant Pleural Effusion (SIMPLE) trial was an open-label, randomised controlled trial done in ten respiratory centres in the UK and one respiratory centre in the Netherlands. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with confirmed MPE who required talc pleurodesis via either a chest tube or as poudrage during medical thorascopy were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to thoracic ultrasonography-guided care or standard care via an online platform using a minimisation algorithm. In the intervention group, daily thoracic ultrasonography examination for lung sliding in nine regions was done to derive an adherence score: present (1 point), questionable (2 points), or absent (3 points), with a lowest possible score of 9 (preserved sliding) and a highest possible score of 27 (complete absence of sliding); the chest tube was removed if the score was more than 20. In the standard care group, tube removal was based on daily output volume (per British Thoracic Society Guidelines). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay, and secondary outcomes were pleurodesis failure at 3 months, time to tube removal, all-cause mortality, symptoms and quality-of-life scores, and cost-effectiveness of thoracic ultrasonography-guided care. All outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (patients with missing data excluded), and a non-inferiority analysis of pleurodesis failure was done in the per-protocol population. This trial was registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN16441661. FINDINGS: Between Dec 31, 2015, and Dec 17, 2019, 778 patients were assessed for eligibility and 313 participants (165 [53%] male) were recruited and randomly assigned to thoracic ultrasonography-guided care (n=159) or standard care (n=154). In the modified intention-to-treat population, the median length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the intervention group (2 days [IQR 2-4]) than in the standard care group (3 days [2-5]; difference 1 day [95% CI 1-1]; p<0·0001). In the per-protocol analysis, thoracic ultrasonography-guided care was non-inferior to standard care in terms of pleurodesis failure at 3 months, which occurred in 27 (29·7%) of 91 patients in the intervention group versus 34 (31·2%) of 109 patients in the standard care group (risk difference -1·5% [95% CI -10·2% to 7·2%]; non-inferiority margin 15%). Mean time to chest tube removal in the intervention group was 2·4 days (SD 2·5) versus 3·1 days (2·0) in the standard care group (mean difference -0·72 days [95% CI -1·22 to -0·21]; p=0·0057). There were no significant between-group differences in all-cause mortality, symptom scores, or quality-of-life scores, except on the EQ-5D visual analogue scale, which was significantly lower in the standard care group at 3 months. Although costs were similar between the groups, thoracic ultrasonography-guided care was cost-effective compared with standard care. INTERPRETATION: Thoracic ultrasonography-guided care for pleurodesis in patients with MPE results in shorter hospital stay (compared with the British Thoracic Society recommendation for pleurodesis) without reducing the success rate of the procedure at 3 months. The data support consideration of standard use of thoracic ultrasonography in patients undergoing MPE-related pleurodesis. FUNDING: Marie Curie Cancer Care Committee.

2.
BMJ Open ; 11(8): e052598, 2021 08 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34452970

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether a home-based rehabilitation programme for people assessed as being at risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty offers superior outcomes to traditional outpatient physiotherapy. DESIGN: A prospective, single-blind, two-arm randomised controlled superiority trial. SETTING: 14 National Health Service physiotherapy departments in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 621 participants identified at high risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty using a bespoke screening tool. INTERVENTIONS: A multicomponent home-based rehabilitation programme delivered by rehabilitation assistants with supervision from qualified therapists versus usual care outpatient physiotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the Oxford Knee Score (a disease-specific measure of function), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Quality of Life subscale, Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly, 5 dimension, 5 level version of Euroqol (EQ-5D-5L) and physical function assessed using the Figure of 8 Walk test, 30 s Chair Stand Test and Single Leg Stance. RESULTS: 621 participants were randomised between March 2015 and January 2018. 309 were assigned to CORKA (Community Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty) home-based rehabilitation, receiving a median five treatment sessions (IQR 4-7). 312 were assigned to usual care, receiving a median 4 sessions (IQR 2-6). The primary outcome, LLFDI function total score at 12 months, was collected for 279 participants (89%) in the home-based CORKA group and 287 participants (92%) in the usual care group. No clinically or statistically significant difference was found between the groups (intention-to-treat adjusted difference=0.49 points; 95% CI -0.89 to 1.88; p=0.48). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups on any of the patient-reported or physical secondary outcome measures at 6 or 12 months.There were 18 participants in the intervention group reporting a serious adverse event (5.8%), only one directly related to the intervention, all other adverse events recorded throughout the trial related to underlying chronic medical conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The CORKA intervention was not superior to usual care. The trial detected no significant differences, clinical or statistical, between the two groups on either primary or secondary outcomes. CORKA offers an evaluation of an intervention utilising a different service delivery model for this patient group. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13517704.


