Public Health Governance: conflicts and challenges of shared management on the Brazil-Bolivia border / Governança da Saúde Pública: conflitos e desafios para uma gestão compartilhada na fronteira Brasil-Bolívia

Resumo Este estudo de caso tem por objetivo apresentar a importância da gestão compartilhada da saúde pública para as zonas de fronteira. Especificamente, apresentaremos como ocorreu o enfrentamento inicial da covid-19 na fronteira Brasil-Bolívia, para demonstrar as fragilidades territoriais, tanto em relação à covid-19, quanto ao enfrentamento de outras doenças infectocontagiosas. De ordem metodológica, este artigo propõe uma nova leitura teórico-analítica para os estudos da governança da saúde pública, com base na sociologia dos problemas públicos, de base pragmatista. Através de uma investigação qualitativa (teórico-reflexiva), realizada mediante levantamento bibliográfico, documental e uma consulta junto a 14 especialistas, foram identificadas as controvérsias e os conflitos que definem o problema e a ação para tentar resolvê-lo. A covid-19 reacende a importância da gestão compartilhada binacional, tanto para combate da pandemia, quanto para o controle de outras endemias locais urgentes, como a dengue e o H1N1, na fronteira.

Abstract This case study aims to present the importance of shared public health management for border areas. Specifically, we will present how the initial confrontation of covid-19 took place on the Brazil-Bolivia border, to demonstrate the territorial weaknesses, both regarding covid-19 and in the face of other infectious diseases. Of methodological order, this article proposes a new theoretical-analytical reading for the study of public health governance, based on the pragmatist sociology of public problems. By an investigation (qualitative and theoretical-reflective), carried out with a bibliographic and documental survey and a consultation with 14 specialists, the controversies and the conflicts that define the problem and the action to try to solve it were identified. covid-19 rekindles the importance of shared binational management, both to fight the pandemic and to control other urgent local endemics, such as dengue and H1N1 on the border.

Feasibility and first results of the 'Trials-within-Cohorts' (TwiCs) design in patients undergoing radiotherapy for lung cancer.

Background: 'Trials-within-Cohorts' (TwiCs), previously known as 'cohort multiple randomized controlled trials' is a pragmatic trial design, supporting an efficient and representative recruitment of patients for (future) trials. To our knowledge, the 'COhort for Lung cancer Outcome Reporting and trial inclusion' (COLOR) is the first TwiCs in lung cancer patients. In this study we aimed to assess the feasibility and first year results of COLOR.Material and Methods: All patients diagnosed with lung cancer referred to the Radiotherapy department were eligible to participate in the ongoing prospective COLOR study. At inclusion, written informed consent was requested for use of patient data, participation in patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and willingness to participate in (future) trials. Feasibility was studied by assessing participation and comparing baseline PROs to EORTC reference values. First-year results of PROs at baseline and 3 months after inclusion were evaluated separately for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and conventional radiotherapy patients.Results: Of the 338 eligible patients between July 2020 and July 2021, 169 (50%) participated. Among these, 127 (75%) gave informed consent to PROs participation and 110 (65%) were willing to participate in (future) trials. The inclusion percentage dropped from 77% to 33% when the information procedure was switched from in-person to by phone (due to COVID-19 pandemic measures). Baseline PROs for physical and cognitive functioning were comparable in COLOR patients compared to the EORTC reference values. No significant changes in PROs were observed 3 months after inclusion, except for a slight increase in pain scores in the SBRT group (n = 97).Conclusions: The TwiCs-design appears feasible in lung cancer patients with fair participation rates (although negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic). With a planned expansion to other centers, the COLOR-study is expected to enable multiple (randomized) evaluations of experimental interventions with important advantages for recruitment, generalizability, and long-term outcome data collection.

Multisite randomised controlled trial of trauma-focused cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis to reduce post-traumatic stress symptoms in people with co-morbid post-traumatic stress disorder and psychosis, compared to treatment as usual: study protocol for the STAR (Study of Trauma And Recovery) trial.

