scholarly journals Clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves in rheumatoid arthritis (A-GLOVES): randomised controlled trial with economic analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Hammond ◽  
Yeliz Prior ◽  
Sarah Cotterill ◽  
Chris Sutton ◽  
Elizabeth Camacho ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Arthritis (or compression) gloves are widely prescribed to people with rheumatoid arthritis and other forms of hand arthritis. They are prescribed for daytime wear to reduce hand pain and improve hand function, and/or night-time wear to reduce pain, improve sleep and reduce morning stiffness. However, evidence for their effectiveness is limited. The aims of this study were to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of arthritis gloves compared to placebo gloves on hand pain, stiffness and function in people with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent hand pain. Methods A parallel randomised controlled trial, in adults (≥ 18 years) with rheumatoid or undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis at 16 National Health Service sites in the UK. Patients with persistent hand pain affecting function and/or sleep were eligible. Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by recent change (or not) in medication, using permuted blocks of random sizes. Three-quarter-finger length arthritis gloves (Isotoner®: applying 23-32 mmHg pressure) (intervention) were compared to loose-fitting placebo gloves (Jobskin® classic: providing no/minimal pressure) (control). Both gloves (considered to have similar thermal qualities) were provided by occupational therapists. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded; clinicians were not. The primary outcome was dominant hand pain on activity (0–10) at 12 weeks, analysed using linear regression and intention to treat principles. Results Two hundred six participants were randomly assigned (103 per arm) and 163 (84 intervention: 79 control) completed 12-week follow-up. Hand pain improved by 1.0 (intervention) and 1.2 (control), an adjusted mean difference of 0.10 (95% CI: − 0.47 to 0.67; p = 0.72). Adverse events were reported by 51% of intervention and 36% of control group participants; with 6 and 7% respectively, discontinuing glove wear. Provision of arthritis gloves cost £129, with no additional benefit. Conclusion The trial provides evidence of no clinically important effect of arthritis gloves on any of the trial outcomes (hand pain, function and stiffness) and arthritis gloves are not cost-effective. The clinical and cost-effectiveness results support ceasing provision of arthritis gloves in routine clinical practice. Funding: National Institute for Health Research. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN25892131; Registered 05/09/2016: retrospectively registered.

Author(s):  
Russell Jago ◽  
Byron Tibbitts ◽  
Kathryn Willis ◽  
Emily Sanderson ◽  
Rebecca Kandiyali ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Physical activity is associated with improved health. Girls are less active than boys. Pilot work showed that a peer-led physical activity intervention called PLAN-A was a promising method of increasing physical activity in secondary school age girls. This study examined the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention. Methods We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial with Year 9 (13–14 year old) girls recruited from 20 secondary schools. Schools were randomly assigned to the PLAN-A intervention or a non-intervention control group after baseline data collection. Girls nominated students to be peer leaders. The top 18 % of girls nominated by their peers in intervention schools received three days of training designed to prepare them to support physical activity. Data were collected at two time points, baseline (T0) and 5–6 months post-intervention (T1). Participants wore an accelerometer for seven days to assess the primary outcome of mean weekday minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Multivariable mixed effects linear regression was used to estimate differences in the primary outcome between the two arms on an Intention-to-Treat (ITT) basis. Resource use and quality of life were measured and a within trial economic evaluation from a public sector perspective was conducted. Results A total of 1558 girls were recruited to the study. At T0, girls in both arms engaged in an average of 51 min of MVPA per weekday. The adjusted mean difference in weekday MVPA at T1 was − 2.84 min per day (95 % CI = -5.94 to 0.25) indicating a slightly larger decline in weekday MVPA in the intervention group. Results were broadly consistent when repeated using a multiple imputation approach and for pre-specified secondary outcomes and sub-groups. The mean cost of the PLAN-A intervention was £2817 per school, equivalent to £31 per girl. Economic analyses indicated that PLAN-A did not lead to demonstrable cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per unit change in QALY. Conclusions This study has shown that the PLAN-A intervention did not result in higher levels of weekday MVPA or associated secondary outcomes among Year 9 girls. The PLAN-A intervention should not be disseminated as a public health strategy. Trial registration ISRCTN14539759–31 May, 2018.


2021 ◽  
pp. 174749302110226
Author(s):  
Dominique Cadilhac ◽  
Jan Cameron ◽  
Monique F Kilkenny ◽  
Nadine Elizabeth Andrew ◽  
Dawn Harris ◽  
...  

