An Inhaled Galectin-3 Inhibitor in COVID-19 Pneumonitis: A Phase Ib/IIa Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial (DEFINE).

Rationale: High circulating galectin-3 is associated with poor outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We hypothesized that GB0139, a potent inhaled thiodigalactoside galectin-3 inhibitor with antiinflammatory and antifibrotic actions, would be safely and effectively delivered in COVID-19 pneumonitis. Objectives: Primary outcomes were safety and tolerability of inhaled GB0139 as an add-on therapy for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonitis. Methods: We present the findings of two arms of a phase Ib/IIa randomized controlled platform trial in hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonitis. Patients received standard of care (SoC) or SoC plus 10 mg inhaled GB0139 twice daily for 48 hours, then once daily for up to 14 days or discharge. Measurements and Main Results: Data are reported from 41 patients, 20 of which were assigned randomly to receive GB0139. Primary outcomes: the GB0139 group experienced no treatment-related serious adverse events. Incidences of adverse events were similar between treatment arms (40 with GB0139 + SoC vs. 35 with SoC). Secondary outcomes: plasma GB0139 was measurable in all patients after inhaled exposure and demonstrated target engagement with decreased circulating galectin (overall treatment effect post-hoc analysis of covariance [ANCOVA] over days 2-7; P = 0.0099 vs. SoC). Plasma biomarkers associated with inflammation, fibrosis, coagulopathy, and major organ function were evaluated. Conclusions: In COVID-19 pneumonitis, inhaled GB0139 was well-tolerated and achieved clinically relevant plasma concentrations with target engagement. The data support larger clinical trials to determine clinical efficacy. Clinical trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04473053) and EudraCT (2020-002230-32).

Phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled trial of spironolactone and dexamethasone versus dexamethasone in COVID-19 hospitalised patients in Delhi.

BACKGROUND: In this phase 2 randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with COVID-19, we hypothesised that blocking mineralocorticoid receptors using a combination of dexamethasone to suppress cortisol secretion and spironolactone is safe and may reduce illness severity. METHODS: Hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 were randomly allocated to low dose oral spironolactone (50 mg day 1, then 25 mg once daily for 21 days) or standard of care in a 2:1 ratio. Both groups received dexamethasone 6 mg daily for 10 days. Group allocation was blinded to the patient and research team. Primary outcomes were time to recovery, defined as the number of days until patients achieved WHO Ordinal Scale (OS) category ≤ 3, and the effect of spironolactone on aldosterone, D-dimer, angiotensin II and Von Willebrand Factor (VWF). RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients with PCR confirmed COVID were recruited in Delhi from 01 February to 30 April 2021. 74 were randomly assigned to spironolactone and dexamethasone (SpiroDex), and 46 to dexamethasone alone (Dex). There was no significant difference in the time to recovery between SpiroDex and Dex groups (SpiroDex median 4.5 days, Dex median 5.5 days, p = 0.055). SpiroDex patients had significantly lower D-dimer levels on days 4 and 7 (day 7 mean D-dimer: SpiroDex 1.15 µg/mL, Dex 3.15 µg/mL, p = 0.0004) and aldosterone at day 7 (SpiroDex 6.8 ng/dL, Dex 14.52 ng/dL, p = 0.0075). There was no difference in VWF or angiotensin II levels between groups. For secondary outcomes, SpiroDex patients had a significantly greater number of oxygen free days and reached oxygen freedom sooner than the Dex group. Cough scores were no different during the acute illness, however the SpiroDex group had lower scores at day 28. There was no difference in corticosteroid levels between groups. There was no increase in adverse events in patients receiving SpiroDex. CONCLUSION: Low dose oral spironolactone in addition to dexamethasone was safe and reduced D-dimer and aldosterone. Time to recovery was not significantly reduced. Phase 3 randomised controlled trials with spironolactone and dexamethasone should be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on the Clinical Trials Registry of India TRI: CTRI/2021/03/031721, reference: REF/2021/03/041472. Registered on 04/03/2021.