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Idoso , Análise Custo-Benefício , Humanos , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Estudos Prospectivos , Qualidade de Vida , Método Simples-Cego , Medicina Estatal
3.
Health Technol Assess ; 25(48): 1-158, 2021 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34382931

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is very common, but there is uncertainty regarding which modes of exercise delivery are optimal and the long-term benefits of corticosteroid injections. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of progressive exercise compared with best-practice physiotherapy advice, with or without corticosteroid injection, in adults with a rotator cuff disorder. DESIGN: This was a pragmatic multicentre superiority randomised controlled trial (with a 2 × 2 factorial design). SETTING: Twenty NHS primary care-based musculoskeletal and related physiotherapy services. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged ≥ 18 years with a new episode of rotator cuff-related shoulder pain in the previous 6 months. INTERVENTIONS: A total of 708 participants were randomised (March 2017-May 2019) by a centralised computer-generated 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 allocation ratio to one of four interventions: (1) progressive exercise (n = 174) (six or fewer physiotherapy sessions), (2) best-practice advice (n = 174) (one physiotherapy session), (3) corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise (n = 182) (six or fewer physiotherapy sessions) or (4) corticosteroid injection then best-practice advice (n = 178) (one physiotherapy session). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score over 12 months. Secondary outcomes included SPADI subdomains, the EuroQol 5 Dimensions, five-level version, sleep disturbance, fear avoidance, pain self-efficacy, return to activity, Global Impression of Treatment and health resource use. Outcomes were collected by postal questionnaires at 8 weeks and at 6 and 12 months. A within-trial economic evaluation was also conducted. The primary analysis was intention to treat. RESULTS: Participants had a mean age of 55.5 (standard deviation 13.1) years and 49.3% were female. The mean baseline SPADI score was 54.1 (standard deviation 18.5). Follow-up rates were 91% at 8 weeks and 87% at 6 and 12 months. There was an overall improvement in SPADI score from baseline in each group over time. Over 12 months, there was no evidence of a difference in the SPADI scores between the progressive exercise intervention and the best-practice advice intervention in shoulder pain and function (adjusted mean difference between groups over 12 months -0.66, 99% confidence interval -4.52 to 3.20). There was also no difference in SPADI scores between the progressive exercise intervention and best-practice advice intervention when analysed at the 8-week and 6- and 12-month time points. Injection resulted in improvement in shoulder pain and function at 8 weeks compared with no injection (adjusted mean difference -5.64, 99% confidence interval -9.93 to -1.35), but not when analysed over 12 months (adjusted mean difference -1.11, 99% confidence interval -4.47 to 2.26), or at 6 and 12 months. There were no serious adverse events. In the base-case analysis, adding injection to best-practice advice gained 0.021 quality-adjusted life-years (p = 0.184) and increased the cost by £10 per participant (p = 0.747). Progressive exercise alone was £52 (p = 0.247) more expensive per participant than best-practice advice, and gained 0.019 QALYs (p = 0.220). At a ceiling ratio of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, injection plus best-practice advice had a 54.93% probability of being the most cost-effective treatment. LIMITATIONS: Participants and physiotherapists were not blinded to group allocation. Twelve-month follow-up may be insufficient for identifying all safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Progressive exercise was not superior to a best-practice advice session with a physiotherapist. Subacromial corticosteroid injection improved shoulder pain and function, but provided only modest short-term benefit. Best-practice advice in combination with corticosteroid injection was expected to be most cost-effective, although there was substantial uncertainty. FUTURE WORK: Longer-term follow-up, including any serious adverse effects of corticosteroid injection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16539266 and EudraCT 2016-002991-28. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 48. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

4.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(10): 1130-1140, 2021 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34252378

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and antiviral properties of azithromycin suggest therapeutic potential against COVID-19. Randomised data in mild-to-moderate disease are not available. We assessed whether azithromycin is effective in reducing hospital admission in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, randomised superiority trial was done at 19 hospitals in the UK. We enrolled adults aged at least 18 years presenting to hospitals with clinically diagnosed, highly probable or confirmed COVID-19 infection, with fewer than 14 days of symptoms, who were considered suitable for initial ambulatory management. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to azithromycin (500 mg once daily orally for 14 days) plus standard care or to standard care alone. The primary outcome was death or hospital admission from any cause over the 28 days from randomisation. The primary and safety outcomes were assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381962) and recruitment is closed. FINDINGS: 298 participants were enrolled from June 3, 2020, to Jan 29, 2021. Three participants withdrew consent and requested removal of all data, and three further participants withdrew consent after randomisation, thus, the primary outcome was assessed in 292 participants (145 in the azithromycin group and 147 in the standard care group). The mean age of the participants was 45·9 years (SD 14·9). 15 (10%) participants in the azithromycin group and 17 (12%) in the standard care group were admitted to hospital or died during the study (adjusted OR 0·91 [95% CI 0·43-1·92], p=0·80). No serious adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: In patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 managed without hospital admission, adding azithromycin to standard care treatment did not reduce the risk of subsequent hospital admission or death. Our findings do not support the use of azithromycin in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, University of Oxford and Pfizer.