Rationale: To address unmet needs, electronic messages to support person-centred goal attainment and secondary prevention may avoid hospital presentations/readmissions after stroke, but evidence is limited. Hypothesis: Compared to control participants, there will be a 10% lower proportion of intervention participants who represent to hospital (emergency/admission) within 90 days of randomisation. Methods and design: Multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis. The intervention group receives 12 weeks of personalised, goal-centred and administrative electronic messages, while the control group only receives administrative messages. The trial includes a process evaluation, assessment of treatment fidelity and an economic evaluation. Participants: Confirmed stroke (modified Rankin Score: 0-4), aged ≥18 years with internet/mobile phone access, discharged directly home from hospital. Randomisation: 1:1 computer-generated, stratified by age and baseline disability. Outcomes Assessments: Collected at 90 days and 12 months following randomisation. Outcomes: Primary: Hospital emergency presentations/admissions within 90 days of randomisation. Secondary outcomes include goal attainment, self-efficacy, mood, unmet needs, disability, quality-of-life, recurrent stroke/cardiovascular events/deaths at 90 days and 12 months, and death and cost-effectiveness at 12 months. Sample size: To test our primary hypothesis, we estimated a sample size of 890 participants (445 per group) with 80% power and two-tailed significance threshold of α=0.05. Given uncertainty for the effect size of this novel intervention, the sample size will be adaptively re-estimated when outcomes for n=668 are obtained, with maximum sample capped at 1100. Discussion: We will provide new evidence on the potential effectiveness, implementation and cost-effectiveness of a tailored eHealth intervention for survivors of stroke.


Trials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne Taylor ◽  
John Parsons ◽  
Denise Taylor ◽  
Elizabeth Binns ◽  
Sue Lord ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Falls are two to four times more frequent amongst older adults living in long-term care (LTC) than community-dwelling older adults and have deleterious consequences. It is hypothesised that a progressive exercise program targeting balance and strength will reduce fall rates when compared to a seated exercise program and do so cost effectively. Methods/design This is a single blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded assessment of outcome and intention-to-treat analysis. LTC residents (age ≥ 65 years) will be recruited from LTC facilities in New Zealand. Participants (n = 528 total, with a 1:1 allocation ratio) will be randomly assigned to either a novel exercise program (Staying UpRight), comprising strength and balance exercises designed specifically for LTC and acceptable to people with dementia (intervention group), or a seated exercise program (control group). The intervention and control group classes will be delivered for 1 h twice weekly over 1 year. The primary outcome is rate of falls (per 1000 person years) within the intervention period. Secondary outcomes will be risk of falling (the proportion of fallers per group), fall rate relative to activity exposure, hospitalisation for fall-related injury, change in gait variability, volume and patterns of ambulatory activity and change in physical performance assessed at baseline and after 6 and 12 months. Cost-effectiveness will be examined using intervention and health service costs. The trial commenced recruitment on 30 November 2018. Discussion This study evaluates the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a progressive strength and balance exercise program for aged care residents to reduce falls. The outcomes will aid development of evidenced-based exercise programmes for this vulnerable population. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618001827224. Registered on 9 November 2018. Universal trial number U1111-1217-7148.


Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Ussher ◽  
C. Best ◽  
S. Lewis ◽  
J. McKell ◽  
T. Coleman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Financial incentives are an effective way of helping women to stop smoking during pregnancy. Unfortunately, most women who stop smoking at this time return to smoking within 12 months of the infant’s birth. There is no evidence for interventions that are effective at preventing postpartum smoking relapse. Financial incentives provided after the birth may help women to sustain cessation. This randomised controlled trial will assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of financial incentives to help women who are abstinent from smoking at end-of-pregnancy to avoid return to smoking up to 12 months postpartum. Methods This is a UK-based, multi-centre, three-arm, superiority, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial, with 1:1:1 allocation. It will compare the effectiveness of two financial incentive interventions with each other (one intervention for up to 3 months postpartum offering up to £120 of incentives (£60 for the participant and £60 for a significant other support); the other for up to 12 months postpartum with up to £300 of incentives (£240 for the participant and £60 for a significant other support) and with a no incentives/usual care control group. Eligible women will be between 34 weeks gestation and 2 weeks postpartum, abstinent from smoking for at least 4 weeks, have an expired carbon monoxide (CO) reading < 4 parts per million (ppm), aged at least 16 years, intend remaining abstinent from smoking after the birth and able to speak and read English. The primary outcome is self-reported, lapse-free, smoking abstinence from the last quit attempt in pregnancy until 12 months postpartum, biochemically validated by expired CO and/or salivary cotinine or anabasine. Outcomes will be analysed by intention-to-treat and regression models used to compare the proportion of abstinent women between the two intervention groups and between each intervention group and the control group. An economic evaluation will assess the cost-effectiveness of offering incentives and a qualitative process evaluation will examine barriers and facilitators to trial retention, effectiveness and implementation. Discussion This pragmatic randomised controlled trial will test whether offering financial incentives is effective and cost-effective for helping women to avoid smoking relapse during the 12 months after the birth of their baby. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number 55218215. Registered retrospectively on 5th June 2019


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. e026023 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Cockayne ◽  
Caroline Fairhurst ◽  
Gillian Frost ◽  
Catherine Hewitt ◽  
Mark Liddle ◽  
...  

