scholarly journals Modifying Alcohol Consumption to Reduce Obesity (MACRO): development and feasibility trial of a complex community-based intervention for men

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (19) ◽  
pp. 1-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain K Crombie ◽  
Kathryn B Cunningham ◽  
Linda Irvine ◽  
Brian Williams ◽  
Falko F Sniehotta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Liver Disease ◽  
Alcohol Consumption ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Increased Risk

BackgroundObese men who consume alcohol are at a greatly increased risk of liver disease; those who drink > 14 units of alcohol per week have a 19-fold increased risk of dying from liver disease.ObjectivesTo develop an intervention to reduce alcohol consumption in obese men and to assess the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to investigate its effectiveness.Design of the interventionThe intervention was developed using formative research, public involvement and behaviour change theory. It was organised in two phases, comprising a face-to-face session with trained laypeople (study co-ordinators) followed by a series of text messages. Participants explored how alcohol consumption contributed to weight gain, both through direct calorie consumption and through its effect on increasing food consumption, particularly of high-calorie foodstuffs. Men were encouraged to set goals to reduce their alcohol consumption and to make specific plans to do so. The comparator group received an active control in the form of a conventional alcohol brief intervention. Randomisation was carried out using the secure remote web-based system provided by the Tayside Clinical Trials Unit. Randomisation was stratified by the recruitment method and restricted using block sizes of randomly varying lengths. Members of the public were involved in the development of all study methods.SettingMen were recruited from the community, from primary care registers and by time–space sampling (TSS). The intervention was delivered in community settings such as the participant’s home, community centres and libraries.ParticipantsMen aged 35–64 years who had a body mass index (BMI) of > 30 kg/m2and who drank > 21 units of alcohol per week.ResultsThe screening methods successfully identified participants meeting the entry criteria. Trial recruitment was successful, with 69 men (36 from 419 approached in primary care, and 33 from 470 approached via TSS) recruited and randomised in 3 months. Of the 69 men randomised, 35 were allocated to the intervention group and 34 to the control group. The analysis was conducted on 31 participants from the intervention group and 30 from the control group. The participants covered a wide range of ages and socioeconomic statuses. The average alcohol consumption of the men recruited was 47.2 units per week, more than twice that of the entry criterion (> 21 units per week). Most (78%) engaged in binge drinking (> 8 units in a session) at least weekly. Almost all (95%) exceeded the threshold for a 19-fold increase in the risk of dying from liver disease (BMI of > 30 kg/m2and > 14 units of alcohol per week). Despite this, they believed that they were at low risk of harm from alcohol, possibly because they seldom suffered acute harms (e.g. hangovers) and made few visits to a general practitioner or hospital.InterventionThe intervention was delivered with high fidelity. A high follow-up rate was achieved (98%) and the outcomes for the full RCT were measured. A process evaluation showed that participants engaged with the main components of the intervention. The acceptability of the study methods was high.ConclusionsThis feasibility study developed a novel intervention and evaluated all of the stages of a RCT that would test the effectiveness of the intervention. The main stages of a trial were completed successfully: recruitment, randomisation, intervention delivery, follow-up and measurement of study outcomes. Most of the men recruited drank very heavily and were also obese. This places them at a very high risk of liver disease, making them a priority for intervention.Future workA RCT to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN55309164.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 19. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Adding emollient bath additives to standard eczema management for children with eczema: the BATHE RCT

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (57) ◽  
pp. 1-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Santer ◽  
Kate Rumsby ◽  
Matthew J Ridd ◽  
Nick A Francis ◽  
Beth Stuart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Additive Group ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Bath Additives

