Quality of life of patients and medical cost of “half elemental diet” as maintenance therapy for Crohn’s disease: Secondary outcomes of a randomised controlled trial

IntroductionKeratins, filament-forming proteins found in vertebrate epithelium, are downregulated in slow-healing venous leg ulcers (VLU) compared with normal-healing VLU. Laboratory and animal model research has suggested exogenous keratins increase expression of endogenous keratins. A non-randomised controlled trial of an exogenous keratin dressing reported increased healing in slow-healing VLU. To date, no randomised controlled trial has been done to verify these promising findings.Methods and analysisThe Keratin4VLU trial is a single-blind, pragmatic, parallel group, randomised controlled trial of keratin dressings compared with usual care non-medicated dressings in patients with VLU where either (1) the ulcer area is greater than 5 cm2, (2) the ulcer has been present for more than 26 weeks or (3) both. All patients will receive compression therapy. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with healed VLU at 24 weeks after randomisation as adjudicated by blinded review of an ulcer photograph. Secondary outcomes are time to healing, estimated change in ulcer area, change in health-related quality of life, agreement between blinded and unblinded assessors and adverse events. The analysis will be intention-to-treat on the primary and secondary outcomes (excepting health-related quality of life).Ethics and disseminationThe Keratin4VLU trial received ethical approval from the Northern A Health and Disability Ethics Committee. We plan to publish the results within 1 year of trial completion and will include the results on the trial registration page.Trial registration numberNCT02896725; Pre-results.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness of a complex intervention on Prioritising Multimedication in Multimorbidity (PRIMUM) in primary care: results of a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017740 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. e017740 ◽

Cited By ~ 17

Author(s):

Christiane Muth ◽

Lorenz Uhlmann ◽

Walter E Haefeli ◽

Justine Rochon ◽

Marjan van den Akker ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

General Practice ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Cluster Randomised ◽

Secondary Outcomes ◽

Randomised Controlled

ObjectivesInvestigate the effectiveness of a complex intervention aimed at improving the appropriateness of medication in older patients with multimorbidity in general practice.DesignPragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with general practice as unit of randomisation.Setting72 general practices in Hesse, Germany.Participants505 randomly sampled, cognitively intact patients (≥60 years, ≥3 chronic conditions under pharmacological treatment, ≥5 long-term drug prescriptions with systemic effects); 465 patients and 71 practices completed the study.InterventionsIntervention group (IG): The healthcare assistant conducted a checklist-based interview with patients on medication-related problems and reconciled their medications. Assisted by a computerised decision support system, the general practitioner optimised medication, discussed it with patients and adjusted it accordingly. The control group (CG) continued with usual care.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was a modified Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI, excluding item 10 on cost-effectiveness), assessed in blinded medication reviews and calculated as the difference between baseline and after 6 months; secondary outcomes after 6 and 9 months’ follow-up: quality of life, functioning, medication adherence, and so on.ResultsAt baseline, a high proportion of patients had appropriate to mildly inappropriate prescriptions (MAI 0–5 points: n=350 patients). Randomisation revealed balanced groups (IG: 36 practices/252 patients; CG: 36/253). Intervention had no significant effect on primary outcome: mean MAI sum scores decreased by 0.3 points in IG and 0.8 points in CG, resulting in a non-significant adjusted mean difference of 0.7 (95% CI −0.2 to 1.6) points in favour of CG. Secondary outcomes showed non-significant changes (quality of life slightly improved in IG but continued to decline in CG) or remained stable (functioning, medication adherence).ConclusionsThe intervention had no significant effects. Many patients already received appropriate prescriptions and enjoyed good quality of life and functional status. We can therefore conclude that in our study, there was not enough scope for improvement.Trial registration numberISRCTN99526053. NCT01171339; Results.

Download Full-text

Yoga-based exercise to prevent falls in community-dwelling people aged 60 years and over: study protocol for the Successful AGEing (SAGE) yoga randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine ◽

10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000878 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. e000878

Author(s):

Juliana S Oliveira ◽

Catherine Sherrington ◽

Stephen Lord ◽

Romina Sesto ◽

Sabrina Youkhana ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Well Being ◽

