Supported Intervention Versus Intervention Alone for Management of Fecal Incontinence in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Multicenter Mixed-Methods Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to test a noninvasive self-management intervention supported by specialist nurses versus intervention alone in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experiencing fecal incontinence and to conduct a qualitative evaluation of the trial. DESIGN: Multicenter, parallel-group, open-label, mixed-methods randomized controlled trial (RCT). SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised patients from a preceding case-finding study who reported fecal incontinence and met study requirements; the RCT was delivered via IBD outpatient clinics in 6 hospitals (5 in major UK cities, 1 rural) between September 2015 and August 2017. Sixteen participants and 11 staff members were interviewed for qualitative evaluation. METHODS: Adults with IBD completed the study activities over a 3-month period following randomization. Each participant received either four 30-minute structured sessions with an IBD clinical nurse specialist and a self-management booklet or the booklet alone. Low retention numbers precluded statistical analysis; individual face-to-face or telephone interviews, recorded digitally and transcribed professionally, were conducted to evaluate the RCT. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using an inductive method. RESULTS: Sixty-seven participants (36%) of the targeted 186 participants were recruited. The groups comprised 32 participants (17% of targeted participants) allocated to the nurse + booklet intervention and 35 (18.8% of targeted participants) allocated to the booklet alone. Less than one-third (n = 21, 31.3%) completed the study. Given the low recruitment and high attrition, statistical analysis of quantitative data was considered futile. Participant interviews were conducted concerning study participation and 4 themes emerged that described experiences of patients and staff. These data provided insights into reasons for low recruitment and high attrition, as well as challenges of delivering resource-heavy studies in busy health service environments. CONCLUSIONS: Alternative approaches to trials of nurse-led interventions in hospital settings are needed as many interfering factors may prevent successful completion.

Clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a technology-supported and solution-focused intervention (DIALOG+) in treatment of patients with chronic depression-study protocol for a multi-site, cluster randomised controlled trial [TACK].

BACKGROUND: Many with an acute depressive disorder go on to develop chronic depression, despite ongoing care. There are few specifically designed interventions to treat chronic depression. DIALOG+, a technology-assisted intervention based on the principles of solution-focused therapy, may be beneficial. It has been shown to be effective as a treatment for patients with psychotic disorders, especially in regards to increasing quality of life. DIALOG+ was designed to be flexibly applied and not diagnosis-specific, aiming to structure communication and generate a personally-tailored care plan. This cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) is part of a programme of research to adapt and test DIALOG+ for patients with chronic depression. METHODS: Patients will be eligible for the trial, if they have exhibited symptoms of depression or non-psychotic low mood for at least 2 years, have regular contact with a clinician and have a low subjective quality of life and moderate depressive symptoms. Clinicians, who routinely see eligible patients, will be recruited from a number of sites across NHS England. Clusters will have between 1 and 6 patients per clinician and will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention (DIALOG+) or active control group (treatment as usual + DIALOG scale). Clinicians in the intervention group are trained and asked to deliver the intervention regularly for 12 months. Active control participants receive treatment as usual and are asked to rate their satisfaction with areas of life and treatment on the DIALOG scale at the end of the clinical session. Approximately 112 clinician clusters will be recruited to reach a total patient sample size of 376. Clinical and social outcomes including costs are assessed at baseline and 3, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. The primary outcome will be subjective quality of life at 12 months. DISCUSSION: This definitive multi-site, cluster RCT aims to evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of DIALOG+ for people with chronic depression. If shown to be effective for this patient population it could be used to improve outcomes of mental health care on a larger scale, ensuring that patients with complex and co-morbid diagnoses can benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11301686 . Registered on 13 Jun 2019.

Supported online self-management versus care as usual for symptoms of fatigue, pain and urgency/incontinence in adults with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD-BOOST): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite being in clinical remission, many people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) live with fatigue, chronic abdominal pain and bowel urgency or incontinence that limit their quality of life. We aim to test the effectiveness of an online self-management programme (BOOST), developed using cognitive behavioural principles and a theoretically informed logic model, and delivered with facilitator support. PRIMARY RESEARCH QUESTION: In people with IBD who report symptoms of fatigue, pain or urgency and express a desire for intervention, does a facilitator-supported tailored (to patient needs) online self-management programme for fatigue, pain and faecal urgency/incontinence improve IBD-related quality of life (measured using the UK-IBDQ) and global rating of symptom relief (0-10 scale) compared with care as usual? METHODS: A pragmatic two-arm, parallel group randomised controlled trial (RCT), of a 12-session facilitator-supported online cognitive behavioural self-management programme versus care as usual to manage symptoms of fatigue, pain and faecal urgency/incontinence in IBD. Patients will be recruited through a previous large-scale survey of unselected people with inflammatory bowel disease. The UK Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire and global rating of symptom relief at 6 months are the co-primary outcomes, with multiple secondary outcomes measured also at 6 and 12 months post randomisation to assess maintenance. The RCT has an embedded pilot study, health economics evaluation and process evaluation. We will randomise 680 patients, 340 in each group. Demographic characteristics and outcome measures will be presented for both study groups at baseline. The UK-IBDQ and global rating of symptom relief at 6 and 12 months post randomisation will be compared between the study groups. DISCUSSION: The BOOST online self-management programme for people with IBD-related symptoms of fatigue, pain and urgency has been designed to be easily scalable and implemented. If it is shown to improve patients' quality of life, this trial will enable clinicians and patients to make informed management decisions. This is the first trial, to our knowledge, focused on multiple symptoms prioritised by both people with IBD and health professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN71618461 . Registered on 9 September 2019.