BackgroundChildhood eczema is very common. Treatment often includes emollient bath additives, despite there being little evidence of their effectiveness.ObjectivesTo determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of emollient bath additives in the management of childhood eczema.DesignPragmatic, randomised, open-label, multicentre superiority trial with two parallel groups.SettingNinety-six general practices in Wales, the west of England and southern England. Invitation by personal letter or opportunistically.ParticipantsChildren aged between 12 months and 12 years fulfilling the UK Diagnostic Criteria for Atopic Eczema. Children with inactive or very mild eczema (a score of ≤ 5 on the Nottingham Eczema Severity Scale) were excluded, as were children who bathed less than once per week or whose parents/carers were not prepared to accept randomisation.InterventionsThe intervention group were prescribed bath additives by their usual clinical team and were asked to use them regularly for 12 months. The control group were asked to use no bath additives for 12 months. Both groups continued standard eczema management, including regular leave-on emollients and topical corticosteroids (TCSs) when required.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was eczema control measured by Patient Oriented Eczema Measure [POEM, 0 (clear) to 28 (severe)] weekly for 16 weeks. The secondary outcomes were eczema severity over 1 year (4-weekly POEM), number of eczema exacerbations, disease-specific quality of life (QoL) (Dermatitis Family Impact Questionnaire), generic QoL (Child Health Utility-9 Dimensions) and type and quantity of topical steroid/calcineurin inhibitors prescribed. Children were randomised (1 : 1) using online software to either bath additives plus standard eczema care or standard eczema care alone, stratified by recruiting centre, and there was open-label blinding.ResultsFrom December 2014 to May 2016, 482 children were randomised: 51% were female, 84% were white and the mean age was 5 years (n = 264 in the intervention group,n = 218 in the control group). Reported adherence to randomised treatment allocation was > 92% in both groups, with 76.7% of participants completing at least 12 (80%) of the first 16 weekly questionnaires for the primary outcome. Baseline POEM score was 9.5 [standard deviation (SD) 5.7] in the bath additives group and 10.1 (SD 5.8) in the no bath additives group. Average POEM score over the first 16 weeks was 7.5 (SD 6.0) in the bath additives group and 8.4 (SD 6.0) in the no bath additives group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups. After controlling for baseline severity and confounders (ethnicity, TCS use, soap substitute use) and allowing for clustering of participants within centres and responses within participants over time, POEM scores in the no bath additive group were 0.41 points higher than in the bath additive group (95% confidence interval –0.27 to 1.10), which is well below the published minimal clinically important difference of 3 points. There was no difference between groups in secondary outcomes or in adverse effects such as redness, stinging or slipping.LimitationsSimple randomisation resulted in an imbalance in baseline group size, although baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups.ConclusionThis trial found no evidence of clinical benefit of including emollient bath additives in the standard management of childhood eczema.Future workFurther research is required on optimal regimens of leave-on emollients and the use of emollients as soap substitutes.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN84102309.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 57. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Prophylactic levofloxacin to prevent infections in newly diagnosed symptomatic myeloma: the TEAMM RCT

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (62) ◽  
pp. 1-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark T Drayson ◽  
Stella Bowcock ◽  
Tim Planche ◽  
Gulnaz Iqbal ◽  
Guy Pratt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Febrile Episodes

Background Myeloma causes profound immunodeficiency and recurrent serious infections. There are approximately 5500 new UK cases of myeloma per annum, and one-quarter of patients will have a serious infection within 3 months of diagnosis. Newly diagnosed patients may benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infection. However, the use of prophylaxis has not been established in myeloma and may be associated with health-care-associated infections (HCAIs), such as Clostridium difficile. There is a need to assess the benefits and cost-effectiveness of the use of antibacterial prophylaxis against any risks in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial. Objectives To assess the risks, benefits and cost-effectiveness of prophylactic levofloxacin in newly diagnosed symptomatic myeloma patients. Design Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A central telephone randomisation service used a minimisation computer algorithm to allocate treatments in a 1 : 1 ratio. Setting A total of 93 NHS hospitals throughout England, Northern Ireland and Wales. Participants A total of 977 patients with newly diagnosed symptomatic myeloma. Intervention Patients were randomised to receive levofloxacin or placebo tablets for 12 weeks at the start of antimyeloma treatment. Treatment allocation was blinded and balanced by centre, estimated glomerular filtration rate and intention to give high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation. Follow-up was at 4-week intervals up to 16 weeks, with a further follow-up at 1 year. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was to assess the number of febrile episodes (or deaths) in the first 12 weeks from randomisation. Secondary outcomes included number of deaths and infection-related deaths, days in hospital, carriage and invasive infections, response to antimyeloma treatment and its relation to infection, quality of life and overall survival within the first 12 weeks and beyond. Results In total, 977 patients were randomised (levofloxacin, n = 489; placebo, n = 488). A total of 134 (27%) events (febrile episodes, n = 119; deaths, n = 15) occurred in the placebo arm and 95 (19%) events (febrile episodes, n = 91; deaths, n = 4) occurred in the levofloxacin arm; the hazard ratio for time to first event (febrile episode or death) within the first 12 weeks was 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.86; p = 0.002). Levofloxacin also reduced other infections (144 infections from 116 patients) compared with placebo (179 infections from 133 patients; p-trend of 0.06). There was no difference in new acquisitions of C. difficile, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Gram-negative organisms when assessed up to 16 weeks. Levofloxacin produced slightly higher quality-adjusted life-year gains over 16 weeks, but had associated higher costs for health resource use. With a median follow-up of 52 weeks, there was no significant difference in overall survival (p = 0.94). Limitations Short duration of prophylactic antibiotics and cost-effectiveness. Conclusions During the 12 weeks from new diagnosis, the addition of prophylactic levofloxacin to active myeloma treatment significantly reduced febrile episodes and deaths without increasing HCAIs or carriage. Future work should aim to establish the optimal duration of antibiotic prophylaxis and should involve the laboratory investigation of immunity, inflammation and disease activity on stored samples funded by the TEAMM (Tackling Early Morbidity and Mortality in Myeloma) National Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation grant (reference number 14/24/04). Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN51731976. Funding details This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 62. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Combining mirtazapine with SSRIs or SNRIs for treatment-resistant depression: the MIR RCT