Assuntos
Anti-Infecciosos/uso terapêutico , Azitromicina/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Admissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , COVID-19/virologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Padrão de Cuidado/estatística & dados numéricos , Resultado do Tratamento
5.
Trials ; 22(1): 467, 2021 Jul 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34284802

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Total hip (THR) and total knee replacements (TKR) are two highly successful orthopaedic procedures that reduce pain for people with osteoarthritis. Previous evidence suggests that physical activity, at best, remains the same pre- to post-operatively, and in some instances declines. The PEP-TALK trial evaluates the effects of a group-based, behaviour change intervention on physical activity following a THR or TKR. METHODS: PEP-TALK is an open, phase III, pragmatic, multi-centre, parallel, two-arm, two-way superiority randomised controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of usual care plus a behaviour change therapy compared with usual care alone following primary THR or TKR. The primary outcome is the UCLA Activity Score at 12 months post-randomisation which will be analysed using a linear mixed effects model. Secondary outcomes measured at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation include the UCLA Activity Score, Lower Extremity Functional Scale, Oxford Hip/Knee Score, Numerical Rating Scale for Pain, Generalised Self-Efficacy Scale, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L index and EQ-VAS and complications or adverse events. Full details of the planned analysis approaches for the primary and secondary outcomes, as well as the planned sensitivity analyses to be undertaken due to the COVID-19 pandemic, are described here. The PEP-TALK study protocol has been published previously. DISCUSSION: This paper provides details of the planned statistical analyses for the PEP-TALK trial. This is aimed to reduce the risk of outcome reporting bias and enhance transparency in reporting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials database, ISRCTN Number: 29770908 . Registered on October 2018.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Exercício Físico , Humanos , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , SARS-CoV-2 , Resultado do Tratamento
6.
Lancet ; 398(10298): 416-428, 2021 07 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34265255

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroid injections and physiotherapy exercise programmes are commonly used to treat rotator cuff disorders but the treatments' effectiveness is uncertain. We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a progressive exercise programme with a single session of best practice physiotherapy advice, with or without corticosteroid injection, in adults with a rotator cuff disorder. METHODS: In this pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial (2 × 2 factorial), we recruited patients from 20 UK National Health Service trusts. We included patients aged 18 years or older with a rotator cuff disorder (new episode within the past 6 months). Patients were excluded if they had a history of significant shoulder trauma (eg, dislocation, fracture, or full-thickness tear requiring surgery), neurological disease affecting the shoulder, other shoulder conditions (eg, inflammatory arthritis, frozen shoulder, or glenohumeral joint instability), received corticosteroid injection or physiotherapy for shoulder pain in the past 6 months, or were being considered for surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (centralised computer-generated system, 1:1:1:1) to progressive exercise (≤6 sessions), best practice advice (one session), corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise, or corticosteroid injection then best practice advice. The primary outcome was the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score over 12 months, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis (statistical significance set at 1%). The trial was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Register, ISRCTN16539266, and EuDRACT, 2016-002991-28. FINDINGS: Between March 10, 2017, and May 2, 2019, we screened 2287 patients. 708 patients were randomly assigned to progressive exercise (n=174), best practice advice (n=174), corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise (n=182), or corticosteroid injection then best practice advice (n=178). Over 12 months, SPADI data were available for 166 (95%) patients in the progressive exercise group, 164 (94%) in the best practice advice group, 177 (97%) in the corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise group, and 175 (98%) in the corticosteroid injection then best practice advice group. We found no evidence of a difference in SPADI score between progressive exercise and best practice advice when analysed over 12 months (adjusted mean difference -0·66 [99% CI -4·52 to 3·20]). We also found no evidence of a difference between corticosteroid injection compared with no injection when analysed over 12 months (-1·11 [-4·47 to 2·26]). No serious adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Progressive exercise was not superior to a best practice advice session with a physiotherapist in improving shoulder pain and function. Subacromial corticosteroid injection provided no long-term benefit in patients with rotator cuff disorders. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Technology Assessment Programme.


Assuntos
Corticosteroides/administração & dosagem , Terapia por Exercício/métodos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Lesões do Manguito Rotador/terapia , Síndrome de Colisão do Ombro/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Injeções Intra-Articulares , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do Tratamento
7.
BMJ Open ; 11(6): e045741, 2021 06 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34155073

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: We will evaluate the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a rehabilitation intervention on pain, function and health-related quality of life following neck dissection (ND) after head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a pragmatic, multicentred, feasibility study. Participants are randomised to usual care (control) or usual care plus an individualised, rehabilitation programme (Getting Recovery Right After Neck Dissection, GRRAND intervention). Adults aged over 18 with HNC for whom ND is part of their care will be recruited from specialist clinics. Participants are randomised in 1:1 ratio using a web-based service. The target sample size is 60 participants. Usual care will be received by all participants during their postoperative inpatient stay consisting standard National Health Service care supplemented with a booklet advising on postoperative self-management strategies. The GRRAND intervention programme consists of usual care plus up to six individual physiotherapy sessions including neck and shoulder range of motion (ROM) and progressive resistance exercises, advice and education. Between sessions participants will be advised to complete a home exercise programme. The primary outcome is to determine recruitment and retention rates from study participants across sites. Outcomes will be measured at 6 and 12 months. Participants and physiotherapists will be invited to an optional qualitative interview at the completion of their involvement in the study. The target qualitative sample size is 15 participants and 12 physiotherapists. Interviews aim to further investigate the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and to determine wider experiences of the study design and intervention from patient and physiotherapist perspectives. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was given on 29 October 2019 (National Research Ethics Committee Number: 19/SC/0457). Results will be reported at conferences and in peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11979997. STATUS: Trial recruitment is ongoing and is expected to be completed by 30 August 2021.