Clinician Administered and Self-Report Survey Both Effective for Identifying Fecal Incontinence in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To test two methods for reporting of fecal incontinence (FI) in people with inflammatory bowel disease. METHODS: Consecutive patients from IBD clinics in six UK hospitals completed a short three-item case-finding survey about FI; they either completed the survey themselves or were asked the same questions face to face by a clinician. RESULTS: Of 1336 eligible patients with complete data (48% male; mean 43 years; 55% Crohn's disease, 41% ulcerative colitis), 772 were asked about FI face to face, and 564 self-completed the survey: FI was reported in 63% and 56%, respectively (p = 0.012). In regression analyses, those aged 51-60, having Crohn's disease and higher disease activity, were more likely to report FI. Of all respondents, 38.7% were interested in receiving help for their incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: Fecal incontinence affects the majority of people with IBD. Although more patients reported fecal incontinence when asked face to face than self-reported, routine screening by either method in clinical practice is recommended. Over one-third of patients with IBD want help for bowel control problems.

Effect of pedometer-based walking interventions on long-term health outcomes: Prospective 4-year follow-up of two randomised controlled trials using routine primary care data.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking from physical activity (PA) trials with long-term follow-up of both objectively measured PA levels and robust health outcomes. Two primary care 12-week pedometer-based walking interventions in adults and older adults (PACE-UP and PACE-Lift) found sustained objectively measured PA increases at 3 and 4 years, respectively. We aimed to evaluate trial intervention effects on long-term health outcomes relevant to walking interventions, using routine primary care data. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Randomisation was from October 2012 to November 2013 for PACE-UP participants from seven general (family) practices and October 2011 to October 2012 for PACE-Lift participants from three practices. We downloaded primary care data, masked to intervention or control status, for 1,001 PACE-UP participants aged 45-75 years, 36% (361) male, and 296 PACE-Lift participants, aged 60-75 years, 46% (138) male, who gave written informed consent, for 4-year periods following randomisation. The following new events were counted for all participants, including those with preexisting diseases (apart from diabetes, for which existing cases were excluded): nonfatal cardiovascular, total cardiovascular (including fatal), incident diabetes, depression, fractures, and falls. Intervention effects on time to first event post-randomisation were modelled using Cox regression for all outcomes, except for falls, which used negative binomial regression to allow for multiple events, adjusting for age, sex, and study. Absolute risk reductions (ARRs) and numbers needed to treat (NNTs) were estimated. Data were downloaded for 1,297 (98%) of 1,321 trial participants. Event rates were low (<20 per group) for outcomes, apart from fractures and falls. Cox hazard ratios for time to first event post-randomisation for interventions versus controls were nonfatal cardiovascular 0.24 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.77, p = 0.02), total cardiovascular 0.34 (95% CI 0.12-0.91, p = 0.03), diabetes 0.75 (95% CI 0.42-1.36, p = 0.34), depression 0.98 (95% CI 0.46-2.07, p = 0.96), and fractures 0.56 (95% CI 0.35-0.90, p = 0.02). Negative binomial incident rate ratio for falls was 1.07 (95% CI 0.78-1.46, p = 0.67). ARR and NNT for cardiovascular events were nonfatal 1.7% (95% CI 0.5%-2.1%), NNT = 59 (95% CI 48-194); total 1.6% (95% CI 0.2%-2.2%), NNT = 61 (95% CI 46-472); and for fractures 3.6% (95% CI 0.8%-5.4%), NNT = 28 (95% CI 19-125). Main limitations were that event rates were low and only events recorded in primary care records were counted; however, any underrecording would not have differed by intervention status and so should not have led to bias. CONCLUSIONS: Routine primary care data used to assess long-term trial outcomes demonstrated significantly fewer new cardiovascular events and fractures in intervention participants at 4 years. No statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups were demonstrated for other events. Short-term primary care pedometer-based walking interventions can produce long-term health benefits and should be more widely used to help address the public health inactivity challenge. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: PACE-UP isrctn.com ISRCTN98538934; PACE-Lift isrctn.com ISRCTN42122561.

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme.

Measuring change in trials of physical activity interventions: a comparison of self-report questionnaire and accelerometry within the PACE-UP trial.