BACKGROUND: People with psychosis have high rates of trauma, with a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) prevalence rate of approximately 15%, which exacerbates psychotic symptoms such as delusions and hallucinations. Pilot studies have shown that trauma-focused (TF) psychological therapies can be safe and effective in such individuals. This trial, the largest to date, will evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a TF therapy integrated with cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis (TF-CBTp) on post-traumatic stress symptoms in people with psychosis. The secondary aims are to compare groups on cost-effectiveness; ascertain whether TF-CBTp impacts on a range of other meaningful outcomes; determine whether therapy effects endure; and determine acceptability of the therapy in participants and therapists. METHODS: Rater-blind, parallel arm, pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing TF-CBTp + treatment as usual (TAU) to TAU only. Adults (N = 300) with distressing post-traumatic stress and psychosis symptoms from five mental health Trusts (60 per site) will be randomised to the two groups. Therapy will be manualised, lasting 9 months (m) with trained therapists. We will assess PTSD symptom severity (primary outcome); percentage who show loss of PTSD diagnosis and clinically significant change; psychosis symptoms; emotional well-being; substance use; suicidal ideation; psychological recovery; social functioning; health-related quality of life; service use, a total of four times: before randomisation; 4 m (mid-therapy); 9 m (end of therapy; primary end point); 24 m (15 m after end of therapy) post-randomisation. Four 3-monthly phone calls will be made between 9 m and 24 m assessment points, to collect service use over the previous 3 months. Therapy acceptability will be assessed through qualitative interviews with participants (N = 35) and therapists (N = 5-10). An internal pilot will ensure integrity of trial recruitment and outcome data, as well as therapy protocol safety and adherence. Data will be analysed following intention-to-treat principles using generalised linear mixed models and reported according to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Social and Psychological Interventions Statement. DISCUSSION: The proposed intervention has the potential to provide significant patient benefit in terms of reductions in distressing symptoms of post-traumatic stress, psychosis, and emotional problems; enable clinicians to implement trauma-focused therapy confidently in this population; and be cost-effective compared to TAU through reduced service use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN93382525 (03/08/20).

Emulating a Target Trial of Interventions Initiated During Pregnancy with Healthcare Databases: The Example of COVID-19 Vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies are often the only option to estimate effects of interventions during pregnancy. Causal inference from observational data can be conceptualized as an attempt to emulate a hypothetical pragmatic randomized trial: the target trial. OBJECTIVE: To provide a step-by-step description of how to use healthcare databases to estimate the effects of interventions initiated during pregnancy. As an example, we describe how to specify and emulate a target trial of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, but the framework can be generally applied to point and sustained strategies involving both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions. METHODS: First, we specify the protocol of a target trial to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of vaccination during pregnancy. Second, we describe how to use observational data to emulate each component of the protocol of the target trial. We propose different target trials for different gestational periods because the outcomes of interest vary by gestational age at exposure. We identify challenges that affect (i) the target trial and thus its observational emulation (censoring and competing events), and (ii) mostly the observational emulation (confounding, immortal time, and measurement biases). CONCLUSION: Some biases may be unavoidable in observational emulations, but others are avoidable. For instance, immortal time bias can be avoided by aligning the start of follow-up with the gestational age at the time of the intervention, as we would do in the target trial. Explicitly emulating target trials at different gestational ages can help reduce bias and improve the interpretability of effect estimates for interventions during pregnancy.

Study protocol of the BASINEL Study: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial investigating treatment versus no treatment of low-risk basal cell carcinomas in older persons.

