Feasibility Study for a Randomised Controlled Trial for the Topical Treatment of Impetigo in Australian General Practice.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gorges H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8628881 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:This trial examined the optimal setting for follow-up of patients after treatment for colon cancer by either general practitioners or surgeons. In all, 203 consenting patients who had undergone potentially curative treatment for colon cancer were randomised to follow-up by general practitioners or surgeons. Follow-up guidance recommended three monthly clinical review and annual faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) and were identical in both study arms. Primary outcome measures (measured at baseline, 12 and 24 months were (1) quality of life, SF-12; physical and mental component scores, (2) anxiety and depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and (3) patient satisfaction: Patient Visit-Specific Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes (at 24 months) were: investigations, number and timing of recurrences and deaths. In all, 170 patients were available for follow-up at 12 months and 157 at 24 months. At 12 and 24 months there were no differences in scores for quality of life (physical component score, P=0.88 at 12 months; P=0.28 at 24 months: mental component score, P=0.51, P=0.47; adjusted), anxiety (P=0.72; P=0.11) depression (P=0.28; P=0.80) or patient satisfaction (P=0.06, 24 months). General practitioners ordered more FOBTs than surgeons (rate ratio 2.4, 95% CI 1.4-4.4), whereas more colonoscopies (rate ratio 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0), and ultrasounds (rate ratio 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-1.0) were undertaken in the surgeon-led group. Results suggest similar recurrence, time to detection and death rates in each group. Colon cancer patients with follow-up led by surgeons or general practitioners experience similar outcomes, although patterns of investigation vary.
| S-EPMC2361245 | biostudies-other
Project description:Depression is a common illness with great human costs and a significant burden on the public economy. Previous studies have indicated that collaborative care (CC) has a positive effect on symptoms when provided to people with depression, but CC has not yet been applied in a Danish context. We therefore developed a model for CC (the Collabri model) to treat people with depression in general practice in Denmark. Since systematic identification of patients is an "active ingredient" in CC and some literature suggests case finding as the best alternative to standard detection, the two detection methods are examined as part of the study. The aim is to investigate if treatment according to the Collabri model has an effect on depression symptoms when provided to people with depression in general practice in Denmark, and to examine if case finding is a better method to detect depression in general practice than standard detection.The trial is a cluster-randomised, clinical superiority trial investigating the effect of treatment according to the Collabri model for CC, compared to treatment as usual for 480 participants diagnosed with depression in general practice in the Capital Region of Denmark. The primary outcome is depression symptoms (Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI-II)) after 6 months. Secondary outcomes include depression symptoms (BDI-II) after 15 months, anxiety symptoms (Beck's Anxiety Inventory (BAI)), level of functioning (Global Assessment of Function (GAF)) and psychological stress (Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R)). In addition, case finding (with the recommended screening tool Major Depression Inventory (MDI)) and standard detection of depression is examined in a cluster-randomized controlled design. Here, the primary outcome is the positive predictive value of referral diagnosis.If the Collabri model is shown to be superior to treatment as usual, the study will contribute with important knowledge on how to improve treatment of depression in general practice, with major benefit to patients and society. If case finding is shown to be superior to standard detection, it will be recommended as the detection method in future treatment according to the Collabri model.ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02678845 . Retrospectively registered on 7 February 2016.
| S-EPMC5521147 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionManaging patients with multiple conditions (multimorbidity) is a major challenge for healthcare systems internationally, particularly in older patients. Multimorbidity and subsequent polypharmacy increase treatment burden and the risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing, and both are complex to manage in primary care. Limited evidence suggests integration of pharmacists into general practice teams could improve medication management for patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Building on findings from a non-randomised, uncontrolled General Practice Pharmacist (GPP) feasibility study conducted in Irish primary care, the aim of this study is to conduct a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) of the GPP study, to assess feasibility, intervention impact, costs and appropriateness of continuing to a definitive cRCT.Methods and analysisThis pilot cRCT will involve 8 general practitioner (GP) practices and 120 patients. Practices will identify and recruit patients aged ≥65 years, who are taking ≥10 regular medications. Practices will be allocated to intervention or control after baseline data collection. Intervention practices will have a pharmacist integrated within their service, working with GPs, patients and practice staff to optimise prescribing and other medication-related activities. Control practices will provide standard GP care. The primary feasibility outcomes will include recruitment rate, uptake of medication reviews and study retention. For the primary clinical outcome, the number of potentially inappropriate prescribing incidences per patient will be collected. Secondary outcomes will include medication-related outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures, and data pertaining to the role and impact of the pharmacist on prescribing. In addition, economic and process evaluations will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by the Irish College of General Practitioners Research Ethics Committee and will be performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals and be presented at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN Registry (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18752158).