BACKGROUND: Few trials have compared estimates of change in physical activity (PA) levels using self-reported and objective PA measures when evaluating trial outcomes. The PACE-UP trial offered the opportunity to assess this, using the self-administered International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and waist-worn accelerometry. METHODS: The PACE-UP trial (N = 1023) compared usual care (n = 338) with two pedometer-based walking interventions, by post (n = 339) or with nurse support (n = 346). Participants wore an accelerometer at baseline and 12 months and completed IPAQ for the same 7-day periods. Main outcomes were weekly minutes, all in ≥10 min bouts as per UK PA guidelines of: i) accelerometer moderate-to-vigorous PA (Acc-MVPA) ii) IPAQ moderate+vigorous PA (IPAQ-MVPA) and iii) IPAQ walking (IPAQ-Walk). For each outcome, 12 month values were regressed on baseline to estimate change. RESULTS: Analyses were restricted to 655 (64%) participants who provided data on all outcomes at baseline and 12 months. Both intervention groups significantly increased their accelerometry MVPA minutes/week compared with control: postal group 42 (95% CI 22, 61), nurse group 43 (95% CI 24, 63). IPAQ-Walk minutes/week also increased: postal 57 (95% CI 2, 112), nurse 43 (95% CI -11, 97) but IPAQ-MVPA minutes/week showed non-significant decreases: postal -11 (95% CI -65, 42), nurse -34 (95% CI -87, 19). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the necessity of using a questionnaire focussing on the activities being altered, as with IPAQ-Walk questions. Even then, the change in PA was estimated with far less precision than with accelerometry. Accelerometry is preferred to self-report measurement, minimising bias and improving precision when assessing effects of a walking intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN98538934 . Registered 2 March 2012.

Intervention effect estimates in cluster randomized versus individually randomized trials: a meta-epidemiological study.

BACKGROUND: Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) and individually randomized trials (IRTs) are often pooled together in meta-analyses (MAs) of randomized trials. However, the potential systematic differences in intervention effect estimates between these two trial types has never been investigated. Therefore, we conducted a meta-epidemiological study comparing intervention effect estimates between CRTs and IRTs. METHODS: All Cochrane MAs including at least one CRT and one IRT, published between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, were included. For each MA, we estimated a ratio of odds ratios (ROR) for binary outcomes or a difference of standardized differences (DSMD) for continuous outcomes, where less than 1 (or 0, respectively) indicated a greater intervention effect estimate with CRTs. RESULTS: Among 1301 screened reviews, we selected 121 MAs, of which 76 had a binary outcome and 45 had a continuous outcome. For binary outcomes, intervention effect estimates did not differ between CRTs and IRTs [ROR 1.00, 95% confidence interval (0.93 to 1.08)]. Subgroup and adjusted analyses led to consistent results. For continuous outcomes, the DSMD was 0.13 (0.06 to 0.19). It was lower for MAs with a pharmacological intervention [-0.03, (-0.12 to 0.07)], an objective outcome [0.05, (-0.08 to 0.17)] or after adjusting for trial size [0.06, (-0.01 to 0.15)]. CONCLUSION: For binary outcomes, CRTs and IRTs can safely be pooled in MAs because of an absence of systematic differences between effect estimates. For continuous outcomes, the results were less clear although accounting for trial sample sizes led to a non-significant difference. More research is needed for continuous outcomes and, meanwhile, MAs should be completed with subgroup analyses (CRTs vs IRTs).

Short-term and long-term cost-effectiveness of a pedometer-based exercise intervention in primary care: a within-trial analysis and beyond-trial modelling.

OBJECTIVES: A short-term and long-term cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of two pedometer-based walking interventions compared with usual care. DESIGN: (A) Short-term CEA: parallel three-arm cluster randomised trial randomised by household. (B) Long-term CEA: Markov decision model. SETTING: Seven primary care practices in South London, UK. PARTICIPANTS: (A) Short-term CEA: 1023 people (922 households) aged 45-75 years without physical activity (PA) contraindications. (b) Long-term CEA: a cohort of 100 000 people aged 59-88 years. INTERVENTIONS: Pedometers, 12-week walking programmes and PA diaries delivered by post or through three PA consultations with practice nurses. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Accelerometer-measured change (baseline to 12 months) in average daily step count and time in 10 min bouts of moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA), and EQ-5D-5L quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). METHODS: Resource use costs (£2013/2014) from a National Health Service perspective, presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for each outcome over a 1-year and lifetime horizon, with cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and willingness to pay per QALY. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses evaluate uncertainty. RESULTS: (A) Short-term CEA: At 12 months, incremental cost was £3.61 (£109)/min in ≥10 min MVPA bouts for nurse support compared with control (postal group). At £20 000/QALY, the postal group had a 50% chance of being cost saving compared with control. (B) Long-term CEA: The postal group had more QALYs (+759 QALYs, 95% CI 400 to 1247) and lower costs (-£11 million, 95% CI -12 to -10) than control and nurse groups, resulting in an incremental net monetary benefit of £26 million per 100 000 population. Results were sensitive to reporting serious adverse events, excluding health service use, and including all participant costs. CONCLUSIONS: Postal delivery of a pedometer intervention in primary care is cost-effective long term and has a 50% chance of being cost-effective, through resource savings, within 1 year. Further research should ascertain maintenance of the higher levels of PA, and its impact on quality of life and health service use. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN98538934; Pre-results.