INTRODUCTION: Basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) represent 70% of all skin cancers. These tumours do not metastasise but are locally invasive if left untreated. There is a high incidence of BCC in the elderly, and clinicians frequently face important treatment dilemmas. The approach to BCC in the elderly should be investigated thoroughly. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Data on health-related quality of life (HrQoL), survival and complication rate will be examined in a treatment and a non-treatment arm (1:1 allocation). In the non-treatment arm, in vivo biological behaviour of low-risk BCCs in elderly patients will be examined. The main objective is to combine tumour characteristics with demographic data, in order to determine whether treatment will positively affect the patients' HrQoL within a predetermined time frame. A monocentric randomised controlled trial (RCT) was designed at the Ghent University Hospital. The study population consists of patients with the minimum age of 75 years and a new diagnosis of (a) low-risk BCC(s). Patients in the treatment arm will receive standard care. Patients in the non-treatment arm will be closely monitored: the tumour will be intensively evaluated using multispectral dermoscopy, reflectance confocal microscopy and high-definition optical coherence tomography. All patients will be asked to fill in a questionnaire concerning their HrQoL at consecutive time points. Patient-reported side effects will be evaluated via an additional questionnaire.Primary outcomes will include the difference in HrQoL and the difference in complication risks (treatment vs non-treatment) at different time points of the study. Secondary endpoints are the evolution of the BCCs in the non-treatment arm and the long-term survival in both study arms. Tertiary endpoint is the treatment effectiveness in the treatment arm. The sample size calculation was performed and resulted in a target sample size of 272 patients in this study with a 1:1 allocation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Subjects can withdraw from participating in this study at any time for any reason without any consequences. Approval for this study was received from the Ethics Committee of the Ghent University Hospital on 26 August 2021.The results of this RCT will be submitted for publication in one or more international, peer-reviewed medical journals, regardless of the nature of the study results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05110924).

The impact of COVID-19 on pragmatic clinical trials: lessons learned from the NIH Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has considerably disrupted nearly all aspects of daily life, including healthcare delivery and clinical research. Because pragmatic clinical trials are often embedded within healthcare delivery systems, they may be at high risk of disruption due to the dual impacts on the conduct of both care and research. METHODS: We collected qualitative data using multiple methods to characterize the impact of COVID-19 on the research activities of 14 active pragmatic clinical trials in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Health Care Systems Research Collaboratory. A COVID-19 impact questionnaire was administered electronically to principal investigators in June 2020. Text responses were analyzed thematically, and qualitative summaries were subsequently reviewed by five independent reviewers, who made iterative revisions. Additional COVID-19-related impacts were identified during virtual meetings with trial teams during April-July 2020 and combined with questionnaire responses for analysis. RESULTS: Impacts of the pandemic were broadly classified into two main types: healthcare operations and social distancing. In some instances, trial delays created statistical challenges, particularly with trials using stepped-wedge designs, and necessitated changing data collection strategies or modifying interventions. The majority of projects used existing stakeholder-driven approaches to adapt interventions. Several benefits of these adaptions were identified, including expanded outreach capabilities and ability to study virtual intervention delivery. All trial teams were able to adapt to pandemic-related modifications. CONCLUSION: In a group of 14 ongoing pragmatic clinical trials, there was significant impact of COVID-19 on trial activities. Engaging appropriate stakeholders was critical to designing and implementing trial modifications and making continued safe progress toward meeting research objectives.

The SWIS trial: Protocol of a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of school based social work.

BACKGROUND: Child and family social workers in the UK work closely with other agencies including schools and the police, and typically they are based in local authority offices. This study will evaluate the effectiveness of placing social workers in schools (SWIS) on the need for social care interventions. SWIS was piloted in three local authorities in 2018-2020, and findings from a feasibility study of the pilots suggests SWIS may operate through three key pathways: (1) by enhancing schools' response to safeguarding issues, (2) through increased collaboration between social workers, school staff, and parents, and (3) by improving relationships between social workers and young people. METHODS: The study is a two-arm pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial building on three feasibility studies which found SWIS to be promising. Social workers will work within secondary schools across local authorities in England. 280 mainstream secondary schools will be randomly allocated with a 1:1 ratio to SWIS or a comparison arm, which will be schools that continue as normal, without a social worker. The primary outcome will be the rate of Child Protection (Section 47) enquiries. Secondary outcomes will comprise rate of referrals to children's social care, rate of Child in Need (Section 17) assessments, days spent in care, and educational attendance and attainment. The study also includes an economic evaluation, and an implementation and process evaluation. Social care outcomes will be measured in July 2022, and educational outcomes will be measured in July 2023. Days in care will be measured at both time points. DISCUSSION: Findings will explore the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SWIS on the need for social care interventions. A final report will be published in January 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered retrospectively with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry on 13.11.2020 (ISRCTN90922032).