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (63) ◽  
pp. 1-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Kessler ◽  
Alison Burns ◽  
Debbie Tallon ◽  
Glyn Lewis ◽  
Stephanie MacNeill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Reuptake Inhibitor ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Treatment Resistant Depression ◽  
Treatment Resistant ◽  
Resistant Depression

Background Depression is usually managed in primary care and antidepressants are often the first-line treatment, but only half of those treated respond to a single antidepressant. Objectives To investigate whether or not combining mirtazapine with serotonin–noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants results in better patient outcomes and more efficient NHS care than SNRI or SSRI therapy alone in treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Design The MIR trial was a two-parallel-group, multicentre, pragmatic, placebo-controlled randomised trial with allocation at the level of the individual. Setting Participants were recruited from primary care in Bristol, Exeter, Hull/York and Manchester/Keele. Participants Eligible participants were aged ≥ 18 years; were taking a SSRI or a SNRI antidepressant for at least 6 weeks at an adequate dose; scored ≥ 14 points on the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II); were adherent to medication; and met the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, criteria for depression. Interventions Participants were randomised using a computer-generated code to either oral mirtazapine or a matched placebo, starting at a dose of 15 mg daily for 2 weeks and increasing to 30 mg daily for up to 12 months, in addition to their usual antidepressant. Participants, their general practitioners (GPs) and the research team were blind to the allocation. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was depression symptoms at 12 weeks post randomisation compared with baseline, measured as a continuous variable using the BDI-II. Secondary outcomes (at 12, 24 and 52 weeks) included response, remission of depression, change in anxiety symptoms, adverse events (AEs), quality of life, adherence to medication, health and social care use and cost-effectiveness. Outcomes were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. A qualitative study explored patients’ views and experiences of managing depression and GPs’ views on prescribing a second antidepressant. Results There were 480 patients randomised to the trial (mirtazapine and usual care, n = 241; placebo and usual care, n = 239), of whom 431 patients (89.8%) were followed up at 12 weeks. BDI-II scores at 12 weeks were lower in the mirtazapine group than the placebo group after adjustment for baseline BDI-II score and minimisation and stratification variables [difference –1.83 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) –3.92 to 0.27 points; p = 0.087]. This was smaller than the minimum clinically important difference and the CI included the null. The difference became smaller at subsequent time points (24 weeks: –0.85 points, 95% CI –3.12 to 1.43 points; 12 months: 0.17 points, 95% CI –2.13 to 2.46 points). More participants in the mirtazapine group withdrew from the trial medication, citing mild AEs (46 vs. 9 participants). Conclusions This study did not find convincing evidence of a clinically important benefit for mirtazapine in addition to a SSRI or a SNRI antidepressant over placebo in primary care patients with TRD. There was no evidence that the addition of mirtazapine was a cost-effective use of NHS resources. GPs and patients were concerned about adding an additional antidepressant. Limitations Voluntary unblinding for participants after the primary outcome at 12 weeks made interpretation of longer-term outcomes more difficult. Future work Treatment-resistant depression remains an area of important, unmet need, with limited evidence of effective treatments. Promising interventions include augmentation with atypical antipsychotics and treatment using transcranial magnetic stimulation. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06653773; EudraCT number 2012-000090-23. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Application of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) to Evaluate New Laboratory Tests in a Health System: A Case Study of Bladder Cancer Testing