Assuntos
Qualidade de Vida , Medicina Estatal , Adulto , Análise Custo-Benefício , Terapia por Exercício , Estudos de Viabilidade , Humanos , Esvaziamento Cervical , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
8.
BMJ Open ; 11(6): e048178, 2021 06 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34183348

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Prespecified progression criteria can inform the decision to progress from an external randomised pilot trial to a definitive randomised controlled trial. We assessed the characteristics of progression criteria reported in external randomised pilot trial protocols and results publications, including whether progression criteria were specified a priori and mentioned in prepublication peer reviewer reports. STUDY DESIGN: Methodological review. METHODS: We searched four journals through PubMed: British Medical Journal Open, Pilot and Feasibility Studies, Trials and Public Library of Science One. Eligible publications reported external randomised pilot trial protocols or results, were published between January 2018 and December 2019 and reported progression criteria. We double data extracted 25% of the included publications. Here we report the progression criteria characteristics. RESULTS: We included 160 publications (123 protocols and 37 completed trials). Recruitment and retention were the most frequent indicators contributing to progression criteria. Progression criteria were mostly reported as distinct thresholds (eg, achieving a specific target; 133/160, 83%). Less than a third of the planned and completed pilot trials that included qualitative research reported how these findings would contribute towards progression criteria (34/108, 31%). The publications seldom stated who established the progression criteria (12/160, 7.5%) or provided rationale or justification for progression criteria (44/160, 28%). Most completed pilot trials reported the intention to proceed to a definitive trial (30/37, 81%), but less than half strictly met all of their progression criteria (17/37, 46%). Prepublication peer reviewer reports were available for 153/160 publications (96%). Peer reviewer reports for 86/153 (56%) publications mentioned progression criteria, with peer reviewers of 35 publications commenting that progression criteria appeared not to be specified. CONCLUSIONS: Many external randomised pilot trial publications did not adequately report or propose prespecified progression criteria to inform whether to proceed to a future definitive randomised controlled trial.


Assuntos
Publicações , Relatório de Pesquisa , Estudos de Viabilidade , Humanos
9.
Bone Joint J ; 103-B(6): 1047-1054, 2021 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33902306

RESUMO

AIMS: To identify the prevalence of neuropathic pain after lower limb fracture surgery, assess associations with pain severity, quality of life and disability, and determine baseline predictors of chronic neuropathic pain at three and at six months post-injury. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a UK multicentre randomized controlled trial (Wound Healing in Surgery for Trauma; WHiST) dataset including adults aged 16 years or over following surgery for lower limb major trauma. The trial recruited 1,547 participants from 24 trauma centres. Neuropathic pain was measured at three and six months using the Doleur Neuropathique Questionnaire (DN4); 701 participants provided a DN4 score at three months and 781 at six months. Overall, 933 participants provided DN4 for at least one time point. Physical disability (Disability Rating Index (DRI) 0 to 100) and health-related quality-of-life (EuroQol five-dimension five-level; EQ-5D-5L) were measured. Candidate predictors of neuropathic pain included sex, age, BMI, injury mechanism, concurrent injury, diabetes, smoking, alcohol, analgaesia use pre-injury, index surgery location, fixation type, Injury Severity Score, open injury, and wound care. RESULTS: The median age of the participants was 51 years (interquartile range 35 to 64). At three and six months post-injury respectively, 32% (222/702) and 30% (234/787) had neuropathic pain, 56% (396/702) and 53% (413/787) had chronic pain without neuropathic characteristics, and the remainder were pain-free. Pain severity was higher among those with neuropathic pain. Linear regression analyses found that those with neuropathic pain at six months post-injury had more physical disability (DRI adjusted mean difference 11.49 (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.84 to 15.14; p < 0.001) and poorer quality of life (EQ-5D utility -0.15 (95% CI -0.19 to -0.11); p < 0.001) compared to those without neuropathic characteristics. Logistic regression identified that prognostic factors of younger age, current smoker, below knee fracture, concurrent injuries, and regular analgaesia pre-injury were associated with higher odds of post-injury neuropathic pain. CONCLUSION: Pain with neuropathic characteristics is common after lower limb fracture surgery and persists to six months post-injury. Persistent neuropathic pain is associated with substantially poorer recovery. Further attention to identify neuropathic pain post-lower limb injury, predicting patients at risk, and targeting interventions, is indicated. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1047-1054.