The United Kingdom Eating Disorders Genetics Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The United Kingdom Eating Disorders Genetics Initiative (EDGI UK), part of the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Mental Health BioResource, aims to deepen our understanding of the environmental and genetic etiology of eating disorders. EDGI UK launched in February 2020 and is partnered with the UK eating disorders charity, Beat. Multiple EDGI branches exist worldwide. This article serves the dual function of providing an in-depth description of our study protocol and of describing our initial sample including demographics, diagnoses, and physical and psychiatric comorbidities. METHOD: EDGI UK recruits via media and clinical services. Anyone living in England, at least 16 years old, with a lifetime probable or clinical eating disorder is eligible to sign up online: edgiuk.org. Participants complete online questionnaires, donate a saliva sample for genetic analysis, and consent to medical record linkage and recontact for future studies. RESULTS: As of September 2022, EDGI UK recruited 7435 survey participants: 98% female, 93.1% white, 97.8% cisgender, 65.9% heterosexual, and 52.1% have a university degree. Over half (57.8%) of these participants have returned their saliva DNA kit. The most common diagnoses are anorexia nervosa (48.3%), purging disorder (37.8%), bulimia nervosa (37.5%), binge-eating disorder (15.8%), and atypical anorexia nervosa (7.8%). CONCLUSION: EDGI UK is the largest UK eating disorders study and efforts to increase its diversity are underway. It offers a unique opportunity to accelerate eating disorder research. Researchers and participants with lived experience can collaborate on projects with unparalleled sample size. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Eating disorders are debilitating and costly for society but are under-researched due to underfunding. EDGI UK is one of the largest eating disorder studies worldwide with ongoing recruitment. The collected data constitute a resource for secondary analysis. We will combine data from all international EDGI branches and the NIHR BioResource to facilitate research that improves our understanding of eating disorders and their comorbidities.

Screening patients for unintentional carbon monoxide exposure in the Emergency Department: a cross-sectional multi-centre study.

BACKGROUND: Low-level exposure to carbon monoxide (CO) is a significant health concern but is difficult to diagnose. This main study aim was to establish the prevalence of low-level CO poisoning in Emergency Department (ED) patients. METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study of patients with symptoms of CO exposure was conducted in four UK EDs between December 2018 and March 2020. Data on symptoms, a CO screening tool and carboxyhaemoglobin were collected. An investigation of participants' homes was undertaken to identify sources of CO exposure. RESULTS: Based on an ED assessment of 4175 participants, the prevalence of suspected CO exposure was 0.62% (95% CI; 0.41-0.91%). CO testing in homes confirmed 1 case of CO presence and 21 probable cases. Normal levels of carboxyhaemoglobin were found in 19 cases of probable exposure and in the confirmed case. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that ED patients with symptoms suggestive of CO poisoning but no history of CO exposure are at risk from CO poisoning. The findings suggest components of the CO screening tool may be an indicator of CO exposure over and above elevated COHb. Clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for CO exposure so that this important diagnosis is not missed.

A Randomized Trial of Epinephrine in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Concern about the use of epinephrine as a treatment for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest led the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation to call for a placebo-controlled trial to determine whether the use of epinephrine is safe and effective in such patients. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind trial involving 8014 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the United Kingdom, paramedics at five National Health Service ambulance services administered either parenteral epinephrine (4015 patients) or saline placebo (3999 patients), along with standard care. The primary outcome was the rate of survival at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included the rate of survival until hospital discharge with a favorable neurologic outcome, as indicated by a score of 3 or less on the modified Rankin scale (which ranges from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]). RESULTS: At 30 days, 130 patients (3.2%) in the epinephrine group and 94 (2.4%) in the placebo group were alive (unadjusted odds ratio for survival, 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06 to 1.82; P=0.02). There was no evidence of a significant difference in the proportion of patients who survived until hospital discharge with a favorable neurologic outcome (87 of 4007 patients [2.2%] vs. 74 of 3994 patients [1.9%]; unadjusted odds ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.61). At the time of hospital discharge, severe neurologic impairment (a score of 4 or 5 on the modified Rankin scale) had occurred in more of the survivors in the epinephrine group than in the placebo group (39 of 126 patients [31.0%] vs. 16 of 90 patients [17.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the use of epinephrine resulted in a significantly higher rate of 30-day survival than the use of placebo, but there was no significant between-group difference in the rate of a favorable neurologic outcome because more survivors had severe neurologic impairment in the epinephrine group. (Funded by the U.K. National Institute for Health Research and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN73485024 .).