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 237428952096822
Author(s):  
Erik J. Landaas ◽  
Ashley M. Eckel ◽  
Jonathan L. Wright ◽  
Geoffrey S. Baird ◽  
Ryan N. Hansen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Real World ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Test System ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data

We describe the methods and decision from a health technology assessment of a new molecular test for bladder cancer (Cxbladder), which was proposed for adoption to our send-out test menu by urology providers. The Cxbladder health technology assessment report contained mixed evidence; predominant concerns were related to the test’s low specificity and high cost. The low specificity indicated a high false-positive rate, which our laboratory formulary committee concluded would result in unnecessary confirmatory testing and follow-up. Our committee voted unanimously to not adopt the test system-wide for use for the initial diagnosis of bladder cancer but supported a pilot study for bladder cancer recurrence surveillance. The pilot study used real-world data from patient management in the scenario in which a patient is evaluated for possible recurrent bladder cancer after a finding of atypical cytopathology in the urine. We evaluated the type and number of follow-up tests conducted including urine cytopathology, imaging studies, repeat cystoscopy evaluation, biopsy, and repeat Cxbladder and their test results. The pilot identified ordering challenges and suggested potential use cases in which the results of Cxbladder affected a change in management. Our health technology assessment provided an objective process to efficiently review test performance and guide new test adoption. Based on our pilot, there were real-world data indicating improved clinician decision-making among select patients who underwent Cxbladder testing.

scholarly journals From idealistic rookies to a regional leader: The history of health technology assessment in Poland

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (S1) ◽  
pp. 156-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafał Niżankowski ◽  
Norbert Wilk
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Public Payer

In 1989, Poland started to slowly release itself not only from the burden of a half-century of communist indoctrination and soviet exploitation, but also from the consequences of the Semashko model of healthcare organization: low doctors' salaries, primary care based on multispecialty groups, overdeveloped hospital infrastructure, and limited access to sophisticated interventions overcome by patients' unofficial payments.A few years after the 1998 workshop on health technology assessment (HTA) in Budapest, the first HTA reports were elaborated in the National Center for Quality Assessment in Health Care, which could mark the beginning of HTA in Poland. Several individuals and organizations have been involved in developing HTA, both from noncommercial and commercial standpoints.A goal to establish a national HTA agency appeared among the priorities of the Polish Ministry of Health in 2004 and was realized a year later. The Agency for HTA in Poland published guidelines on HTA and established a sound and transparent two-step (assessment-appraisal) process for preparing recommendations on public financing of both drugs and nondrug technologies. The recommendations of the Agency's Consultative Council were warmly welcomed by the public payer. However, the recent major restructuring of the Agency and new drug reimbursement decisions aroused doubts as to keeping transparency of the decision-making processes.

scholarly journals Enhanced motivational interviewing for reducing weight and increasing physical activity in adults with high cardiovascular risk: the MOVE IT three-arm RCT

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (69) ◽  
pp. 1-144
Author(s):  
Khalida Ismail ◽  
Daniel Stahl ◽  
Adam Bayley ◽  
Katherine Twist ◽  
Kurtis Stewart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Motivational Interviewing ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Cvd Risk ◽  
Objective Evidence