Effectiveness of a web-based virtual journal club to promote medical education (Web-Ed): protocol of a multicentre pragmatic randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: A journal club (JC) is a commonly used medical educational tool. Videoconferencing technology can facilitate the delivery of JCs, however, there remains no evidence on the role of web-based virtual JCs in promoting the acquisition and retention of medical knowledge. The Web-Ed trial aims to evaluate the educational benefits, feasibility and acceptability of web-based virtual JCs compared with traditional face-to-face ones. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Web-Ed is a multicentre pragmatic parallel-group randomised trial across teaching hospitals within the UK National Health Service (NHS). We will enrol qualified doctors or medical students who are >18 years old, proficient in English and able to use online videoconferencing software. Block randomisation will be used to allocate participants in 1:1 ratio to either intervention group. Both groups will be presented with the same educational material and follow a standardised JC structure hosted by nominated moderators and medical faculty members.The primary outcome is the difference in participants' knowledge acquisition and retention 7 days after the JCs evaluated using standardised multiple-choice questions. We will report secondarily on the feasibility and acceptability of the JCs using Likert scale questionnaires. Assuming a 30% drop-out rate, we aim to enrol 75 participants to detect a 20% improvement in knowledge acquisition at 80% power and 5% significance. We will report using mean difference or risk ratio with 95% CIs and assess significance using parametric/non-parametric testing. Where relevant, we will adjust for predetermined characteristics (age, grade of training and session duration) using multivariate regression analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Web-Ed was designed by doctors in training to address their learning needs and evaluate the preferred mode of learning. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant scientific conferences. The trial has been approved by the NHS Health Regulation Authority (21/HRA/3361). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN18036769.

Study protocol for pragmatic trials of Internet-delivered guided and unguided cognitive behavior therapy for treating depression and anxiety in university students of two Latin American countries: the Yo Puedo Sentirme Bien study.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) are highly prevalent among university students and predict impaired college performance and later life role functioning. Yet most students do not receive treatment, especially in low-middle-income countries (LMICs). We aim to evaluate the effects of expanding treatment using scalable and inexpensive Internet-delivered transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) among college students with symptoms of MDD and/or GAD in two LMICs in Latin America (Colombia and Mexico) and to investigate the feasibility of creating a precision treatment rule (PTR) to predict for whom iCBT is most effective. METHODS: We will first carry out a multi-site randomized pragmatic clinical trial (N = 1500) of students seeking treatment at student mental health clinics in participating universities or responding to an email offering services. Students on wait lists for clinic services will be randomized to unguided iCBT (33%), guided iCBT (33%), and treatment as usual (TAU) (33%). iCBT will be provided immediately whereas TAU will be whenever a clinic appointment is available. Short-term aggregate effects will be assessed at 90 days and longer-term effects 12 months after randomization. We will use ensemble machine learning to predict heterogeneity of treatment effects of unguided versus guided iCBT versus TAU and develop a precision treatment rule (PTR) to optimize individual student outcome. We will then conduct a second and third trial with separate samples (n = 500 per arm), but with unequal allocation across two arms: 25% will be assigned to the treatment determined to yield optimal outcomes based on the PTR developed in the first trial (PTR for optimal short-term outcomes for Trial 2 and 12-month outcomes for Trial 3), whereas the remaining 75% will be assigned with equal allocation across all three treatment arms. DISCUSSION: By collecting comprehensive baseline characteristics to evaluate heterogeneity of treatment effects, we will provide valuable and innovative information to optimize treatment effects and guide university mental health treatment planning. Such an effort could have enormous public-health implications for the region by increasing the reach of treatment, decreasing unmet need and clinic wait times, and serving as a model of evidence-based intervention planning and implementation. TRIAL STATUS: IRB Approval of Protocol Version 1.0; June 3, 2020. Recruitment began on March 1, 2021. Recruitment is tentatively scheduled to be completed on May 30, 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04780542 . First submission date: February 28, 2021.