HbA1c and hypoglycaemia in intensively treated type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To establish whether low HbA1c is associated with clinical hypoglycaemia among people with type 2 diabetes prescribed insulins or sulphonylureas. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using routine electronic GP health records collected between January 2013 and December 2015. SETTING: Three east London Clinical Commissioning Groups. PARTICIPANTS: Two cohorts of adults with type 2 diabetes prescribed either (i) insulins with or without other oral antidiabetic medication (n = 6788, 36.4%) or (ii) sulphonylureas with or without other oral antidiabetic medications excluding insulins (n = 11,840, 63.6%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: First clinically recorded hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality. Hazard ratios (HR) adjusting for age, ethnicity, renal function and comorbidities were calculated using Cox regression models. RESULTS: Compared with an HbA1c of 53-63 mmol/mol, the adjusted HR of hypoglycaemia in those with a low HbA1c, below 53 mmol/mol, in the insulin and sulphonylurea cohorts were 1.26 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.62) and 1.54 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.87), respectively. Adjusted HRs of all-cause mortality from low HbA1c in the insulin and sulphonylurea cohorts were 1.54 (95% CI, 1.15 to 2.07) and 1.42 (95% CI, 1.11 to 1.81), respectively. Increasing age and renal impairment were also associated with increased hypoglycaemic risk in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c below 53 mmol/mol was associated with episodes of clinical hypoglycaemia among people with type 2 diabetes prescribed sulphonylureas, and all-cause mortality in those prescribed insulins and sulphonylureas. These findings support the need for reviewing glycaemic targets and the intensities of treatment in those with low HbA1c prescribed insulins or sulphonylureas to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia.

A pedometer-based walking intervention in 45- to 75-year-olds, with and without practice nurse support: the PACE-UP three-arm cluster RCT.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend walking to increase moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) for health benefits. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of a pedometer-based walking intervention in inactive adults, delivered postally or through dedicated practice nurse physical activity (PA) consultations. DESIGN: Parallel three-arm trial, cluster randomised by household. SETTING: Seven London-based general practices. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 11,015 people without PA contraindications, aged 45-75 years, randomly selected from practices, were invited. A total of 6399 people were non-responders, and 548 people self-reporting achieving PA guidelines were excluded. A total of 1023 people from 922 households were randomised to usual care (n = 338), postal intervention (n = 339) or nurse support (n = 346). The recruitment rate was 10% (1023/10,467). A total of 956 participants (93%) provided outcome data. INTERVENTIONS: Intervention groups received pedometers, 12-week walking programmes advising participants to gradually add '3000 steps in 30 minutes' most days weekly and PA diaries. The nurse group was offered three dedicated PA consultations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary and main secondary outcomes were changes from baseline to 12 months in average daily step counts and time in MVPA (in ≥ 10-minute bouts), respectively, from 7-day accelerometry. Individual resource-use data informed the within-trial economic evaluation and the Markov model for simulating long-term cost-effectiveness. Qualitative evaluations assessed nurse and participant views. A 3-year follow-up was conducted. RESULTS: Baseline average daily step count was 7479 [standard deviation (SD) 2671], average minutes per week in MVPA bouts was 94 minutes (SD 102 minutes) for those randomised. PA increased significantly at 12 months in both intervention groups compared with the control group, with no difference between interventions; additional steps per day were 642 steps [95% confidence interval (CI) 329 to 955 steps] for the postal group and 677 steps (95% CI 365 to 989 steps) for nurse support, and additional MVPA in bouts (minutes per week) was 33 minutes per week (95% CI 17 to 49 minutes per week) for the postal group and 35 minutes per week (95% CI 19 to 51 minutes per week) for nurse support. Intervention groups showed no increase in adverse events. Incremental cost per step was 19p and £3.61 per minute in a ≥ 10-minute MVPA bout for nurse support, whereas the postal group took more steps and cost less than the control group. The postal group had a 50% chance of being cost-effective at a £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) threshold within 1 year and had both lower costs [-£11M (95% CI -£12M to -£10M) per 100,000 population] and more QALYs [759 QALYs gained (95% CI 400 to 1247 QALYs)] than the nurse support and control groups in the long term. Participants and nurses found the interventions acceptable and enjoyable. Three-year follow-up data showed persistent intervention effects (nurse support plus postal vs. control) on steps per day [648 steps (95% CI 272 to 1024 steps)] and MVPA bouts [26 minutes per week (95% CI 8 to 44 minutes per week)]. LIMITATIONS: The 10% recruitment level, with lower levels in Asian and socioeconomically deprived participants, limits the generalisability of the findings. Assessors were unmasked to the group. CONCLUSIONS: A primary care pedometer-based walking intervention in 45- to 75-year-olds increased 12-month step counts by around one-tenth, and time in MVPA bouts by around one-third, with similar effects for the nurse support and postal groups, and persistent 3-year effects. The postal intervention provides cost-effective, long-term quality-of-life benefits. A primary care pedometer intervention delivered by post could help address the public health physical inactivity challenge. FUTURE WORK: Exploring different recruitment strategies to increase uptake. Integrating the Pedometer And Consultation Evaluation-UP (PACE-UP) trial with evolving PA monitoring technologies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN98538934. 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. 22, No. 37. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Blood Pressure and Haematological Indices in Twelve Communities in Ashanti, Ghana.