Background Motivational interviewing (MI) enhanced with behaviour change techniques (BCTs) and deployed by health trainers targeting multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) may be more effective than interventions targeting a single risk factor. Objectives The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an enhanced lifestyle motivational interviewing intervention for patients at high risk of CVD in group settings versus individual settings and usual care (UC) in reducing weight and increasing physical activity (PA) were tested. Design This was a three-arm, single-blind, parallel randomised controlled trial. Setting A total of 135 general practices across all 12 South London Clinical Commissioning Groups were recruited. Participants A total of 1742 participants aged 40–74 years with a ≥ 20.0% risk of a CVD event in the following 10 years were randomised. Interventions The intervention was designed to integrate MI and cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT), delivered by trained healthy lifestyle facilitators in 10 sessions over 1 year, in group or individual format. The control group received UC. Randomisation Simple randomisation was used with computer-generated randomisation blocks. In each block, 10 participants were randomised to the group, individual or UC arm in a 4 : 3 : 3 ratio. Researchers were blind to the allocation. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes are change in weight (kg) from baseline and change in PA (average number of steps per day over 1 week) from baseline at the 24-month follow-up, with an interim follow-up at 12 months. An economic evaluation estimates the relative cost-effectiveness of each intervention. Secondary outcomes include changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and CVD risk score. Results The mean age of participants was 69.75 years (standard deviation 4.11 years), 85.5% were male and 89.4% were white. At the 24-month follow-up, the group and individual intervention arms were not more effective than UC in increasing PA [mean 70.05 steps, 95% confidence interval (CI) –288 to 147.9 steps, and mean 7.24 steps, 95% CI –224.01 to 238.5 steps, respectively] or in reducing weight (mean –0.03 kg, 95% CI –0.49 to 0.44 kg, and mean –0.42 kg, 95% CI –0.93 to 0.09 kg, respectively). At the 12-month follow-up, the group and individual intervention arms were not more effective than UC in increasing PA (mean 131.1 steps, 95% CI –85.28 to 347.48 steps, and mean 210.22 steps, 95% CI –19.46 to 439.91 steps, respectively), but there were reductions in weight for the group and individual intervention arms compared with UC (mean –0.52 kg, 95% CI –0.90 to –0.13 kg, and mean –0.55 kg, 95% CI –0.95 to –0.14 kg, respectively). The group intervention arm was not more effective than the individual intervention arm in improving outcomes at either follow-up point. The group and individual interventions were not cost-effective. Conclusions Enhanced MI, in group or individual formats, targeted at members of the general population with high CVD risk is not effective in reducing weight or increasing PA compared with UC. Future work should focus on ensuring objective evidence of high competency in BCTs, identifying those with modifiable factors for CVD risk and improving engagement of patients and primary care. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN84864870. 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. 23, No. 69. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This research was part-funded by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London.

scholarly journals A single Epley manoeuvre can improve self-perceptions of disability (quality of life) in patients with cp-BPPV: A randomised controlled trial in primary care.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricard Carrillo Muñoz ◽  
Jose Luis Ballve Moreno ◽  
Ivan Villar Balboa ◽  
Yolanda Rando Matos ◽  
Oriol Cunillera Puertolas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Perceived Disability ◽  
Self Perceptions ◽  
Perceptions Of Disability ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (pc-BPPV) causes physical, functional, and emotional impairment. The treatment of choice is the Epley manoeuvre (EM). The purpose of the study was to compare the impact of the EM and a sham manoeuvre in primary care on self-perceived disability. Method: Randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial conducted in primary care with a follow-up of 1 year. Patients aged ≥18 years old diagnosed with pc-BPPV according to the Dix-Hallpike test (DHT) were randomised to an intervention (EM) group or a control (sham manoeuvre) group. The main study covariables were age, sex, history of depression and anxiety, presence of nystagmus in the DHT, patient-perceived disability assessed with the Dizziness Handicap Inventory-screening version (DHI-S). Data were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate mixed Tobit analyses. Results: Overall, 134 patients were studied: 66 in the intervention group and 68 in the control group. Median age was 52 years (interquartile range [IQR], 38.25–68.00 years) and 76.12% of the patients were women. The DHT triggered nystagmus in 40.30% of patients. The median total DHI-S score for the overall sample at baseline was 16 (IQR, 8.00–22.00); 16 [IQR, 10.5–24.0] vs 10 [6.0–14.0] for women vs men ( P <0.001) and 16 [IQR, 10.0-24.0] vs 12 [IQR, 8.0–18.0] for patients without nystagmus vs those with nystagmus ( P =0.033).Patients treated with the EM experienced a mean reduction of 2.03 points in DHI-S score over the follow-up period compared with patients in the sham group. Conclusion: Pc-BPPV affects the quality of life of primary care patients. A single EM can improve self-perceptions of disability by around 2 points on the DHI-S scale, Trial registration : ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01969513. Retrospectively registered. First Posted: October 25, 2013. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01969513

scholarly journals Randomised controlled trial and economic analysis of an internet-based weight management programme: POWeR+ (Positive Online Weight Reduction)