Cost-effectiveness of adrenaline for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: The 'Prehospital Assessment of the Role of Adrenaline: Measuring the Effectiveness of Drug Administration In Cardiac Arrest' (PARAMEDIC2) trial showed that adrenaline improves overall survival, but not neurological outcomes. We sought to determine the within-trial and lifetime health and social care costs and benefits associated with adrenaline, including secondary benefits from organ donation. METHODS: We estimated the costs, benefits (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) associated with adrenaline during the 6-month trial follow-up. Model-based analyses explored how results altered when the time horizon was extended beyond 6 months and the scope extended to include recipients of donated organs. RESULTS: The within-trial (6 months) and lifetime horizon economic evaluations focussed on the trial population produced ICERs of £1,693,003 (€1,946,953) and £81,070 (€93,231) per QALY gained in 2017 prices, respectively, reflecting significantly higher mean costs and only marginally higher mean QALYs in the adrenaline group. The probability that adrenaline is cost-effective was less than 1% across a range of cost-effectiveness thresholds. Combined direct economic effects over the lifetimes of survivors and indirect economic effects in organ recipients produced an ICER of £16,086 (€18,499) per QALY gained for adrenaline with the probability that adrenaline is cost-effective increasing to 90% at a £30,000 (€34,500) per QALY cost-effectiveness threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Adrenaline was not cost-effective when only directly related costs and consequences are considered. However, incorporating the indirect economic effects associated with transplanted organs substantially alters cost-effectiveness, suggesting decision-makers should consider the complexity of direct and indirect economic impacts of adrenaline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN73485024 . Registered on 13 March 2014.

Patient safety incidents and medication errors during a clinical trial: experience from a pre-hospital randomized controlled trial of emergency medication administration.

AIM: To assess and evaluate patient safety incidents and in particular, medication errors, during a large multi-center pre-hospital trial of emergency therapy (PARAMEDIC2), in order to inform and improve future pre-hospital medicines trials. METHODS: The PARAMEDIC2 trial was undertaken across five NHS Ambulance Services in England and Wales with randomisation between December 2014 and October 2017. Patients with an out -of-hospital cardiac arrest unresponsive to initial resuscitation were randomly assigned to 1 mg intravenous adrenaline or matching placebo. Records were reviewed to identify trial medication errors involving documentation and/or clinical protocol errors occurring in trial participants. Causes of medication errors, including root cause analysis where available, were reviewed to identify patterns and themes contributing to these errors. RESULTS: Eight thousand sixteen patients were enrolled, of whom 4902 received trial medication. A total of 331 patient safety incidents was reported, involving 295 patients, representing an overall rate of 3.6% of these, 166 (50.2%) were documentation errors while 165 (49.8%) were clinical protocol/medication errors. An overall rate of 0-4.5% was reported across all five ambulance services, with a mean of 2.0%. These errors had no impact on patient care or the trial and were all resolved CONCLUSION: The overall medication error rate of 1.8% primarily consisted of administration of open-label adrenaline and confusion with trial medication packs. A similar number of patients had documentation errors. This study is the first to provide data on patient safety incidents relating to medication errors encountered during a pre-hospital trial of emergency medication administration and will provide supporting data for planning future trials in this area.