A pragmatic randomized trial of home-based testing for COVID-19 in rural Native American and Latino communities: Protocol for the "Protecting our Communities" study.

BACKGROUND: Home-based testing for COVID-19 has potential to reduce existing health care disparities among underserved populations in the United States. However, implementation of home-based tests in these communities may face significant barriers. This study evaluates the acceptability, feasibility, and success of home-based testing and the potential added benefit of active support from trusted community health workers for Native Americans and Hispanic/Latino adults living in rural Montana and Washington states. METHODS/DESIGN: The academic-community research team designed the trial to be responsive to community needs for understanding barriers and supports to home-based COVID-19 testing. The "Protecting Our Community" study is a two-arm pragmatic randomized controlled trial in which a total of 400 participants are randomized to active or passive arms. Participants of both study arms receive a commercially available home collection COVID-19 test kit, which is completed by mailing a self-collected nasal swab to a central laboratory. The primary study outcome is return of the kit to the central lab within 14 days. The cultural, social, behavioral, and economic barriers to home-based COVID-19 testing are also assessed by qualitative research methods. A survey and semi-structured interviews are conducted after the trial to evaluate perceptions and experience of home-based testing. DISCUSSION: Implementing home-based testing in underserved populations, including among Native American and Hispanic/Latino communities, may require additional support to be successful. The Protecting Our Community trial examines the effect of trusted community health workers on use of home-based testing, which may be adaptable for community-driven models of home-based testing in other underserved populations.

Coronary calcium scoring as first-line test to detect and exclude coronary artery disease in patients presenting to the general practitioner with stable chest pain: protocol of the cluster-randomised CONCRETE trial.

INTRODUCTION: Identifying and excluding coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with atypical angina pectoris (AP) and non-specific thoracic complaints is a challenge for general practitioners (GPs). A diagnostic and prognostic tool could help GPs in determining the likelihood of CAD and guide patient management. Studies in outpatient settings have shown that the CT-based coronary calcium score (CCS) has high accuracy for diagnosis and exclusion of CAD. However, the CT CCS test has not been tested in a primary care setting. In the COroNary Calcium scoring as fiRst-linE Test to dEtect and exclude coronary artery disease in GPs patients with stable chest pain (CONCRETE) study, the impact of direct access of GPs to CT CCS will be investigated. We hypothesise that this will allow for early diagnosis of CAD and treatment, more efficient referral to the cardiologist and a reduction of healthcare-related costs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: CONCRETE is a pragmatic multicentre trial with a cluster randomised design, in which direct GP access to the CT CCS test is compared with standard of care. In both arms, at least 40 GP offices, and circa 800 patients with atypical AP and non-specific thoracic complaints will be included. To determine the increase in detection and treatment rate of CAD in GP offices, the CVRM registration rate is derived from the GPs electronic registration system. Individual patients' data regarding cardiovascular risk factors, expressed chest pain complaints, quality of life, downstream testing and CAD diagnosis will be collected through questionnaires and the electronic GP dossier. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: CONCRETE has been approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the University Medical Center of Groningen. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR 7475; Pre-results.

Bedtime versus morning use of antihypertensives for cardiovascular risk reduction (BedMed): protocol for a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded end-point pragmatic trial.