Hypertension is the most important risk factor for cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in Sub-Saharan Africa. In western populations, high haemoglobin levels are associated with raised BP unlike in Sub-Saharan Africa where there is a paucity of data. Our study examines the association between haematological indices with BP variables. Weight, height, BP, and whole blood indices of viscosity (Hb, haematocrit, RBC count, and MCV) were measured in 921 adults (340 men, 581 women; aged 40-75) in 12 communities in Ghana. Mean values for Hb (12.3 g/dl ± 1.7 SD), haematocrit (36.7% ± 5.2), RBC (4.10 million/µL ± 0.64), and MCV were lower than reference values used in Sub-Saharan Africa. Mean BMI was 21.1 ± 4.1 indicating a lean population. Systolic BP increased by 1.0 mmHg (95% CI 0.5-1.5), p < 0.001, for women and 0.5 (0.1-1.0), p = 0.027, for men per unit increase in haematocrit. Similar relationships were found for Hb and RBC but not for MCV or platelets. The relationships were weaker when adjusted for BMI, 0.7 mmHg (0.2-1.2) in women and 0.5 (0.0-1.0) in men. Findings for diastolic BP were similar. Overall haematological indices were low. We have found a significant, positive relationship between BP, Hb, Haematocrit, and RBC count in our population.

Physical activity levels in adults and older adults 3-4 years after pedometer-based walking interventions: Long-term follow-up of participants from two randomised controlled trials in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Physical inactivity is an important cause of noncommunicable diseases. Interventions can increase short-term physical activity (PA), but health benefits require maintenance. Few interventions have evaluated PA objectively beyond 12 months. We followed up two pedometer interventions with positive 12-month effects to examine objective PA levels at 3-4 years. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Long-term follow-up of two completed trials: Pedometer And Consultation Evaluation-UP (PACE-UP) 3-arm (postal, nurse support, control) at 3 years and Pedometer Accelerometer Consultation Evaluation-Lift (PACE-Lift) 2-arm (nurse support, control) at 4 years post-baseline. Randomly selected patients from 10 United Kingdom primary care practices were recruited (PACE-UP: 45-75 years, PACE-Lift: 60-75 years). Intervention arms received 12-week walking programmes (pedometer, handbooks, PA diaries) postally (PACE-UP) or with nurse support (PACE-UP, PACE-Lift). Main outcomes were changes in 7-day accelerometer average daily step counts and weekly time in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) in ≥10-minute bouts in intervention versus control groups, between baseline and 3 years (PACE-UP) and 4 years (PACE-Lift). PACE-UP 3-year follow-up was 67% (681/1,023) (mean age: 59, 64% female), and PACE-Lift 4-year follow-up was 76% (225/298) (mean age: 67, 53% female). PACE-UP 3-year intervention versus control comparisons were as follows: additional steps/day postal +627 (95% CI: 198-1,056), p = 0.004, nurse +670 (95% CI: 237-1,102), p = 0.002; total weekly MVPA in bouts (minutes/week) postal +28 (95% CI: 7-49), p = 0.009, nurse +24 (95% CI: 3-45), p = 0.03. PACE-Lift 4-year intervention versus control comparisons were: +407 (95% CI: -177-992), p = 0.17 steps/day, and +32 (95% CI: 5-60), p = 0.02 minutes/week MVPA in bouts. Neither trial showed sedentary or wear-time differences. Main study limitation was incomplete follow-up; however, results were robust to missing data sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention participants followed up from both trials demonstrated higher levels of objectively measured PA at 3-4 years than controls, similar to previously reported 12-month trial effects. Pedometer interventions, delivered by post or with nurse support, can help address the public health physical inactivity challenge. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: PACE-UP isrctn.com ISRCTN98538934; PACE-Lift isrctn.com ISRCTN42122561.

Interpreting population reach of a large, successful physical activity trial delivered through primary care.