Complication during transportation and 30 days mortality of patients with acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who present to hospitals without interventional facilities frequently require transfer to another hospital equipped with a cardiac catheterization laboratory. This retrospective cohort study evaluates the association of the type of medical transport with patient outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of medical records of patients with ACS transported by basic (BT) and specialist transfer (ST) by emergency medical teams (EMTs). We analyzed age, gender, hemodynamic parameters, type of the emergency medical team, and complications during transport as well as patient survival to hospital admission, survival time and the 30-day mortality rate. RESULTS: Of 500 patients who underwent transfer, ST transported 368 (73.6%) and BT 132 (26.4%) patients (p < 0.001). Complications during transportation occurred in 3 (1%) in the ST group and 2 (1.5%) in and BT group. Cardiac arrest during transfer occurred in no (0%) patients in the ST group, and 2 (1.5%) in the BT group (p = 0.118). Survival to admission was recorded in all patients in the ST group and 131/132 (0.8%) patients in the BT group (p = 0.592). 40 (12%) of patients in the ST group and 13 (11%) patients in the BT group (p = 0.731) died within 30 days of transfer. CONCLUSIONS: Complications during medical transport of ACS patients from hospitals without a cardiac catheter lab to hospitals equipped with such a lab were rare and their incidence was not associated with the type of transporting EMT. The type of EMT was not associated with 30-day patient mortality.

Factors associated with return of spontaneous circulation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Poland: a one-year retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a common reason for calls for intervention by emergency medical teams (EMTs) in Poland. Regardless of the mechanism, OHCA is a state in which the chance of survival is dependent on rapid action from bystanders and responding health professionals in emergency medical services (EMS). We aimed to identify factors associated with return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). METHODS: The medical records of 2137 EMS responses to OHCA in the city of Wroclaw, Poland between July 2017 and June 2018 were analyzed. RESULTS: The OHCA incidence rate for the year studied was 102 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. EMS were called to 2317 OHCA events of which 1167 (50.4%) did not have resuscitation attempted on EMS arrival. The difference between the number of successful and failed cardiopulmonary resuscitations (CPRs) was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Of 1150 patients in whom resuscitation was attempted, ROSC was achieved in 250 (27.8%). Rate of ROSC was significantly higher when CPR was initiated by bystanders (p < 0.001). Patients presenting with asystole or pulseless electrical activity (PEA) had a higher risk of CPR failure (86%) than those with ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia (VF/VT). Patients with VF/VT had a higher chance of ROSC (OR 2.68, 1.86-3.85) than those with asystole (p < 0.001). The chance of ROSC was 1.78 times higher when the event occurred in a public place (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The factors associated with ROSC were occurrence in a public place, CPR initiation by witnesses, and presence of a shockable rhythm. Gender, age, and the type of EMT did not influence ROSC. Low bystander CPR rates reinforce the need for further efforts to train the public in CPR.

No Surgical Innovation Without Evaluation: Evolution and Further Development of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To update, clarify, and extend IDEAL concepts and recommendations. BACKGROUND: New surgical procedures, devices, and other complex interventions need robust evaluation for safety, efficacy, and effectiveness. Unlike new medicines, there is no internationally agreed evaluation pathway for generating and analyzing data throughout the life cycle of surgical innovations. The IDEAL Framework and Recommendations were designed to provide this pathway and they have been used increasingly since their introduction in 2009. Based on a Delphi survey, expert workshop and major discussions during IDEAL conferences held in Oxford (2016) and New York (2017), this article updates and extends the IDEAL Recommendations, identifies areas for future research, and discusses the ethical problems faced by investigators at each IDEAL stage. METHODS: The IDEAL Framework describes 5 stages of evolution for new surgical therapeutic interventions-Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, and Long-term Study. This comprehensive update proposes several modifications. First, a "Pre-IDEAL" stage describing preclinical studies has been added. Second we discuss potential adaptations to expand the scope of IDEAL (originally designed for surgical procedures) to accommodate therapeutic devices, through an IDEAL-D variant. Third, we explicitly recognise the value of comprehensive data collection through registries at all stages in the Framework and fourth, we examine the ethical issues that arise at each stage of IDEAL and underpin the recommendations. The Recommendations for each stage are reviewed, clarified and additional detail added. CONCLUSIONS: The intention of this article is to widen the practical use of IDEAL by clarifying the rationale for and practical details of the Recommendations. Additional research based on the experience of implementing these Recommendations is needed to further improve them.