Assuntos
Dor Crônica/epidemiologia , Dor Crônica/etiologia , Fraturas Ósseas/cirurgia , Traumatismos da Perna/cirurgia , Neuralgia/epidemiologia , Neuralgia/etiologia , Dor Pós-Operatória/epidemiologia , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Qualidade de Vida , Adulto , Avaliação da Deficiência , Feminino , Humanos , Escala de Gravidade do Ferimento , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Prevalência , Fatores de Risco , Reino Unido/epidemiologia
10.
Trials ; 22(1): 185, 2021 Mar 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33663566

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Tight Control of psoriatic arthritis (TICOPA) trial confirmed improved clinical outcomes with a treat to target (T2T) strategy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This consisted of 4-weekly review and escalation of 'step up' therapy (single disease modifying therapy (DMARD), combination DMARDs and then biologics) based on remission criteria. Based on this, a T2T approach is supported by European PsA treatment recommendations. However, it is not commonly implemented in routine care primarily due to feasibility and cost concerns. In the TICOPA trial, the same treatment regime was used for all participants regardless of their disease profile. Despite the recognition of PsA as a highly heterogeneous condition, no studies have tailored which drugs are used depending on disease severity. The cohort will establish real world outcomes for the T2T approach in PsA and also form the basis of a trials within cohorts (TWiCs) design to test alternative therapeutic approaches within embedded clinical trials providing an evidence base for treatment strategy in PsA. METHODS: The Multicentre Observational Initiative in Treat to target Outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis (MONITOR-PsA) cohort will apply a T2T approach within routine care. It will recruit newly diagnosed adult patients with PsA starting systemic therapies. The cohort is observational allowing routine therapeutic care within NHS clinics but a T2T approach will be supported when monitoring treatment within the cohort. Eligible participants will be adults (≥18 years) with active PsA with ≥ 1 tender or swollen joints or enthesis who have not previously had treatment with DMARDs for articular disease. DISCUSSION: This study is the first TWiC designed to support a fully powered randomised drug trial. The results from the observational cohort will be compared with those observed in the TICOPA trial investigating the clinical effectiveness and health care costs of the pragmatic T2T approach. Nested trials will provide definitive RCT evidence establishing the optimal management of PsA within the T2T approach. The TWiCs design allows robust generalizability to routine healthcare, avoids disappointment bias, aids recruitment and in future will allow assessment of longer-term outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03531073 . Retrospectively registered on 21 May 2018.


Assuntos
Antirreumáticos , Artrite Psoriásica , Adulto , Antirreumáticos/efeitos adversos , Artrite Psoriásica/diagnóstico , Artrite Psoriásica/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Projetos de Pesquisa , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento
11.
Platelets ; 32(2): 273-279, 2021 Feb 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33242293

RESUMO

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous preparation that has been claimed to improve healing and mechanobiological properties of tendons both in vitro and in vivo. In this sub-study from the PATH-2 (PRP in Achilles Tendon Healing-2) trial, we report the cellular and growth factor content and quality of the Leukocyte-rich PRP (L-PRP) (N = 103) prepared using a standardized commercial preparation method across 19 different UK centers. Baseline whole blood cell counts (red cells, leukocyte and platelets) demonstrated that the two groups were well-matched. L-PRP analysis gave a mean platelet count of 852.6 x 109/L (SD 438.96), a mean leukocyte cell count of 15.13 x 109/L (SD 10.28) and a mean red blood cell count of 0.91 x 1012/L (SD 1.49). The activation status of the L-PRP gave either low or high expression levels of the degranulation marker CD62p before and after ex-vivo platelet activation respectively. TGF-ß, VEGF, PDGF, IGF and FGFb mean concentrations were 131.92 ng/ml, 0.98 ng/ml, 55.34 ng/ml, 78.2 ng/ml and 111.0 pg/ml respectively with expected correlations with both platelet and leukocyte counts. While PATH-2 results demonstrated that there was no evidence L-PRP is effective for improving clinical outcomes at 24 weeks after Achilles tendon rupture, our findings support that the majority of L-PRP properties were within the method specification and performance.

12.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(6): 2862-2877, 2021 Jun 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33254239