BACKGROUND: Failure to include socio-economically deprived or ethnic minority groups in physical activity (PA) trials may limit representativeness and could lead to implementation of interventions that then increase health inequalities. Randomised intervention trials often have low recruitment rates and rarely assess recruitment bias. A previous trial by the same team using similar methods recruited 30% of the eligible population but was in an affluent setting with few non-white residents and was limited to those over 60 years of age. METHODS: PACE-UP is a large, effective, population-based walking trial in inactive 45-75 year-olds that recruited through seven London general practices. Anonymised practice demographic data were available for all those invited, enabling investigation of inequalities in trial recruitment. Non-participants were invited to complete a questionnaire. RESULTS: From 10,927 postal invitations, 1150 (10.5%) completed baseline assessment. Participation rate ratios (95% CI), adjusted for age and gender as appropriate, were lower in men 0.59 (0.52, 0.67) than women, in those under 55 compared with those ≥65, 0.60 (0.51, 0.71), in the most deprived quintile compared with the least deprived 0.52 (0.39, 0.70) and in Asian individuals compared with whites 0.62 (0.50, 0.76). Black individuals were equally likely to participate as white individuals. Participation was also associated with having a co-morbidity or some degree of health limitation. The most common reasons for non-participation were considering themselves as being too active or lack of time. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting the trial in this diverse setting reduced overall response, with lower response in socio-economically deprived and Asian sub-groups. Trials with greater reach are likely to be more expensive in terms of recruitment and gains in generalizability need to be balanced with greater costs. Differential uptake of successful trial interventions may increase inequalities in PA levels and should be monitored. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN98538934 . Registered 2nd March 2012.

Relating process evaluation measures to complex intervention outcomes: findings from the PACE-UP primary care pedometer-based walking trial.

BACKGROUND: The PACE-UP trial demonstrated positive effects of a pedometer-based walking intervention on objective physical activity (PA) outcomes at three and 12 months in 45-75-year-old primary care patients, in postal and nurse-supported trial arms compared with controls. We explored associations between process evaluation measures and change in PA outcomes. METHODS: The MRC framework guided process evaluation. Three quantitative measures (nurse session attendance [dose delivered], PA diary completion [fidelity] and pedometer use [fidelity]) were selected as independent variables in multi-level models estimating intervention effectiveness on PA outcomes (changes in step-counts and time in moderate-to-vigorous PA [MVPA] levels in ≥ 10-min bouts). RESULTS: Dose: attending all three nurse sessions compared with 0-2 sessions was associated with an increase in steps/day at three and 12 months of 1197 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 627-1766) and 605 (95% CI = 74-1137), respectively; and MVPA in bouts (min/week) at three and 12 months by 74 (95% CI = 45-103) and 30 (95% CI = 3-57), respectively. Fidelity: postal and nurse groups showed strong positive associations of diary return with steps/day at three months: postal 1458 (95% CI = 854-2061), nurse 873 (95% CI = 190-1555). MVPA in bouts (min/week): postal 64 (95% CI = 33-94), nurse 50 (95% CI = 15-85). At 12 months, only the postal group effects remained statistically significant: steps/day 1114 (95% CI = 538-1689), MVPA 47 (95% CI = 18-75). Regular pedometer use in the postal group only was associated with higher three-month and 12-month steps/day: 1029 (95% CI = 383-1675) and 606 (95% CI = 22-1190), respectively, and with MVPA in bouts at three months: 40 (95% CI = 6-73). CONCLUSION: Process evaluation measures demonstrated significant associations with PA outcomes at three and 12 months. We cannot infer causality, but the associations between the process measures and PA outcomes suggest that they were important in enabling the trial changes observed and should be considered core components of the PACE-UP nurse and postal interventions. We have shown the MRC framework to be a useful tool for process evaluation of intervention implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN98538934 . Registered on 2 March 2012.

Self-monitoring of blood pressure in hypertension: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) appears to reduce BP in hypertension but important questions remain regarding effective implementation and which groups may benefit most. This individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed to better understand the effectiveness of BP self-monitoring to lower BP and control hypertension. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomised trials comparing self-monitoring to no self-monitoring in hypertensive patients (June 2016). Two reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility and the authors of eligible trials were approached requesting IPD. Of 2,846 articles in the initial search, 36 were eligible. IPD were provided from 25 trials, including 1 unpublished study. Data for the primary outcomes-change in mean clinic or ambulatory BP and proportion controlled below target at 12 months-were available from 15/19 possible studies (7,138/8,292 [86%] of randomised participants). Overall, self-monitoring was associated with reduced clinic systolic blood pressure (sBP) compared to usual care at 12 months (-3.2 mmHg, [95% CI -4.9, -1.6 mmHg]). However, this effect was strongly influenced by the intensity of co-intervention ranging from no effect with self-monitoring alone (-1.0 mmHg [-3.3, 1.2]), to a 6.1 mmHg (-9.0, -3.2) reduction when monitoring was combined with intensive support. Self-monitoring was most effective in those with fewer antihypertensive medications and higher baseline sBP up to 170 mmHg. No differences in efficacy were seen by sex or by most comorbidities. Ambulatory BP data at 12 months were available from 4 trials (1,478 patients), which assessed self-monitoring with little or no co-intervention. There was no association between self-monitoring and either lower clinic or ambulatory sBP in this group (clinic -0.2 mmHg [-2.2, 1.8]; ambulatory 1.1 mmHg [-0.3, 2.5]). Results for diastolic blood pressure (dBP) were similar. The main limitation of this work was that significant heterogeneity remained. This was at least in part due to different inclusion criteria, self-monitoring regimes, and target BPs in included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Self-monitoring alone is not associated with lower BP or better control, but in conjunction with co-interventions (including systematic medication titration by doctors, pharmacists, or patients; education; or lifestyle counselling) leads to clinically significant BP reduction which persists for at least 12 months. The implementation of self-monitoring in hypertension should be accompanied by such co-interventions.