Exercise Programme ◽

Community Dwelling ◽

Successful Ageing ◽

Secondary Outcomes ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionFalls significantly reduce independence and quality of life in older age. Balance-specific exercise prevents falls in people aged 60+ years. Yoga is growing in popularity and can provide a high challenge to balance; however, the effect of yoga on falls has not been evaluated. This trial aims to establish the effect on falls of a yoga exercise programme compared with a yoga relaxation programme in community-dwellers aged 60+ years.Method and AnalysisThis randomised controlled trial will involve 560 community-dwelling people aged 60+ years. Participants will be randomised to either: (1) the Successful AGEing (SAGE) yoga exercise programme or (2) a yoga relaxation programme. Primary outcome is rate of falls in the 12 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes include mental well-being, physical activity, health-related quality of life, balance self-confidence, physical function, pain, goal attainment and sleep quality at 12 months after randomisation. The number of falls per person-year will be analysed using negative binomial regression models to estimate between-group difference in fall rates. Generalised linear models will assess the effect of group allocation on the continuously scored secondary outcomes, adjusting for baseline scores. An economic analysis will compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the two yoga programmes.Ethics and disseminationProtocol was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at The University of Sydney, Australia (approval 2019/604). Trial results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed articles, conference presentations, lay summaries.Trial registration numberThe protocol for this trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619001183178).

Download Full-text

Study protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare the use of the decellularised dermis allograft in addition to standard care versus standard care alone for the treatment of venous leg ulceration: DAVE trial

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041748 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. e041748

Author(s):

Sarah Onida ◽

Francine Heatley ◽

Sarrah Peerbux ◽

Layla Bolton ◽

Tristan Lane ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Ulcer Healing ◽

Standard Care ◽

Chronic Wounds ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Compression Bandaging ◽

Secondary Outcomes ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionVenous leg ulceration (VLU), the most common type of chronic ulcer, can be difficult to heal and is a major cause of morbidity and reduced quality of life. Although compression bandaging is the principal treatment, it is time-consuming and bandage application requires specific training. There is evidence that intervention on superficial venous incompetence can help ulcer healing and recurrence, but this is not accessible to all patients. Hence, new treatments are required to address these chronic wounds. One possible adjuvant treatment for VLU is human decellularised dermis (DCD), a type of skin graft derived from skin from deceased tissue donors. Although DCD has the potential to promote ulcer healing, there is a paucity of data for its use in patients with VLU.Methods and analysisThis is a multicentre, parallel group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial. One hundred and ninety-six patients with VLU will be randomly assigned to receive either the DCD allograft in addition to standard care or standard care alone. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants with a healed index ulcer at 12 weeks post-randomisation in each treatment arm. Secondary outcomes include the time to index ulcer healing and the proportion of participants with a healed index ulcer at 12 months. Changes in quality of life scores and cost-effectiveness will also be assessed. All analyses will be carried out on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. A mixed-effects, logistic regression on the outcome of the proportion of those with the index ulcer healed at 12 weeks will be performed. Secondary outcomes will be assessed using various statistical models appropriate to the distribution and nature of these outcomes.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by the Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1271). Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN21541209.

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Health-related quality of life in patients with glioblastoma: a randomised controlled trial.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.9074.466564 ◽

2006 ◽

Author(s):

Elfriede Greimel

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Health Related Quality ◽

Related Quality ◽

Health Related ◽

Randomised Controlled

Download Full-text

Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of specialty outpatient versus nurse-led telephonic palliative care of older adults with advanced illness

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025692 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. e025692 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Corita R Grudzen ◽

Deborah J Shim ◽

Abigail M Schmucker ◽

Jeanne Cho ◽

Keith S Goldfeld

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Older Adults ◽

Palliative Care ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Case Management ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Chronic Obstructive ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

End Stage

IntroductionEmergency department (ED)-initiated palliative care has been shown to improve patient-centred outcomes in older adults with serious, life-limiting illnesses. However, the optimal modality for providing such interventions is unknown. This study aims to compare nurse-led telephonic case management to specialty outpatient palliative care for older adults with serious, life-limiting illness on: (1) quality of life in patients; (2) healthcare utilisation; (3) loneliness and symptom burden and (4) caregiver strain, caregiver quality of life and bereavement.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel, two-arm randomised controlled trial in ED patients comparing two established models of palliative care: nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care. We will enrol 1350 patients aged 50+ years and 675 of their caregivers across nine EDs. Eligible patients: (1) have advanced cancer (metastatic solid tumour) or end-stage organ failure (New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, end-stage renal disease with glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/m2, or global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease stage III, IV or oxygen-dependent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease); (2) speak English; (3) are scheduled for ED discharge or observation status; (4) reside locally; (5) have a working telephone and (6) are insured. Patients will be excluded if they: (1) have dementia; (2) have received hospice care or two or more palliative care visits in the last 6 months or (3) reside in a long-term care facility. We will use patient-level block randomisation, stratified by ED site and disease. Effectiveness will be compared by measuring the impact of each intervention on the specified outcomes. The primary outcome will measure change in patient quality of life.Ethics and disseminationInstitutional Review Board approval was obtained at all study sites. Trial results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT03325985; Pre-results.

