Characterization of original research presented at the COVID-19 First National Scientific Conference, CovidCien2021

Background: original investigations represent the fulfillment of a research process;it test all the research team's abilities, from detecting the problem and conducting the study to interpreting the results and proposing solutions to the problem. Objective: to characterize the original research presented at the COVID- 19 First National Scientific Conference, CovidCien2021. Methods: an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study was carried out. 57 papers presented at the event were included. Variables: number of original researches presented, student investigations or professional investigations, type of study, type of research, most common methodological errors, number of authors. Descriptive statistics were used for processing and analysis of the results. Results: 57 free topics were presented ( 32.6%). Research belonging to students stood out (32;56.1%). Descriptive observational studies (50;87.7%) and quantitative studies (50;87.7%) stood out. Papers with four and five authors prevailed (14;24.6%). Difficulties such as the absence of the research objective and errors in the methodology that make its reproduction impossible were observed. Conclusions: descriptive observational researches, mostly quantitative, provide general and particular elements of a problem. There is a need to educate future generations in good methodological practices, in order to achieve science of quality and excellence.

Research interrupted: applying the CONSERVE 2021 Statement to a randomized trial of rehabilitation during critical illness affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

RATIONALE: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted non-COVID critical care trials globally as intensive care units (ICUs) prioritized patient care and COVID-specific research. The international randomized controlled trial CYCLE (Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength) was forced to halt recruitment at all sites in March 2020, creating immediate challenges. We applied the CONSERVE (CONSORT and SPIRIT Extension for RCTs Revised in Extenuating Circumstance) statement as a framework to report the impact of the pandemic on CYCLE and describe our mitigation approaches. METHODS: On March 23, 2020, the CYCLE Methods Centre distributed a standardized email to determine the number of patients still in-hospital and those requiring imminent 90-day endpoint assessments. We assessed protocol fidelity by documenting attempts to provide the in-hospital randomized intervention (cycling or routine physiotherapy) and collect the primary outcome (physical function 3-days post-ICU discharge) and 90-day outcomes. We advised sites to prioritize data for the study's primary outcome. We sought feedback on pandemic barriers related to trial procedures. RESULTS: Our main Methods Centre mitigation strategies included identifying patients at risk for protocol deviations, communicating early and frequently with sites, developing standardized internal tools focused on high-risk points in the protocol for monitoring patient progress, data entry, and validation, and providing guidance to conduct some research activities remotely. For study sites, our strategies included determining how institutional pandemic research policies applied to CYCLE, communicating with the Methods Centre about capacity to continue any part of the research, and developing contingency plans to ensure the protocol was delivered as intended. From 15 active sites (12 Canada, 2 US, 1 Australia), 5 patients were still receiving the study intervention in ICUs, 6 required primary outcomes, and 17 required 90-day assessments. With these mitigation strategies, we attempted 100% of ICU interventions, 83% of primary outcomes, and 100% of 90-day assessments per our protocol. CONCLUSIONS: We retained all enrolled patients with minimal missing data using several time-sensitive strategies. Although CONSERVE recommends reporting only major modifications incurred by extenuating circumstances, we suggest that it also provides a helpful framework for reporting mitigation strategies with the goal of improving research transparency and trial management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03471247. Registered on March 20, 2018.

The Distressed State of Primary Care in Virginia Pre-Medicaid Expansion and Pre-Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Primary care is crucial to the health of individuals and communities, but it faces numerous structural and systemic challenges. Our study assessed the state of primary care in Virginia to prepare for Medicaid expansion. It also provides insight into the frontline of health care prior to an unprecedented global COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We surveyed 1622 primary care practices to understand organizational characteristics, scope of care, capacity, and organizational stress. RESULTS: Practices (484) varied in type, ownership, location, and care for medically underserved and diverse patient populations. Most practices accepted uninsured and Medicaid patients. Practices reported a broad scope of care, including offering behavioral health and medication-assisted therapy for opioid addiction. Over half addressed social needs like transportation and unstable housing. One in three practices experienced a significant stress in 2019, prepandemic, and only 18.8% of practices anticipated a stress in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care serves as the foundation of our health care system and is an essential service, but it is severely stressed, under-resourced, and overburdened in the best of times. Primary care needs strategic workforce planning, adequate access to resources, and financial investment to sustain its value and innovation.

The role played by family physicians in providing health services for the sheltered homeless populations during COVID-19 lockdown in the Tshwane district.

This short report describes the role that family physicians (FPs) (and family medicine registrars) played to provide care for the homeless people in shelters (both temporary and permanent) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown in the City of Tshwane, South Africa. The lockdown resulted in the establishment of a large number of temporary shelters. The FPs took on the task to provide comprehensive and coordinated primary care, whilst extending their activities in terms of data management, quality improvement, capacity building and research. The FPs worked in teams with other healthcare providers and contributed a unique set of skills to the process. This report demonstrates the value of responding quickly and appropriately through communication, cooperation and innovation. It also demonstrates the large number of areas in which FPs can make a difference when engaged appropriately, with the necessary support and collaboration, thus making a positive impact in the already overburdened health services.

The Unknown Prevalence of Postrandomization Bias in 15 Physical Therapy Journals: A Methods Review.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of prospective clinical trial registration and postrandomization bias in published musculoskeletal physical therapy randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DESIGN: A methods review. LITERATURE SEARCH: Articles indexed in MEDLINE and published between January 2016 and July 2020 were included. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Two independent blinded reviewers identified the RCTs using Covidence. We included RCTs related to musculoskeletal interventions that were published in International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors member journals. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted independently for the variables of interest from the identified RCTs by 2 blinded reviewers. The data were presented descriptively or in frequency tables. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight RCTs were identified. One third of RCTs were consistent with their prospectively registered intent (49/138); consistency with prospectively registered intent could not be determined for two thirds (89/138) of the RCTs. Four RCTs (8%)reported inconsistent results with the primary aims and 7 (14%) with the outcomes from the prospective clinical trial registry, despite high methodological quality (Physiotherapy Evidence Database [PEDro] scale score). Differences between prospectively registered and non-prospectively registered RCTs for PEDro scale scores had a medium effect size (r = 0.30). Two of 15 journals followed their clinical trial registration policy 100% of the time; in 1 journal, the published RCTs were consistent with the clinical trial registration. CONCLUSION: Postrandomization bias in musculoskeletal physical therapy RCTs could not be ruled out, due to the lack of prospective clinical trial registration and detailed data analysis plans. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(11):542-550. Epub 21 Sep 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10491.