IntroductionSlips, trips and falls are common causes of injuries in the workplace. It is estimated that in Great Britain, nearly 1 million days are taken off work due to these injuries. There is some evidence to suggest this accident burden could be reduced by the use of slip resistant footwear. This protocol describes a multicentre trial investigating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of slip resistant footwear to prevent slips in National Health Service (NHS) staff working in clinical, general or catering environments.Methods and analysisA two-arm, randomised controlled trial conducted within England, with 4400 NHS staff, aged 18 years and above, who adhere to a dress code policy and work in a clinical, catering or general hospital environment. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to the intervention or waiting list control group. The intervention group will be offered a pair of 5-star GRIP rated slip resistant footwear. The control group will be offered the footwear at the end of the trial. The primary outcome is the incidence rate of self-reported slips in the workplace over a 14-week period, as reported via weekly text messages. Secondary outcomes include: time to first slip/fall, proportion of participants who slip and fall over 14 weeks and incidence rate of falls resulting from and not resulting from a slip in the workplace over 14 weeks. An economic evaluation will assess cost-effectiveness, in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. A nested qualitative study will explore the acceptability of the footwear and compliance.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol received a favourable ethical opinion from the University of York, Department of Health Sciences Research Governance Committee. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and at conferences. A summary of the findings will be made available to participants.Trial registration numberISRCTN33051393; Pre results.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ussher ◽  
Cath Best ◽  
Sarah Lewis ◽  
Jennifer McKell ◽  
Tim Coleman ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundFinancial incentives are an effective way of helping women to stop smoking during pregnancy. Unfortunately, most women who stop smoking at this time return to smoking within 12 months of the infant’s birth. There is no evidence for interventions that are effective at preventing postpartum smoking relapse. Financial incentives provided after the birth may help women to sustain cessation. This randomised controlled trial will assess the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of financial incentives to help women who are abstinent from smoking at end of pregnancy to avoid return to smoking up to 12 months postpartum. MethodsThis is a UK-based, multi-centre, three-arm, superiority, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial, with 1:1:1 allocation. It will compare the effectiveness of two financial incentive interventions with each other (one intervention for up to three months postpartum offering up to £120 of incentives, the other for up to 12 months postpartum with up to £300 of incentives) and with a no incentives/usual care control group. Eligible women will be between 34 weeks gestation and two weeks postpartum, abstinent from smoking for at least four weeks, have an expired carbon monoxide (CO) reading <4 parts per million (ppm), aged at least 16 years, intend remaining abstinent from smoking after the birth and able to speak and read English. The primary outcome is self-reported, lapse-free, smoking abstinence from the last quit attempt in pregnancy until 12 months postpartum, biochemically validated by expired CO and/or salivary cotinine or anabasine. Outcomes will be analysed by intention-to-treat and regression models used to compare the proportion of abstinent women between the two intervention groups and between each intervention group and the control group. An economic evaluation will assess the cost-effectiveness of offering incentives and a qualitative process evaluation will examine barriers and facilitators to trial retention, effectiveness and implementation. DiscussionThis pragmatic randomised controlled trial will test whether offering financial incentives is effective and cost-effective for helping women to avoid smoking relapse during the 12 months after the birth of their baby. Trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: 55218215. Registered retrospectively on 5 th June 2019.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e041328
Author(s):  
Xia Wang ◽  
David J Hunter ◽  
Sarah Robbins ◽  
Sarah Capistrano ◽  
Vicky Duong ◽  
...  

IntroductionPostsurgical rehabilitation is critical for optimal recovery in people undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Currently, knee and lumbar spine postsurgical care is not standardised, economically sustainable, nor based on quality evidence, contributing to substantial clinical variation, poor outcomes and increasing healthcare costs. This protocol describes the design of a randomised controlled trial aiming to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a postsurgical clinical pathway augmented by disruptive technology and compared with standardised rehabilitation alone, in decreasing pain and improving function after total knee replacement (TKR) or lumbar laminectomy (with or without fusion).MethodsAn assessor-blinded, parallel group, randomised controlled trial will be conducted to recruit 204 consenting participants (102 per arm) of whom 50% are undergoing TKR and 50% lumbar surgery. The intervention group will receive a 6-month technology-enabled rehabilitation package in addition to usual postsurgical care. The package includes (1) an exercise program delivered via the Physitrack app on the iPad, (2) a health-coaching program delivered via video calls and motivational messages, (3) use of physical activity tracker with goal setting and motivational reminders (Fitbit). For those undergoing TKR, the intervention will also include knee joint range of motion self-monitoring via the Goniometer app. The control group will receive usual postsurgical care. Participants will be followed up at 3, 6 and 12 months from the enrolment date. The primary outcome is pain measured with the Numerical Rating Scale at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include pain-related disability, quality of life, computer self-efficacy, physical activity participation and sedentary behaviour. Data analysis will be blinded and by intention-to-treat. A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis will determine the potential incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol is approved by the human research ethics committee of the University of Sydney. Dissemination will occur through lay summary, infographics, conferences and journal publications.Trial registration numberACTRN12618001448235.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document