Download Full-text

Evaluating the provision of Further Enabling Care at Home (FECH+) for informal caregivers of older adults discharged home from hospital: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046600 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. e046600

Author(s):

Anne-Marie Hill ◽

Rachael Moorin ◽

Susan Slatyer ◽

Christina Bryant ◽

Keith Hill ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Older Adults ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Usual Care ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Informal Caregivers ◽

Care Recipient ◽

Care At Home ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThere are personal and societal benefits from caregiving; however, caregiving can jeopardise caregivers’ health. The Further Enabling Care at Home (FECH+) programme provides structured nurse support, through telephone outreach, to informal caregivers of older adults following discharge from acute hospital care to home. The trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of the FECH+ programme on caregivers’ health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after care recipients’ hospital discharge.Methods and analysisA multisite, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded baseline and outcome assessment and intention-to-treat analysis, adhering to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines will be conducted. Participants (N=925 dyads) comprising informal home caregiver (18 years or older) and care recipient (70 years or older) will be recruited when the care recipient is discharged from hospital. Caregivers of patients discharged from wards in three hospitals in Australia (one in Western Australia and two in Queensland) are eligible for inclusion. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups. The intervention group receive the FECH+ programme, which provides structured support and problem-solving for the caregiver after the care recipient’s discharge, in addition to usual care. The control group receives usual care. The programme is delivered by a registered nurse and comprises six 30–45 min telephone support sessions over 6 months. The primary outcome is caregivers’ HRQOL measured using the Assessment of Quality of Life—eight dimensions. Secondary outcomes include caregiver preparedness, strain and distress and use of healthcare services. Changes in HRQOL between groups will be compared using a mixed regression model that accounts for the correlation between repeated measurements.Ethics and disseminationParticipants will provide written informed consent. Ethics approvals have been obtained from Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group, Curtin University, Griffith University, Gold Coast Health Service and government health data linkage services. Findings will be disseminated through presentations, peer-reviewed journals and conferences.Trial registration numberACTRN12620000060943.

Download Full-text

E-health ecosystem with integrated and stepped psychosocial services for breast cancer survivors: study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041548 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (3) ◽

pp. e041548

Author(s):

Cristian Ochoa-Arnedo ◽

Joan Carles Medina ◽

Aida Flix-Valle ◽

Dimitra Anastasiadou

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Quality Of Life ◽

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Emotional Distress ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Psychosocial Care ◽

Cost Utility ◽

Psychosocial Services ◽

Randomised Controlled

IntroductionPsychosocial interventions for patients with breast cancer (BC) have demonstrated their effectiveness at reducing emotional distress and improving quality of life. The current digitisation of screening, monitoring and psychosocial treatment presents the opportunity for a revolution that could improve the quality of care and reduce its economic burden. The objectives of this study are, first, to assess the effectiveness of an e-health platform with integrated and stepped psychosocial services compared with usual psychosocial care, and second, to examine its cost–utility.Methods and analysisThis study is a multicentre randomised controlled trial with two parallel groups: E-health intervention with integrated and stepped psychosocial services vs usual psychosocial care. An estimated sample of 338 patients with BC in the acute survival phase will be recruited from three university hospitals in Catalonia (Spain) and will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. All participants will be evaluated at the beginning of the study (T1: recruitment), 3 months from T1 (T2), 6 months from T1 (T3) and 12 months from T1 (T4). Primary outcome measures will include number of clinical cases detected, waiting time from detection to psychosocial intervention and proportion of cases successfully treated in the different steps of the intervention, as well as outcomes related to emotional distress, quality of life, post-traumatic stress and growth, treatment adherence and therapeutic alliance. Secondary outcomes will include the acceptability of the platform, patients’ satisfaction and usability. For the cost–utility analysis, we will assess quality-adjusted life years and costs related to healthcare utilisation, medication use and adherence, work absenteeism and infrastructure-related and transport-related costs.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the Ethics committee of the Institut Català d’Oncologia network in Hospitalet, Spain. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, reports to the funding body, conferences among the scientific community, workshops with patients and media press releases.Trial registration numberOnline Psychosocial Cancer Screening, Monitoring and Stepped Treatment in Cancer Survivors (ICOnnectat-B),NCT04372459.

Download Full-text