Can we improve the management of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction? Results of a feasibility study of elemental diet as an alternative to parenteral nutrition in patients with advanced gynaecological cancer.

PURPOSE: Nutrition support in inoperable bowel obstruction (IBO) remains challenging. Parenteral nutrition (PN) is recommended if the prognosis is > 2 months. An elemental diet (ED) is licensed for strictures in Crohn's disease but has not been used in malignant bowel obstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of ED in patients with IBO and provide a proof of concept of ED as an acceptable feeding option. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods single-arm feasibility study. The primary endpoint was to provide a 'proof of concept' of ED as an acceptable feeding option for patients with IBO. Secondary endpoints included taste acceptability, incidences of vomiting and pain, the proportion of women who tolerated ED, the number of cartons drunk, quality of life (QOL) and the number of women treated with chemotherapy. Patients (> 18 years) with CT-confirmed IBO who could tolerate 500 ml of liquid in 24 h remained on the trial for 2 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 29 patients were recruited; of those, 19 contributed to the analysis for the primary endpoint; 13 (68.4%) participants tolerated the ED; 26 patients contributed to MSAS and EORTC QLQ questionnaires at baseline to allow for the assessment of symptoms. At the start of the study, 18 (69%) of patients experienced vomiting, reducing to 4 (25%) by the end of day 15 of the study; 24 (92%) of patients reported pain at consent, reducing to 12 (75%) by the end of day 15. QOL scores improved from 36.2 (95% CI 27.7-44.7) at baseline to 53.1 (95% CI 40.3-66) at the end of day 15; 16 (84%) participants commenced chemotherapy within the first week of starting ED. The number of cartons across all participants showed a median of 1.3 cartons per day (range 0.8 to 2.5). CONCLUSION: ED is well tolerated by patients with IBO caused by gynaecological malignancies and may have a positive effect on symptom burden and QOL.

The COVID-19 ambulance response assessment (CARA) study: a national survey of ambulance service healthcare professionals' preparedness and response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic placed significant demand on the NHS, including ambulance services, but it is unclear how this affected ambulance service staff and paramedics in other clinical settings (e.g. urgent and primary care, armed services, prisons). This study aimed to measure the self-perceived preparedness and impact of the first wave of the pandemic on paramedics' psychological stress and perceived ability to deliver care. Methods: Ambulance clinicians and paramedics working in other healthcare settings were invited to participate in a three-phase sequential online survey during the acceleration (April 2020), peak (May 2020) and deceleration (September/October 2020) phases of the first wave of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom. Recruitment used social media, Trust internal bulletins and the College of Paramedics' communication channels, employing a convenience sampling strategy. Data were collected using purposively developed open- and closed-ended questions and the validated general health questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12). Data were analysed using multi-level linear and logistic regression models. Results: Phase 1 recruited 3717 participants, reducing to 2709 (73%) by phase 2 and 2159 (58%) by phase 3. Participants were mostly male (58%, n = 2148) and registered paramedics (n = 1992, 54%). Mean (standard deviation) GHQ-12 scores were 16.5 (5.2) during phase 1, reducing to 15.2 (6.7) by phase 3. A total of 84% of participants (n = 3112) had a GHQ-12 score ≥ 12 during the first phase, indicating psychological distress. Participants that had higher GHQ-12 scores were feeling unprepared for the pandemic, and reported a lack of confidence in using personal protective equipment and managing cardiac arrests in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients. Conclusions: Most participants reported psychological distress, the reasons for which are multi-factorial. Ambulance managers need to be aware of the risks to staff mental health and take action to mitigate these, to support staff in the delivery of unscheduled, emergency and urgent care under these additional pressures.