Protocol for a national, multicentre study of post-endoscopy colorectal and upper gastrointestinal cancers: The POET study.

AIM: The primary aim of the study is to define the post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer (PCCRC) three-year rate and the post-endoscopy upper gastrointestinal cancer (PEUGIC) three-year rate across public hospitals in Aotearoa New Zealand. METHOD: This retrospective cohort study will be conducted via the trainee-led STRATA Collaborative network. All public hospitals in Aotearoa New Zealand will be eligible to participate. Data will be collected on all adult patients who are diagnosed with colorectal adenocarcinoma within 6 to 48 months of a colonoscopy and all adult patients diagnosed with gastroesophageal cancer within 6 to 48 months of an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The study period will be from 2010 to 2022. The primary outcome is the PCCRC 3-year rate and the PEUGIC 3-year rate. Secondary aims are to define and characterize survival after PCCRC or PEUGIC, the cause of PCCRC as based on the World Endoscopy Organization System of Analysis definitions, trends over time, and centre level variation. CONCLUSION: This protocol describes the methodology for a nationwide retrospective cohort study on PCCRC and PEUGIC in Aotearoa New Zealand. These data will lay the foundation for future studies and quality improvement initiatives.

Management and outcomes of splenic injuries secondary to blunt trauma in patients presenting to major trauma hospitals in Aotearoa New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Non-operative management of splenic injuries has significantly increased in the last decade with an increased emphasis on splenic preservation. This shift was assisted by increased availability of angioembolization, however, potential geographical variability in access exists in Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ). The aim of this study was to assess the management of splenic injury across AoNZ. METHOD: Five-year retrospective study of all patients admitted to AoNZ hospitals with blunt major trauma and a splenic injury. Patients were identified using the National Trauma Registry and cross-referenced with the National Minimum Data Set to determine their management. The primary outcome was the non-operative rate. RESULTS: Seven hundred seventy-three patients were included. Four hundred sixty-nine presented to a tertiary major trauma hospital and 304 to a secondary major trauma hospital. A difference was found in the rate of non-operative management between tertiary and secondary hospitals (P = 0.019). The rate of non-operative management was similar in mild (P = 0.814) and moderate (P = 0.825) injuries, however, significantly higher in severe injuries in tertiary hospitals (P = 0.009). No difference in mortality rate was found. CONCLUSION: This study found a difference in the management of splenic injuries between tertiary and secondary major trauma hospitals; predominantly due to a higher rate of operative management in patients with severe injuries at secondary hospitals. Despite this, no difference in mortality rate was found between tertiary and secondary hospitals.

Interpreting economic evaluations of healthcare interventions: A simple guide.

This guide aims to help healthcare professionals of all backgrounds make sense of economic evaluations to determine whether interventions represent value for money.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of online recorded recovery narratives in improving quality of life for people with non-psychotic mental health problems: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

Narratives describing first-hand experiences of recovery from mental health problems are widely available. Emerging evidence suggests that engaging with mental health recovery narratives can benefit people experiencing mental health problems, but no randomized controlled trial has been conducted as yet. We developed the Narrative Experiences Online (NEON) Intervention, a web application providing self-guided and recommender systems access to a collection of recorded mental health recovery narratives (n=659). We investigated whether NEON Intervention access benefited adults experiencing non-psychotic mental health problems by conducting a pragmatic parallel-group randomized trial, with usual care as control condition. The primary endpoint was quality of life at week 52 assessed by the Manchester Short Assessment (MANSA). Secondary outcomes were psychological distress, hope, self-efficacy, and meaning in life at week 52. Between March 9, 2020 and March 26, 2021, we recruited 1,023 participants from across England (the target based on power analysis was 994), of whom 827 (80.8%) identified as White British, 811 (79.3%) were female, 586 (57.3%) were employed, and 272 (26.6%) were unemployed. Their mean age was 38.4±13.6 years. Mood and/or anxiety disorders (N=626, 61.2%) and stress-related disorders (N=152, 14.9%) were the most common mental health problems. At week 52, our intention-to-treat analysis found a significant baseline-adjusted difference of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.01-0.26, p=0.041) in the MANSA score between the intervention and control groups, corresponding to a mean change of 1.56 scale points per participant, which indicates that the intervention increased quality of life. We also detected a significant baseline-adjusted difference of 0.22 (95% CI: 0.05-0.40, p=0.014) between the groups in the score on the "presence of meaning" subscale of the Meaning in Life Questionnaire, corresponding to a mean change of 1.1 scale points per participant. We found an incremental gain of 0.0142 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (95% credible interval: 0.0059 to 0.0226) and a £178 incremental increase in cost (95% credible interval: -£154 to £455) per participant, generating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £12,526 per QALY compared with usual care. This was lower than the £20,000 per QALY threshold used by the National Health Service in England, indicating that the intervention would be a cost-effective use of health service resources. In the subgroup analysis including participants who had used specialist mental health services at baseline, the intervention both reduced cost (-£98, 95% credible interval: -£606 to £309) and improved QALYs (0.0165, 95% credible interval: 0.0057 to 0.0273) per participant as compared to usual care. We conclude that the NEON Intervention is an effective and cost-effective new intervention for people experiencing non-psychotic mental health problems.