Geography is more important than host plant use for the population genetic structure of a generalist insect herbivore.

Population divergence can occur due to mechanisms associated with geographic isolation and/or due to selection associated with different ecological niches. Much of the evidence for selection-driven speciation has come from studies of specialist insect herbivores that use different host plant species; however, the influence of host plant use on population divergence of generalist herbivores remains poorly understood. We tested how diet breadth, host plant species and geographic distance influence population divergence of the fall webworm (Hyphantria cunea; FW). FW is a broadly distributed, extreme generalist herbivore consisting of two morphotypes that have been argued to represent two different species: black-headed and red-headed. We characterized the differentiation of FW populations at two geographic scales. We first analysed the influence of host plant and geographic distance on genetic divergence across a broad continental scale for both colour types. We further analysed the influence of host plant, diet breadth and geographic distance on divergence at a finer geographic scale focusing on red-headed FW in Colorado. We found clear genetic and morphological distinction between red- and black-headed FW, and Colorado FW formed a genetic cluster distinct from other locations. Although both geographic distance and host plant use were correlated with genetic distance, geographic distance accounted for up to 3× more variation in genetic distance than did host plant use. As a rare study investigating the genetic structure of a widespread generalist herbivore over a broad geographic range (up to 3,000 km), our study supports a strong role for geographic isolation in divergence in this system.

Ethical considerations in prehospital ambulance based research: qualitative interview study of expert informants.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital ambulance based research has unique ethical considerations due to urgency, time limitations and the locations involved. We sought to explore these issues through interviews with experts in this research field. METHODS: We undertook semi-structured interviews with expert informants, primarily based in the UK, seeking their views and experiences of ethics in ambulance based clinical research. Participants were questioned regarding their experiences of ambulance based research, their opinions on current regulations and guidelines, and views about their general ethical considerations. Participants were chosen because they were actively involved in, or in their expert capacity (e.g. law) expressed an interest in, ambulance based research. RESULTS: Fourteen participants were interviewed including principal investigators, researchers, ethicists and medical lawyers. Five major themes were identified: Capacity, Consent, Clinical Considerations, Consultation and Regulation. Questions regarding consent and capacity were foremost in the discussions as all participants highlighted these as areas for concern. The challenges and use of multiple consent models reflected the complexity of research in this environment. The clinical theme referred to the role of paramedics in research and how research involving ambulance services is increasingly informing improvements to patient care and outcomes and reducing the burden on hospital services. Most felt that, although current regulations were fit for purpose, more specific guidance on implementing these in the ambulance setting would be beneficial. This related closely to the theme of consultation, which examined the key role of ethics committees and other regulatory bodies, as well as public engagement. CONCLUSIONS: By interviewing experts in research or ethics in this setting we were able to identify key concerns and highlight areas for future development such as improved guidance.

Multiple triangulation and collaborative research using qualitative methods to explore decision making in pre-hospital emergency care.