'You started something then I continued by myself': a qualitative study of physical activity maintenance.

BACKGROUND: Most mid-life and older adults are not achieving recommended physical activity (PA) targets and effective interventions are needed to increase and maintain PA long-term for health benefits. The Pedometer And Consultation Evaluation (PACE-UP) trial, a three-armed primary care pedometer-based walking intervention in those aged 45-75 years, demonstrated increased PA levels at 12 months. A three-year follow-up was conducted to evaluate long-term PA maintenance, including a qualitative component. Aim To examine facilitators and barriers to PA maintenance in mid-life and older adults previously involved in a PA trial. METHOD: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 60 PACE-UP participants across all study arms. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded independently by researchers, prior to thematic analysis. Findings Two-thirds of participants felt since the PACE-UP trial they had an awareness of PA, with the pedometer reported as 'kick-starting' regular activity, and then helped them to maintain regular activity. PA facilitators included: maintaining good health, self-motivation, social support and good weather. Lack of time was the most frequently cited barrier. Other barriers were often the inverse of the facilitators; for example, poor health and bad weather. Participants described the type of 'top-up' intervention they would find beneficial to aid PA maintenance (eg, text messages, online resources and walking groups). CONCLUSION: A challenge for future PA interventions is to transform barriers into facilitators; for example, educating trial participants about the value of PA for many chronic health conditions to change this from inhibiting to promoting PA. Participants provided ideas for encouraging PA maintenance which could be incorporated into future interventions.

Effects of antenatal diet and physical activity on maternal and fetal outcomes: individual patient data meta-analysis and health economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Diet- and physical activity-based interventions in pregnancy have the potential to alter maternal and child outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether or not the effects of diet and lifestyle interventions vary in subgroups of women, based on maternal body mass index (BMI), age, parity, Caucasian ethnicity and underlying medical condition(s), by undertaking an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. We also evaluated the association of gestational weight gain (GWG) with adverse pregnancy outcomes and assessed the cost-effectiveness of the interventions. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment database were searched from October 2013 to March 2015 (to update a previous search). REVIEW METHODS: Researchers from the International Weight Management in Pregnancy Collaborative Network shared the primary data. For each intervention type and outcome, we performed a two-step IPD random-effects meta-analysis, for all women (except underweight) combined and for each subgroup of interest, to obtain summary estimates of effects and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and synthesised the differences in effects between subgroups. In the first stage, we fitted a linear regression adjusted for baseline (for continuous outcomes) or a logistic regression model (for binary outcomes) in each study separately; estimates were combined across studies using random-effects meta-analysis models. We quantified the relationship between weight gain and complications, and undertook a decision-analytic model-based economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions. RESULTS: Diet and lifestyle interventions reduced GWG by an average of 0.70 kg (95% CI -0.92 to -0.48 kg; 33 studies, 9320 women). The effects on composite maternal outcome [summary odds ratio (OR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.03; 24 studies, 8852 women] and composite fetal/neonatal outcome (summary OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.08; 18 studies, 7981 women) were not significant. The effect did not vary with baseline BMI, age, ethnicity, parity or underlying medical conditions for GWG, and composite maternal and fetal outcomes. Lifestyle interventions reduce Caesarean sections (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.99), but not other individual maternal outcomes such as gestational diabetes mellitus (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.10), pre-eclampsia or pregnancy-induced hypertension (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16) and preterm birth (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13). There was no significant effect on fetal outcomes. The interventions were not cost-effective. GWG, including adherence to the Institute of Medicine-recommended targets, was not associated with a reduction in complications. Predictors of GWG were maternal age (summary estimate -0.10 kg, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.06 kg) and multiparity (summary estimate -0.73 kg, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.23 kg). LIMITATIONS: The findings were limited by the lack of standardisation in the components of intervention, residual heterogeneity in effects across studies for most analyses and the unavailability of IPD in some studies. CONCLUSION: Diet and lifestyle interventions in pregnancy are clinically effective in reducing GWG irrespective of risk factors, with no effects on composite maternal and fetal outcomes. FUTURE WORK: The differential effects of lifestyle interventions on individual pregnancy outcomes need evaluation. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003804. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Development and validation of Prediction models for Risks of complications in Early-onset Pre-eclampsia (PREP): a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of early-onset pre-eclampsia (before 34 weeks' gestation) is variable. Accurate prediction of complications is required to plan appropriate management in high-risk women. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate prediction models for outcomes in early-onset pre-eclampsia. DESIGN: Prospective cohort for model development, with validation in two external data sets. SETTING: Model development: 53 obstetric units in the UK. Model transportability: PIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk for mothers) and PETRA (Pre-Eclampsia TRial Amsterdam) studies. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women with early-onset pre-eclampsia. SAMPLE SIZE: Nine hundred and forty-six women in the model development data set and 850 women (634 in PIERS, 216 in PETRA) in the transportability (external validation) data sets. PREDICTORS: The predictors were identified from systematic reviews of tests to predict complications in pre-eclampsia and were prioritised by Delphi survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the composite of adverse maternal outcomes established using Delphi surveys. The secondary outcome was the composite of fetal and neonatal complications. ANALYSIS: We developed two prediction models: a logistic regression model (PREP-L) to assess the overall risk of any maternal outcome until postnatal discharge and a survival analysis model (PREP-S) to obtain individual risk estimates at daily intervals from diagnosis until 34 weeks. Shrinkage was used to adjust for overoptimism of predictor effects. For internal validation (of the full models in the development data) and external validation (of the reduced models in the transportability data), we computed the ability of the models to discriminate between those with and without poor outcomes (c-statistic), and the agreement between predicted and observed risk (calibration slope). RESULTS: The PREP-L model included maternal age, gestational age at diagnosis, medical history, systolic blood pressure, urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, platelet count, serum urea concentration, oxygen saturation, baseline treatment with antihypertensive drugs and administration of magnesium sulphate. The PREP-S model additionally included exaggerated tendon reflexes and serum alanine aminotransaminase and creatinine concentration. Both models showed good discrimination for maternal complications, with anoptimism-adjusted c-statistic of 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 0.84] for PREP-L and 0.75 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.78) for the PREP-S model in the internal validation. External validation of the reduced PREP-L model showed good performance with a c-statistic of 0.81 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.85) in PIERS and 0.75 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.86) in PETRA cohorts for maternal complications, and calibrated well with slopes of 0.93 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.10) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.48 to 1.32), respectively. In the PIERS data set, the reduced PREP-S model had a c-statistic of 0.71 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.75) and a calibration slope of 0.67 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.79). Low gestational age at diagnosis, high urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, increased serum urea concentration, treatment with antihypertensive drugs, magnesium sulphate, abnormal uterine artery Doppler scan findings and estimated fetal weight below the 10th centile were associated with fetal complications. CONCLUSIONS: The PREP-L model provided individualised risk estimates in early-onset pre-eclampsia to plan management of high- or low-risk individuals. The PREP-S model has the potential to be used as a triage tool for risk assessment. The impacts of the model use on outcomes need further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN40384046. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Prediction of complications in early-onset pre-eclampsia (PREP): development and external multinational validation of prognostic models.