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical effectiveness, efficacy and cost effectiveness of splints (orthoses) in people with symptomatic basal thumb joint OA (BTOA). METHODS: A pragmatic, multicentre parallel group randomized controlled trial at 17 National Health Service (NHS) hospital departments recruited adults with symptomatic BTOA and at least moderate hand pain and dysfunction. We randomized participants (1:1:1) using a computer-based minimization system to one of three treatment groups: a therapist supported self-management programme (SSM), a therapist supported self-management programme plus a verum thumb splint (SSM+S), or a therapist supported self-management programme plus a placebo thumb splint (SSM+PS). Participants were blinded to group allocation, received 90 min therapy over 8 weeks and were followed up for 12 weeks from baseline. Australian/Canadian (AUSCAN) hand pain at 8 weeks was the primary outcome, using intention to treat analysis. We calculated costs of treatment. RESULTS: We randomized 349 participants to SSM (n = 116), SSM+S (n = 116) or SSM+PS (n = 117) and 292 (84%) provided AUSCAN Osteoarthritis Hand Index hand pain scores at the primary end point (8 weeks). All groups improved, with no mean treatment difference between groups: SSM+S vs SSM -0.5 (95% CI: -1.4, 0.4), P = 0.255; SSM+PS vs SSM -0.1 (95% CI: -1.0, 0.8), P = 0.829; and SSM+S vs SSM+PS -0.4 (95% CI: -1.4, 0.5), P = 0.378. The average 12-week costs were: SSM £586; SSM+S £738; and SSM+PS £685. CONCLUSION: There was no additional benefit of adding a thumb splint to a high-quality evidence-based, supported self-management programme for thumb OA delivered by therapists. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 54744256 (http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN54744256).

13.
Health Technol Assess ; 24(65): 1-116, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33250068

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Over 100,000 primary knee arthroplasty operations are undertaken annually in the UK. Around 15-30% of patients do not report a good outcome. Better rehabilitation strategies may improve patient-reported outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes from a traditional outpatient physiotherapy model with those from a home-based rehabilitation programme for people assessed as being at risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty. DESIGN: An individually randomised, two-arm controlled trial with a blinded outcome assessment, a parallel health economic evaluation and a nested qualitative study. SETTING: The trial took place in 14 NHS physiotherapy departments. PARTICIPANTS: People identified as being at high risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty. INTERVENTIONS: A multicomponent home-based rehabilitation package delivered by rehabilitation assistants with supervision from qualified therapists compared with usual-care outpatient physiotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Late Life Function and Disability Instrument at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the Oxford Knee Score (a disease-specific measure of function); Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; Quality of Life subscale; Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly; EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version; and physical function assessed using the Figure-of-8 Walk Test, 30-Second Chair Stand Test and Single Leg Stance. Data on the use of health-care services, time off work and informal care were collected using participant diaries. RESULTS: In total, 621 participants were randomised. A total of 309 participants were assigned to the COmmunity based Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty (CORKA) home-based rehabilitation programme, receiving a median of five treatment sessions (interquartile range 4-7 sessions). A total of 312 participants were assigned to usual care, receiving a median of four sessions (interquartile range 2-6 sessions). The primary outcome, Late Life Function and Disability Instrument function total score at 12 months, was collected for 279 participants (89%) in the home-based CORKA group and 287 participants (92%) in the usual-care group. No clinically or statistically significant difference was found between the groups (intention-to-treat adjusted difference 0.49 points, 95% confidence interval -0.89 to 1.88 points; p = 0.48). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in any of the patient-reported or physical secondary outcome measures at 6 or 12 months post randomisation. The health economic analysis found that the CORKA intervention was cheaper to provide than usual care (£66 less per participant). Total societal costs (combining health-care costs and other costs) were lower for the CORKA intervention than usual care (£316 less per participant). Adopting a societal perspective, CORKA had a 75% probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Adopting the narrower health and social care perspective, CORKA had a 43% probability of being cost-effective at the same threshold. LIMITATIONS: The interventions were of short duration and were set within current commissioning guidance for UK physiotherapy. Participants and treating therapists could not be blinded. CONCLUSIONS: This randomised controlled trial found no important differences in outcomes when post-arthroplasty rehabilitation was delivered using a home-based, rehabilitation assistant-delivered rehabilitation package or a traditional outpatient model. However, the health economic evaluation found that when adopting a societal perspective, the CORKA home-based intervention was cost-saving and more effective than, and thus dominant over, usual care, owing to reduced time away from paid employment for this group. Further research could look at identifying the risk of poor outcome and further evaluation of a cost-effective treatment, including the workforce model to deliver it. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13517704. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 65. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

14.
Bone Jt Open ; 1(6): 205-213, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33225291

RESUMO

Aims: Torus fractures of the distal radius are the most common fractures in children. The NICE non-complex fracture guidelines recently concluded that bandaging was probably the optimal treatment for these injuries. However, across the UK current treatment varies widely due to a lack of evidence underpinning the guidelines. The Forearm Fracture Recovery in Children Evaluation (FORCE) trial evaluates the effect of a soft bandage and immediate discharge compared with rigid immobilization. Methods: FORCE is a multicentre, parallel group randomized controlled equivalence trial. The primary outcome is the Wong-Baker FACES pain score at three days after randomization and the primary analysis of this outcome will use a multivariate linear regression model to compare the two groups. Secondary outcomes are measured at one and seven days, and three and six-weeks post-randomization and include the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) upper extremity limb score, EuroQoL EQ-5D-Y, analgesia use, school absence, complications, and healthcare resource use. The planned statistical and health economic analyses for this trial are described here. The FORCE trial protocol has been published separately. Conclusion: This paper provides details of the planned analyses for this trial, and will reduce the risks of outcome reporting bias and data driven results.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:205-213.