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Little ◽  
Beth Stuart ◽  
FD Richard Hobbs ◽  
Jo Kelly ◽  
Emily R Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Weight Reduction ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Random Numbers ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Face To Face

BackgroundBehavioural counselling with intensive follow-up for obesity is effective, but in resource-constrained primary care settings briefer approaches are needed.ObjectivesTo estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an internet-based behavioural intervention with regular face-to-face or remote support in primary care, compared with brief advice.DesignIndividually randomised three-arm parallel trial with health economic evaluation and nested qualitative interviews.SettingPrimary care general practices in the UK.ParticipantsPatients with a body mass index of ≥ 30 kg/m2(or ≥ 28 kg/m2with risk factors) identified from general practice records, recruited by postal invitation.InterventionsPositive Online Weight Reduction (POWeR+) is a 24-session, web-based weight management intervention completed over 6 months. Following online registration, the website randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to (1) the control intervention (n = 279), which had previously been demonstrated to be clinically effective (brief web-based information that minimised pressure to cut down foods, instead encouraging swaps to healthier choices and increasing fruit and vegetables, plus 6-monthly nurse weighing); (2) POWeR+F (n = 269), POWeR+ supplemented by face-to-face nurse support (up to seven contacts); or (3) POWeR+R (n = 270), POWeR+ supplemented by remote nurse support (up to five e-mails or brief telephone calls).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was a modelled estimate of average weight reduction over 12 months, assessed blind to group where possible, using multiple imputation for missing data. The secondary outcome was the number of participants maintaining a 5% weight reduction at 12 months.ResultsA total of 818 eligible individuals were randomised using computer-generated random numbers. Weight change, averaged over 12 months, was documented in 666 out of 818 participants (81%; control,n = 227; POWeR+F,n = 221; POWeR+R,n = 218). The control group maintained nearly 3 kg of weight loss per person (mean weight per person: baseline, 104.4 kg; 6 months, 101.9 kg; 12 months, 101.7 kg). Compared with the control group, the estimated additional weight reduction with POWeR+F was 1.5 kg [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6 to 2.4 kg;p = 0.001] and with POWeR+R was 1.3 kg (95% CI 0.34 to 2.2 kg;p = 0.007). By 12 months the mean weight loss was not statistically significantly different between groups, but 20.8% of control participants, 29.2% of POWeR+F participants (risk ratio 1.56, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.51;p = 0.070) and 32.4% of POWeR+R participants (risk ratio 1.82, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.74;p = 0.004) maintained a clinically significant 5% weight reduction. The POWeR+R group had fewer individuals who reported doing another activity to help lose weight [control, 47.1% (64/136); POWeR+F, 37.2% (51/137); POWeR+R, 26.7% (40/150)]. The incremental cost to the health service per kilogram weight lost, compared with the control group, was £18 (95% CI –£129 to £195) for POWeR+F and –£25 (95% CI –£268 to £157) for POWeR+R. The probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £100 per kilogram was 88% and 98% for POWeR+F and POWeR+R, respectively. POWeR+R was dominant compared with the control group. No harms were reported and participants using POWeR+ felt more enabled in managing their weight. The qualitative studies documented that POWeR+ was viewed positively by patients and that health-care professionals generally enjoyed supporting patients using POWeR+.Study limitationsMaintenance of weight loss after 1 year is unknown.Future workIdentifying strategies for longer-term engagement, impact in community settings and increasing physical activity.ConclusionClinically valuable weight loss (> 5%) is maintained in 20% of individuals using novel written materials with brief follow-up. A web-based behavioural programme and brief support results in greater mean weight loss and 10% more participants maintain valuable weight loss; it achieves greater enablement and fewer participants undertaking other weight-loss activities; and it is likely to be cost-effective.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN21244703.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Impact of Epley manoeuvre on self-perceived disability: A randomised controlled trial in primary care