BACKGROUND: Paramedics make important and increasingly complex decisions at scene about patient care. Patient safety implications of influences on decision making in the pre-hospital setting were previously under-researched. Cutting edge perspectives advocate exploring the whole system rather than individual influences on patient safety. Ethnography (the study of people and cultures) has been acknowledged as a suitable method for identifying health care issues as they occur within the natural context. In this paper we compare multiple methods used in a multi-site, qualitative study that aimed to identify system influences on decision making. METHODS: The study was conducted in three NHS Ambulance Trusts in England and involved researchers from each Trust working alongside academic researchers. Exploratory interviews with key informants e.g. managers (n = 16) and document review provided contextual information. Between October 2012 and July 2013 researchers observed 34 paramedic shifts and ten paramedics provided additional accounts via audio-recorded 'digital diaries' (155 events). Three staff focus groups (total n = 21) and three service user focus groups (total n = 23) explored a range of experiences and perceptions. Data collection and analysis was carried out by academic and ambulance service researchers as well as service users. Workshops were held at each site to elicit feedback on the findings and facilitate prioritisation of issues identified. RESULTS: The use of a multi-method qualitative approach allowed cross-validation of important issues for ambulance service staff and service users. A key factor in successful implementation of the study was establishing good working relationships with academic and ambulance service teams. Enrolling at least one research lead at each site facilitated the recruitment process as well as study progress. Active involvement with the study allowed ambulance service researchers and service users to gain a better understanding of the research process. Feedback workshops allowed stakeholders to discuss and prioritise findings as well as identify new research areas. CONCLUSION: Combining multiple qualitative methods with a collaborative research approach can facilitate exploration of system influences on patient safety in under-researched settings. The paper highlights empirical issues, strengths and limitations for this approach. Feedback workshops were effective for verifying findings and prioritising areas for future intervention and research.

Mechanical versus manual chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical chest compression devices have the potential to help maintain high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), but despite their increasing use, little evidence exists for their effectiveness. We aimed to study whether the introduction of LUCAS-2 mechanical CPR into front-line emergency response vehicles would improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: The pre-hospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC) trial was a pragmatic, cluster-randomised open-label trial including adults with non-traumatic, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from four UK Ambulance Services (West Midlands, North East England, Wales, South Central). 91 urban and semi-urban ambulance stations were selected for participation. Clusters were ambulance service vehicles, which were randomly assigned (1:2) to LUCAS-2 or manual CPR. Patients received LUCAS-2 mechanical chest compression or manual chest compressions according to the first trial vehicle to arrive on scene. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days following cardiac arrest and was analysed by intention to treat. Ambulance dispatch staff and those collecting the primary outcome were masked to treatment allocation. Masking of the ambulance staff who delivered the interventions and reported initial response to treatment was not possible. The study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN08233942. FINDINGS: We enrolled 4471 eligible patients (1652 assigned to the LUCAS-2 group, 2819 assigned to the control group) between April 15, 2010 and June 10, 2013. 985 (60%) patients in the LUCAS-2 group received mechanical chest compression, and 11 (<1%) patients in the control group received LUCAS-2. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 30 day survival was similar in the LUCAS-2 group (104 [6%] of 1652 patients) and in the manual CPR group (193 [7%] of 2819 patients; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0·86, 95% CI 0·64-1·15). No serious adverse events were noted. Seven clinical adverse events were reported in the LUCAS-2 group (three patients with chest bruising, two with chest lacerations, and two with blood in mouth). 15 device incidents occurred during operational use. No adverse or serious adverse events were reported in the manual group. INTERPRETATION: We noted no evidence of improvement in 30 day survival with LUCAS-2 compared with manual compressions. On the basis of ours and other recent randomised trials, widespread adoption of mechanical CPR devices for routine use does not improve survival. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research HTA - 07/37/69.