BACKGROUND: Unexpected clinical deterioration before 34 weeks gestation is an undesired course in early-onset pre-eclampsia. To safely prolong preterm gestation, accurate and timely prediction of complications is required. METHOD: Women with confirmed early onset pre-eclampsia were recruited from 53 maternity units in the UK to a large prospective cohort study (PREP-946) for development of prognostic models for the overall risk of experiencing a complication using logistic regression (PREP-L), and for predicting the time to adverse maternal outcome using a survival model (PREP-S). External validation of the models were carried out in a multinational cohort (PIERS-634) and another cohort from the Netherlands (PETRA-216). Main outcome measures were C-statistics to summarise discrimination of the models and calibration plots and calibration slopes. RESULTS: A total of 169 mothers (18%) in the PREP dataset had adverse outcomes by 48 hours, and 633 (67%) by discharge. The C-statistics of the models for predicting complications by 48 hours and by discharge were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.81-0.87; PREP-S) and 0.82 (0.80-0.84; PREP-L), respectively. The PREP-S model included maternal age, gestation, medical history, systolic blood pressure, deep tendon reflexes, urine protein creatinine ratio, platelets, serum alanine amino transaminase, urea, creatinine, oxygen saturation and treatment with antihypertensives or magnesium sulfate. The PREP-L model included the above except deep tendon reflexes, serum alanine amino transaminase and creatinine. On validation in the external PIERS dataset, the reduced PREP-S model showed reasonable calibration (slope 0.80) and discrimination (C-statistic 0.75) for predicting adverse outcome by 48 hours. Reduced PREP-L model showed excellent calibration (slope: 0.93 PIERS, 0.90 PETRA) and discrimination (0.81 PIERS, 0.75 PETRA) for predicting risk by discharge in the two external datasets. CONCLUSIONS: PREP models can be used to obtain predictions of adverse maternal outcome risk, including early preterm delivery, by 48 hours (PREP-S) and by discharge (PREP-L), in women with early onset pre-eclampsia in the context of current care. They have a potential role in triaging high-risk mothers who may need transfer to tertiary units for intensive maternal and neonatal care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN40384046 , retrospectively registered.