15.
Bone Jt Open ; 1(6): 214-221, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33225292

RESUMO

Aims: Torus fractures are the most common childhood fracture, accounting for 500,000 UK emergency attendances per year. UK treatment varies widely due to lack of scientific evidence. This is the protocol for a randomized controlled equivalence trial of 'the offer of a soft bandage and immediate discharge' versus 'rigid immobilization and follow-up as per the protocol of the treating centre' in the treatment of torus fractures . Methods: Children aged four to 15-years-old inclusive who have sustained a torus/buckle fracture of the distal radius with/without an injury to the ulna are eligible to take part. Baseline pain as measured by the Wong Baker FACES pain scale, function using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) upper limb, and quality of life (QoL) assessed with the EuroQol EQ-5D-Y will be collected. Each patient will be randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre and age group (four to seven years and ≥ eight years) to either a regimen of the offer of a soft bandage and immediate discharge or rigid immobilization and follow-up as per the protocol of the treating centre. Results: At day one, three, and seven, data on pain, function, QoL, immobilization, and analgesia will be collected. Three and six weeks after injury, the main outcomes plus data on complications, resource use, and school absence will be collected. The primary outcome is the Wong-Baker FACES pain scale at three days post-randomization. All data will be obtained through electronic questionnaires completed by the participants and/or parents/guardian.Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:214-221.

16.
Trials ; 21(1): 767, 2020 Sep 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32894159

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Getting it Right: Addressing Shoulder Pain (GRASP) trial assesses the clinical and cost-effectiveness of individually tailored, progressive exercise compared with best practice advice, with or without corticosteroid injection, in adults with a rotator cuff disorder. This article describes the statistical analysis plan for the GRASP randomised controlled trial. METHODS/DESIGN: GRASP is a multicentre randomised controlled trial using a 2 × 2 factorial design. Adults aged ≥ 18 years with a new episode of shoulder pain related to a rotator cuff disorder, not currently receiving physiotherapy or being considered for surgery, are randomised (centralised computer-generated 1:1:1:1 allocation ratio) to one of four interventions: (1) progressive exercise (up to 6 physiotherapy sessions), (2) best practice advice (one physiotherapy session), (3) subacromial corticosteroid injection then progressive exercise and (4) subacromial corticosteroid injection then best practice advice. The primary outcome is the mean difference in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) total score over 12 months. Secondary outcomes are as follows: pain and function SPADI subdomains, health-related quality of life (EuroQol EQ-5D-5L), sleep disturbance, return to activity, global impression of change, health resource use, out-of-pocket expenses and work disability. Here, we describe in detail the following: sample size calculation, descriptive statistics of the primary and secondary outcomes, statistical models used for the analysis of the main outcomes, handling of missing data, planned sensitivity and subgroup analyses. This pre-specified statistical analysis plan was written and submitted without prior knowledge of the trial results. DISCUSSION: Publication of the statistical analysis plan for the GRASP trial aims to reduce the risk of outcome reporting bias and increase transparency of the data analysis. Any deviations or changes to the current SAP will be described and justified in the final study report and any results publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number ISRCTN16539266 . Registered on 14 June 2016. EudraCT number 2016-002991-28. Registered on 12 June 2016.


Assuntos
Manguito Rotador , Dor de Ombro , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Terapia por Exercício , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Dor de Ombro/diagnóstico , Dor de Ombro/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do Tratamento
17.
Trials ; 21(1): 718, 2020 Aug 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32807209

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Azithromycin is an orally active synthetic macrolide antibiotic with a wide range of anti-bacterial, anti-inflammatory and antiviral properties. It is a safe, inexpensive, generic licenced drug available worldwide and manufactured to scale and is a potential candidate therapy for pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Azithromycin was widely used to treat severe SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, but to date, no randomised data are available in any coronavirus infections. Other ongoing trials are exploring short courses of azithromycin either in early disease, within the first 7 days of symptoms, when azithromycin's antiviral properties may be important, or late in disease when anti-bacterial properties may reduce the risk of secondary bacterial infection. However, the molecule's anti-inflammatory properties, including suppression of pulmonary macrophage-derived pro-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukins-1ß, -6, -8, and -18 and cytokines G-CSF and GM-CSF may provide a distinct therapeutic benefit if given in as a prolonged course during the period of progression from moderate to severe disease. METHODS: ATOMIC2 is a phase II/III, multi-centre, prospective, open-label, two-arm randomised superiority clinical trial of azithromycin versus standard care for adults presenting to hospital with COVID-19 symptoms who are not admitted at initial presentation. We will enrol adults, ≥ 18 years of age assessed in acute hospitals in the UK with clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 infection where management on an ambulatory care pathway is deemed appropriate. Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to usual care or to azithromycin 500 mg orally daily for 14 days with telephone follow-up at days 14 and 28. The primary objective is to compare the proportion with either death or respiratory failure requiring invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation over 28 days from randomisation. Secondary objectives include mortality/respiratory failure in those with a PCR-confirmed diagnosis; all-cause mortality; progression to pneumonia; progression to severe pneumonia; peak severity of illness and mechanistic analysis of blood and nasal biomarkers. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine the clinical utility of azithromycin in patients with moderately severe, clinically diagnosed COVID-19 and could be rapidly applicable worldwide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04381962 . Registered on 11 May 2020. EudraCT identifier 2020-001740-26 . Opened for accrual on 29 May 2020.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Azitromicina/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , COVID-19 , Humanos , Pandemias , Estudos Prospectivos , Projetos de Pesquisa , SARS-CoV-2 , Índice de Gravidade de Doença
18.
Health Technol Assess ; 24(38): 1-86, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32821038