Inequities in colonoscopy access: a retrospective audit of accepted referrals in Te Whatu Ora Counties Manukau.

AIM: Maori are more likely to have colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosed in the emergency setting.[[1]] CRC patients diagnosed in the emergency setting have a higher stage, increased surgical complications and worse survival than those diagnosed elsewhere.[[2]] Access to colonoscopy is crucial to diagnosing CRC prior to an emergency presentation. This study aims to assess inequities in access to symptomatic and surveillance colonoscopies. METHODS: A retrospective audit of all accepted referrals for symptomatic and surveillance colonoscopies made in Te Whatu Ora Counties Manukau in 2018 (n=7,184) with analysis by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 751 Maori patients, 33.4% were removed off the waiting list and therefore did not have their colonoscopy performed, compared to 24.1% of the 4,047 NZ European patients. Maori patients were significantly more likely to be removed off the waiting list than NZ European patients with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.68 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.40-2.02). Pasifika patients were significantly more likely to be removed off the waiting list than NZ European patients with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.30 (95% CI 1.92-2.75). CONCLUSIONS: Maori have significantly less access to colonoscopies than NZ Europeans. We suggest improvements to referral systems locally and nationally to facilitate equitable access.

Development and delivery cost of digital health technologies for mental health: Application to the Narrative Experiences Online Intervention.

Background: The increasing development and use of digital health interventions requires good quality costing information to inform development and commissioning choices about resource allocation decisions. The Narrative Experiences Online (NEON) Intervention is a web-application that delivers recorded mental health recovery narratives to its users. Two randomized controlled trials are testing the NEON Intervention in people with experience of psychosis (NEON) and people experiencing non-psychosis mental health problems (NEON-O). Aim: This study describes and estimates the cost components and total cost of developing and delivering the NEON Intervention. Materials and methods: Total costs for the NEON Trial (739 participants) and NEON-O Trial (1,024 participants) were estimated by: identifying resource use categories involved in intervention development and delivery; accurate measurement or estimation of resource use; and a valuation of resource use to generate overall costs, using relevant unit costs. Resource use categories were identified through consultation with literature, costing reporting standards and iterative consultation with health researchers involved in NEON Intervention development and delivery. Sensitivity analysis was used to test assumptions made. Results: The total cost of developing the NEON Intervention was £182,851. The largest cost components were software development (27%); Lived Experience Advisory Panel workshops (23%); coding the narratives (9%); and researchers' time to source narratives (9%). The total cost of NEON Intervention delivery during the NEON Trial was £118,663 (£349 per NEON Intervention user). In the NEON-O Trial, the total delivery cost of the NEON Intervention was £123,444 (£241 per NEON Intervention user). The largest cost components include updating the narrative collection (50%); advertising (19%); administration (14%); and software maintenance (11%). Uncertainty in the cost of administration had the largest effect on delivery cost estimates. Conclusion: Our work shows that developing and delivering a digital health intervention requires expertise and time commitment from a range of personnel. Teams developing digital narrative interventions need to allocate substantial resources to curating narrative collections. Implications for practice: This study identifies the development and delivery resource use categories of a digital health intervention to promote the consistent reporting of costs and informs future decision-making about the costs of delivering the NEON Intervention at scale. Trial registration: NEON Trial: ISRCTN11152837, registered 13 August 2018, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11152837. NEON-O Trial: ISRCTN63197153, registered 9 January 2020, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN63197153.