Oxygen therapy for acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Oxygen (O2) is widely used in people with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Previous systematic reviews concluded that there was insufficient evidence to know whether oxygen reduced, increased or had no effect on heart ischaemia or infarct size. Our first Cochrane review in 2010 also concluded there was insufficient evidence to know whether oxygen should be used. Since 2010, the lack of evidence to support this widely used intervention has attracted considerable attention, prompting further trials of oxygen therapy in myocardial infarction patients. It is thus important to update this Cochrane review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of routine use of inhaled oxygen for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following bibliographic databases on 6 June 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO) and Web of Science (Thomson Reuters). LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature) was last searched in September 2016. We also contacted experts to identify eligible studies. We applied no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in people with suspected or proven AMI (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI) within 24 hours after onset, in which the intervention was inhaled oxygen (at normal pressure) compared to air, regardless of co-therapies provided to participants in both arms of the trial. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of identified studies to see if they met the inclusion criteria and independently undertook the data extraction. We assessed the quality of studies and the risk of bias according to guidance in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The primary outcome was death. The measure of effect used was the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the quality of the evidence and the GRADE profiler (GRADEpro) to import data from Review Manager 5 and create 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: The updated search yielded one new trial, for a total of five included studies involving 1173 participants, 32 of whom died. The pooled risk ratio (RR) of all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat analysis was 0.99 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.95; 4 studies, N = 1123; I2 = 46%; quality of evidence: very low) and 1.02 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.98; 4 studies, N = 871; I2 = 49%; quality of evidence: very low) when only analysing participants with confirmed AMI. One trial measured pain directly, and two others measured it by opiate usage. The trial showed no effect, with a pooled RR of 0.97 for the use of opiates (95% CI 0.78 to 1.20; 2 studies, N = 250). The result on mortality and pain are inconclusive. There is no clear effect for oxygen on infarct size (the evidence is inconsistent and low quality). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support the routine use of inhaled oxygen in people with AMI, and we cannot rule out a harmful effect. Given the uncertainty surrounding the effect of oxygen therapy on all-cause mortality and on other outcomes critical for clinical decision, well-conducted, high quality randomised controlled trials are urgently required to inform guidelines in order to give definitive recommendations about the routine use of oxygen in AMI.

'You're never making just one decision': exploring the lived experiences of ambulance Emergency Operations Centre personnel.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of ambulance dispatch personnel, identifying key stressors and their impact on staff well-being. METHODS: Qualitative methodology was used. Nine semistructured interviews were conducted with National Health Service (NHS) ambulance Emergency Operations Centre (EOC) dispatch personnel in the UK between July and August 2014. Participants were asked about their experiences of the role, stress experienced and current strategies they use to deal with stress. Transcripts were analysed using an inductive, bottom-up thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three key themes were identified: (1) 'How dispatch is perceived by others', (2) 'What dispatch really involves' and (3) 'Dealing with the stresses of dispatch'. All participants expressed pride in their work, but felt overloaded by the workload and undervalued by others. Several sources of additional stress, not directly related to the execution of their work, were identified, including the need to mentally unwind from work at the end of a shift. Participants were able to identify a number of ways in which they currently manage work-related stress, but they also suggested changes the organisation could put in place in order to reduce stress in the working environment. CONCLUSIONS: Building on existing theory on work stress and postwork recovery, it was concluded that EOC dispatch staff require greater support at work, including skills training to promote postshift recovery, in order to reduce the likelihood of sickness absence, and prevent work-related fatigue.

Human factors in prehospital research: lessons from the PARAMEDIC trial.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to develop prehospital research capability in order to improve the care of patients presenting to emergency medical services (EMS). The Prehospital Randomised Assessment of a Mechanical compression Device In Cardiac arrest trial, a pragmatic cluster randomised trial evaluating the LUCAS-2 device, represents the largest randomised controlled trial conducted by UK ambulance services to date. The aim of this study was to identify and analyse factors that may influence paramedic attitudes to, and participation in, clinical trials. METHODS: Personal and organisational experience from this trial was assessed by feedback from a workshop attended by collaborators from participating EMS and a survey of EMS personnel participating in the trial. A work systems model was used to explain the impact of five interwoven themes-person, organisation, tasks, tools & technology and environment-on trial conduct including gathering of high-quality data. RESULTS: The challenge of training a geographically diverse EMS workforce required development of multiple educational solutions. In order to operationalise the trial protocol, internal organisational relationships were perceived as essential. Staff perceptions of the normalisation of participation and ownership of the trial influenced protocol compliance rates. Undertaking research was considered less burdensome when additional tasks were minimised and more difficult when equipment was unavailable. The prehospital environment presents practical challenges for undertaking clinical trials, but our experience suggests these are not insurmountable and should not preclude conducting high-quality research in this setting. CONCLUSIONS: Application of a human factors model to the implementation of a clinical trial protocol has improved understanding of the work system, which can inform the future conduct of clinical trials and foster a research culture within UK ambulance services. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN08233942.