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Major trauma is the leading cause of death in people aged < 45 years. Patients with major trauma usually have lower-limb fractures. Surgery to fix the fractures is complicated and the risk of infection may be as high as 27%. The type of dressing applied after surgery could potentially reduce the risk of infection. OBJECTIVES: To assess the deep surgical site infection rate, disability, quality of life, patient assessment of the surgical scar and resource use in patients with surgical incisions associated with fractures following major trauma to the lower limbs treated with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy versus standard dressings. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty-four specialist trauma hospitals representing the UK Major Trauma Network. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1548 adult patients were randomised from September 2016 to April 2018. Exclusion criteria included presentation > 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. INTERVENTIONS: Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (n = 785), in which a non-adherent absorbent dressing covered with a semipermeable membrane is connected to a pump to create a partial vacuum over the wound, versus standard dressings not involving negative pressure (n = 763). Trial participants and the treating surgeon could not be blinded to treatment allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Deep surgical site infection at 30 days was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were deep infection at 90 days, the results of the Disability Rating Index, health-related quality of life, the results of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale and resource use collected at 3 and 6 months post surgery. RESULTS: A total of 98% of participants provided primary outcome data. There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of deep surgical site infection at 30 days. The infection rate was 6.7% (50/749) in the standard dressing group and 5.8% (45/770) in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (intention-to-treat odds ratio 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.33; p = 0.52). There was no difference in the deep surgical site infection rate at 90 days: 13.2% in the standard dressing group and 11.4% in the incisional negative-pressure wound therapy group (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.19; p = 0.32). There was no difference between the two groups in disability, quality of life or scar appearance at 3 or 6 months. Incisional negative-pressure wound therapy did not reduce the cost of treatment and was associated with a low probability of cost-effectiveness. LIMITATIONS: Owing to the emergency nature of the surgery, we anticipated that some patients who were randomised would subsequently be unable or unwilling to participate. However, the majority of the patients (85%) agreed to participate. Therefore, participants were representative of the population with lower-limb fractures associated with major trauma. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study do not support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in patients having surgery for major trauma to the lower limbs. FUTURE WORK: Our work suggests that the use of incisional negative-pressure wound therapy dressings in other at-risk surgical wounds requires further investigation. Future research may also investigate different approaches to reduce postoperative infections, for example the use of topical antibiotic preparations in surgical wounds and the role of orthopaedic implants with antimicrobial coatings when fixing the associated fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12702354 and UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio ID20416. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library for further project information.

20.
Trials ; 21(1): 667, 2020 Jul 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32693842

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Neurogenic claudication is a common spinal condition affecting older adults that has a major effect on mobility and implicitly independence. The effectiveness of conservative interventions in this population is not known. We describe the statistical analysis plan for the Better Outcomes for Older people with Spinal trouble (BOOST) randomised controlled trial. METHODS/DESIGN: BOOST is a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel, two-arm, randomised controlled trial. Participants are community-dwelling adults, 65 years or older, with neurogenic claudication, registered prospectively, and randomised 2:1 (intervention to control) to the combined physical and psychological BOOST group physiotherapy programme or best practice advice. The primary outcome is the Oswestry Disability Index at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the Short Physical Performance Battery, Swiss Spinal Stenosis Scale, 6 Minute Walk Test, Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, and Tilburg Frailty Indicator. Outcomes are measured at 6 and 12 months by researchers blinded to treatment allocation. The primary statistical analysis is by intention to treat. Further study design details are published in the BOOST protocol. DISCUSSION: The planned statistical analyses for the BOOST trial aim to reduce the risk of outcome reporting bias from prior data knowledge. Any changes or deviations from this statistical analysis plan will be described and justified in the final study report. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered in the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, reference number ISRCTN12698674 . Registered on 10 November 2015.


Assuntos
Dor nas Costas/terapia , Dor Crônica/terapia , Claudicação Intermitente/terapia , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Intervenção Psicossocial , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Dor nas Costas/psicologia , Dor Crônica/psicologia , Terapia Combinada , Humanos , Claudicação Intermitente/psicologia , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Pragmáticos como Assunto
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...