INTRODUCTION: Sleep-time blood pressure correlates more strongly with adverse cardiovascular events than does daytime blood pressure. The BedMed trial evaluates whether bedtime antihypertensive administration, as compared with conventional morning use, reduces major adverse cardiovascular events. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: DesignProspective randomised, open-label, blinded end-point trial.ParticipantsHypertensive primary care patients using blood pressure lowering medication and free from glaucoma.SettingCommunity primary care providers in 5 Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario) are mailing invitations to their eligible patients. Social media campaigns (Google, Facebook) are additionally running in the same provinces.InterventionConsenting participants are allocated via central randomisation to bedtime vs morning use of all antihypertensives.Follow-up(1) Telephone or email questionnaire at 1 week, 6 weeks, 6 months and every 6 months thereafter, and (2) accessing linked governmental healthcare databases tracking hospital and community medical services.Primary outcomeComposite of all-cause death, or hospitalisation for myocardial infarction/acute-coronary syndrome, stroke or congestive heart failure.Secondary outcomesEach primary outcome element on its own, all-cause hospitalisation or emergency department visit, long-term care admission, non-vertebral fracture, new glaucoma diagnosis, 18-month cognitive decline from baseline (via Short Blessed Test).Select other outcomesSelf-reported nocturia burden at 6 weeks and 6 months (no, minor or major burden), 1-year self-reported overall health score (EQ-5D-5L), self-reported falls, total cost of care (acute and community over study duration) and mean sleep-time systolic blood pressure after 6 months (via 24-hour monitor in a subset of 302 sequential participants).Primary outcome analysisCox proportional hazards survival analysis.Sample sizeThe trial will continue until a projected 254 primary outcome events have occurred.Current statusEnrolment ongoing (3227 randomised to date). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: BedMed has ethics approval from six research ethics review boards and will publish results in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02990663.

Health-related quality of life at 3 months following head and neck cancer treatment is a key predictor of longer-term outcome and of benefit from using the patient concerns inventory.

INTRODUCTION: During clinical follow-up it can be difficult to identify those head and neck cancer (HNC) patients who are coping poorly and could benefit from additional support. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires and prompt lists provide a means by which patients can express their perceived outcomes and raise concerns. The first aim of this secondary analysis following a randomized trial was to explore which patient characteristics, at around 3 months following treatment completion (baseline), best predict HRQOL 12 months later. The second aim was to attempt to ascertain which patients were most likely to benefit from using prompt list. METHODS: Cluster-controlled pragmatic trial data were analyzed. HRQOL was measured by the University of Washington Quality of life questionnaire (UW-QOLv4). The prompt list was the Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI-HN). RESULTS: The trial involved 15 eligible consultants and a median (inter-quartile range) of 16 (13-26) primary HNC patients per consultant, with 140 PCI patients and 148 controls. Baseline HRQOL was the dominant predictor of 12-month HRQOL with other predictors related to social, financial, and lifestyle characteristics as well as clinical stage and treatment. Although formal statistical tests for interaction were non-significant the trend in analyses over a range of outcomes suggested that patients with worse baseline HRQOL could benefit more from the PCI-HN. DISCUSSION: HRQOL early post-treatment is a key predictor of longer-term outcome. Measuring and using HRQOL and the PCI-HN are not only surrogates for predicting HRQOL at 15 months post-treatment, but also tools to help guide interventions.

Heart Watch Study: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Personal digital devices that provide health information, such as the Apple Watch, have developed an increasing array of cardiopulmonary tracking features which have received regulatory clearance and are directly marketed to consumers. Despite their widespread and increasing use, data about the impact of personal digital device use on patient-reported outcomes and healthcare utilisation are sparse. Among a population of patients with atrial fibrillation and/or atrial flutter undergoing cardioversion, our primary aim is to determine the impact of the heart rate measurement, irregular rhythm notification, and ECG features of the Apple Watch on quality of life and healthcare utilisation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We are conducting a prospective, open-label multicentre pragmatic randomised clinical trial, leveraging a unique patient-centred health data sharing platform for enrolment and follow-up. A total of 150 patients undergoing cardioversion for atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter will be randomised 1:1 to receive the Apple Watch Series 6 or Withings Move at the time of cardioversion. The primary outcome is the difference in the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-life global score at 6 months postcardioversion. Secondary outcomes include inpatient and outpatient healthcare utilisation. Additional secondary outcomes include a comparison of the Apple Watch ECG and pulse oximeter features with gold-standard data obtained in routine clinical care settings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Institutional Review Boards at Yale University, Mayo Clinic, and Duke University Health System have approved the trial protocol. This trial will provide important data to policymakers, clinicians and patients about the impact of the heart rate, irregular rhythm notification, and ECG features of widely used personal digital devices on patient quality of life and healthcare utilisation. Findings will be disseminated to study participants, at professional society meetings and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04468321.

Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pragmatic clinical trial participants.

Characterizing the impacts of disruption attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical research is important, especially in pain research where psychological, social, and economic stressors attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic may greatly impact treatment effects. The National Institutes of Health - Department of Defense - Department of Veterans Affairs Pain Management Collaboratory (PMC) is a collective effort supporting 11 pragmatic clinical trials studying nonpharmacological approaches and innovative integrated care models for pain management in veteran and military health systems. The PMC rapidly developed a brief pandemic impacts measure for use across its pragmatic trials studying pain while remaining broadly applicable to other areas of clinical research. Through open discussion and consensus building by the PMC's Phenotypes and Outcomes Work Group, the PMC Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) Measure was iteratively developed. The measure assesses the following domains (one item/domain): access to healthcare, social support, finances, ability to meet basic needs, and mental or emotional health. Two additional items assess infection status (personal and household) and hospitalization. The measure uses structured responses with a three-point scale for COVID-19 infection status and four-point ordinal rank response for all other domains. We recommend individualized adaptation as appropriate by clinical research teams using this measure to survey the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on study participants. This can also help maintain utility of the measure beyond the COVID-19 pandemic to characterize impacts during future public health emergencies that may require mitigation strategies such as periods of quarantine and isolation.

Modified Application of Cardiac Rehabilitation in Older Adults (MACRO) Trial: Protocol changes in a pragmatic multi-site randomized controlled trial in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are at higher risk for cardiovascular disease and functional decline, often leading to deterioration and dependency. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) provides opportunity to improve clinical and functional recovery, yet participation in CR decreases with age. Modified Application of CR in Older Adults (MACRO) is a National Institute on Aging (NIA)-funded pragmatic trial that responds to this gap by aiming to increase enrollment of older adults into CR and improving functional outcomes. This article describes the methodology and novel features of the MACRO trial. METHODS: Randomized, controlled trial of a coaching intervention (MACRO-I) vs. usual care for older adults (age ≥ 70 years) eligible for CR after an incident cardiac hospitalization. MACRO-I incorporates innovations including holistic risk assessments, flexible CR format (i.e., helping patients to select a CR design that aligns with their personal risks and preferences), motivational prompts, nutritional emphasis, facilitated deprescription, enhanced education, and home visits. Key modifications were necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, including switching from a performance-based primary endpoint (Short Physical Performance Battery) to a patient-reported measure (Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care Computerized Adaptive Testing). Changes prompted by COVID-19 maintain the original intent of the trial and provide key methodologic advantages. CONCLUSIONS: MACRO is exploring a novel individualized coaching intervention to better enable older patients to participate in CR. Due to COVID-19 many aspects of the MACRO protocol required modification, but the primary objective of the trial is maintained and the updated protocol will more effectively achieve the original goals of the study.

Optimizing the Impact of Pragmatic Clinical Trials for Veteran and Military Populations: Lessons From the Pain Management Collaboratory.

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) are well-suited to address unmet healthcare needs, such as those arising from the dual public health crises of chronic pain and opioid misuse, recently exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. These overlapping epidemics have complex, multifactorial etiologies, and PCTs can be used to investigate the effectiveness of integrated therapies that are currently available but underused. Yet individual pragmatic studies can be limited in their reach because of existing structural and cultural barriers to dissemination and implementation. The National Institutes of Health, Department of Defense, and Department of Veterans Affairs formed an interagency research partnership, the Pain Management Collaboratory. The partnership combines pragmatic trial design with collaborative tools and relationship building within a large network to advance the science and impact of nonpharmacological approaches and integrated models of care for the management of pain and common co-occurring conditions. The Pain Management Collaboratory team supports 11 large-scale, multisite PCTs in veteran and military health systems with a focus on team science with the shared aim that the "whole is greater than the sum of the parts." Herein, we describe this integrated approach and lessons learned, including incentivizing all parties; proactively offering frequent opportunities for problem-solving; engaging stakeholders during all stages of research; and navigating competing research priorities. We also articulate several specific strategies and their practical implications for advancing pain management in active clinical, "real-world," settings.