Decisions and delays within stroke patients' route to the hospital: a qualitative study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We examine acute stroke patients' decisions and delays en route to the hospital after onset of symptoms. METHODS: This was a qualitative study carried out in the West Midlands, United Kingdom. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 30 patients (6 accompanied by partners). Patients were asked about their previous experience of having had a stroke and their initial engagement with health services. "One sheet of paper" and thematic analyses were used. RESULTS: Three potential types of delay were identified from onset of symptoms to accessing stroke care in the hospital: primary delays caused by lack of recognition of symptoms or not dealing with symptoms immediately, secondary delays caused by initial contact with nonemergency services, and tertiary delays in which health service providers did not interpret the patients' presenting symptoms as suggestive of stroke. The main factors determining the speed of action by patients were the presence and influence of a bystander and the perceived seriousness of symptoms. CONCLUSION: Despite campaigns to increase public awareness of stroke symptoms, the behavior of both patients and health service providers apparently led to delays in the recognition of and response to stroke symptoms, potentially reducing access to optimum and timely acute specialist assessment and treatment for acute stroke.

The association between prehospital care and in-hospital treatment decisions in acute stroke: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hospital prealerting in acute stroke improves the timeliness of subsequent treatment, but little is known about the impact of prehospital assessments on in-hospital care. OBJECTIVE: Examine the association between prehospital assessments and notification by emergency medical service staff on the subsequent acute stroke care pathway. METHODS: This was a cohort study of linked patient medical records. Consenting patients with a diagnosis of stroke were recruited from two urban hospitals. Data from patient medical records were extracted and entered into a Cox regression analysis to investigate the association between time to CT request and recording of onset time, stroke recognition (using the Face Arm Speech Test (FAST)) and sending of a prealert message. RESULTS: 151 patients (aged 71±15 years) travelled to hospital via ambulance and were eligible for this analysis. Time of symptom onset was recorded in 61 (40%) cases, the FAST test was positive in 114 (75%) and a prealert message was sent in 65 (44%). Following adjustment for confounding, patients who had time of onset recorded (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.03), were FAST-positive (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.80) or were prealerted (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38), were more likely to receive a timely CT request in hospital. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of hospital prealerting, accurate stroke recognition, and recording of onset time. Those not recognised with stroke in a prehospital setting appear to be excluded from the possibility of rapid treatment in hospital, even before they have been seen by a specialist.

Cost-effectiveness of optimizing acute stroke care services for thrombolysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Thrombolysis in acute stroke is effective up to 4.5 hours after symptom onset but relies on early recognition, prompt arrival in hospital, and timely brain scanning. This study aimed to establish the cost-effectiveness of increasing thrombolysis rates through a series of hypothetical change strategies designed to optimize the acute care pathway for stroke. METHODS: A decision-tree model was constructed, which relates the acute management of patients with suspected stroke from symptom onset to outcome. Current practice was modeled and compared with 7 change strategies designed to facilitate wider eligibility for thrombolysis. The model basecase consisted of data from consenting patients following the acute stroke pathway recruited in participating hospitals with data on effectiveness of treatment and costs from published sources. RESULTS: All change strategies were cost saving while increasing quality-adjusted life years gained. Using realistic estimates of effectiveness, the change strategy with the largest potential benefit was that of better recording of onset time, which resulted in 3.3 additional quality-adjusted life years and a cost saving of US $46,000 per 100,000 population. All strategies increased the number of thrombolysed patients and the number requiring urgent brain imaging (by 9% to 21% dependent on the scenario). Assuming a willingness-to-pay of US $30,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained, the potential budget available to deliver the interventions in each strategy ranged from US $50,000 to US $144,000. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that any strategy that increases thrombolysis rates will result in cost savings and improved patient quality of life. Healthcare commissioners could consider this model when planning improvements in stroke care.