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricard Carrillo Muñoz ◽  
Jose Luis Ballve Moreno ◽  
Ivan Villar Balboa ◽  
Yolanda Rando Matos ◽  
Oriol Cunillera Puertolas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Perceived Disability ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Posterior canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (pc-BPPV) causes physical, functional, and emotional impairment. The treatment of choice is the Epley manoeuvre (EM). The purpose of the study was to compare the impact of the EM and a sham manoeuvre in primary care on self-perceived disability.Method: Randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial conducted in primary care with a follow-up of 1 year. Patients aged ≥18 years old diagnosed with pc-BPPV according to the Dix-Hallpike test (DHT) were randomised to an intervention (EM) group or a control (sham manoeuvre) group. The main study covariables were age, sex, history of depression and anxiety, presence of nystagmus in the DHT, patient-perceived disability assessed with the Dizziness Handicap Inventory-screening version (DHI-S). Data were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate mixed Tobit analyses. Results: Overall, 134 patients were studied: 66 in the intervention group and 68 in the control group. Median age was 52 years (interquartile range [IQR], 38.25–68.00 years) and 76.12% of the patients were women. The DHT triggered nystagmus in 40.30% of patients. The median total DHI-S score for the overall sample at baseline was 16 (IQR, 8.00–22.00); 16 [IQR, 10.5–24.0] vs 10 [6.0–14.0] for women vs men (P<0.001) and 16 [IQR, 10.0-24.0] vs 12 [IQR, 8.0–18.0] for patients without nystagmus vs those with nystagmus (P=0.033).Patients treated with the EM experienced a mean reduction of 2.03 points in DHI-S score over the follow-up period compared with patients in the sham group. Conclusion: Pc-BPPV affects the quality of life of primary care patients. A single EM can improve self-perceptions of disability by around 2 points on the DHI-S scale, Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01969513. Retrospectively registered. First Posted: October 25, 2013. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01969513

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of a stepwise cardiometabolic disease prevention program: results of a randomized controlled trial in primary care

BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daphne M. Stol ◽  
Eelco A. B. Over ◽  
Ilse F. Badenbroek ◽  
Monika Hollander ◽  
Mark M. J. Nielen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Prevention Program ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group

Abstract Background Cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) are the major cause of death worldwide and are associated with a lower quality of life and high healthcare costs. To prevent a further rise in CMD and related healthcare costs, early detection and adequate management of individuals at risk could be an effective preventive strategy. The objective of this study was to determine long-term cost-effectiveness of stepwise CMD risk assessment followed by individualized treatment if indicated compared to care as usual. A computer-based simulation model was used to project long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness, assuming the prevention program was implemented in Dutch primary care. Methods A randomized controlled trial in a primary care setting in which 1934 participants aged 45–70 years without recorded CMD or CMD risk factors participated. The intervention group was invited for stepwise CMD risk assessment through a risk score (step 1), additional risk assessment at the practice in case of increased risk (step 2) and individualized follow-up treatment if indicated (step 3). The control group was not invited for risk assessment, but completed a health questionnaire. Results of the effectiveness analysis on systolic blood pressure (− 2.26 mmHg; 95% CI − 4.01: − 0.51) and total cholesterol (− 0.15 mmol/l; 95% CI − 0.23: − 0.07) were used in this analysis. Outcome measures were the costs and benefits after 1-year follow-up and long-term (60 years) cost-effectiveness of stepwise CMD risk assessment compared to no assessment. A computer-based simulation model was used that included data on disability weights associated with age and disease outcomes related to CMD. Analyses were performed taking a healthcare perspective. Results After 1 year, the average costs in the intervention group were 260 Euro higher than in the control group and differences were mainly driven by healthcare costs. No meaningful change was found in EQ 5D-based quality of life between the intervention and control groups after 1-year follow-up (− 0.0154; 95% CI − 0.029: 0.004). After 60 years, cumulative costs of the intervention were 41.4 million Euro and 135 quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were gained. Despite improvements in blood pressure and cholesterol, the intervention was not cost-effective (ICER of 306,000 Euro/QALY after 60 years). Scenario analyses did not allow for a change in conclusions with regard to cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Conclusions Implementation of this primary care-based CMD prevention program is not cost-effective in the long term. Implementation of this program in primary care cannot be recommended. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register NTR4277, registered on 26 November 2013

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document