| S-EPMC7986865 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Hand osteoarthritis is a common and disabling chronic joint disease with a lack of effective therapies. Emerging evidence suggests the role of local inflammation in causing pain in hand osteoarthritis. Corticosteroids are potent anti-inflammatory drugs used in many rheumatic diseases. The aim of this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial is to determine whether topical corticosteroid reduces pain over 6 weeks in patients with hand osteoarthritis. METHODS:One hundred participants with hand osteoarthritis will be recruited from the community in Melbourne, Australia, and randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either topical Diprosone OV or placebo ointment administered 3 times daily on the painful hand joints for 6 weeks. The primary outcome is pain reduction (assessed by 100 mm visual analogue scale) at 6 weeks. The secondary outcomes include changes in pain and function assessed using Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis, Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index, Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire, and tender and swollen joint count at 6 weeks. Adverse events will be recorded. The primary analysis will be by intention to treat, including all participants in their randomised groups. DISCUSSION:This study will provide high-quality evidence to determine whether topical corticosteroid reduces pain over 6 weeks in patients with hand osteoarthritis, with major clinical and public health importance by informing clinical practice guidelines for the management of hand osteoarthritis and reducing the burden of the disabling disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12620000599976 . Registered 22 May 2020.
| S-EPMC8670184 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRandomised controlled trials have shown the efficacy of several treatment modalities for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in selected populations. The effectiveness in daily practice has hardly been investigated, especially in primary care and is dependent on choices between all possible treatment options and best investigated in a comprehensive study, including all treatment modalities (watchful waiting, alpha-blockers, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors, and surgery).AimAssessment of the effectiveness of a comprehensive treatment protocol for LUTS in primary care.Design of studyRandomised controlled trial.SettingFourteen general practices in the Netherlands.MethodInterventiontreatment protocol based on a formalised expert opinion. Control condition: usual care.Study population208 subjects with moderate to severe LUTS (IPSS > or =8, median = 13).Outcome measuressymptom severity (IPSS [International Prostate Symptom Score]), bother score (Dan-PSS [Danish Prostate Symptom Score]), and maximum urinary flow (Q(max)); incidence of acute urinary retention and urinary tract infections.ResultsIn the intervention group markedly more subjects used an alpha-blocker at end of follow-up than in the usual care group (24% versus 6%). No significant differences were found between intervention and control group in IPSS, Q(max) or Dan-PSS.Conclusionalpha-blockers and watchful waiting are the most frequent treatment modalities for LUTS in primary care. Our study showed no evidence that a protocol using well-defined indications for all possible treatment modalities based on a formalised expert opinion procedure has added value. Based on our results, we cannot recommend a broadening of the indication for alpha-blockers, which, however, seems to be the current trend.
| S-EPMC1934054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThrough addressing main barriers to the uptake of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) among Australian women, the Australian Contraceptive ChOice pRoject (ACCORd) trialled an educational intervention targeting general practitioners (GPs) and provided those in the intervention group with a rapid referral service for quick insertion. The cluster randomised controlled trial resulted in greater uptake of LARC in the intervention group. This protocol paper describes a longitudinal follow-up to the ACCORd Study to assess the long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.Methods and analysisWomen participants (patients of ACCORd GPs) completed a baseline, 6-month and 12-month survey. These participants will be invited to complete an additional follow-up survey 3 years post completion of their baseline interview. Based on the original ACCORd Study tools, the online survey will address long-term outcomes including contraceptive continuation rates and reproductive history, any unintended pregnancies, satisfaction and concerns with their current contraceptive method, and an assessment of quality of life. We will analyse data using binary regression models with generalised estimating equations and robust standard errors to account for clustering.DiscussionDemonstration of sustained use, effectiveness at reducing unwanted pregnancies and cost-effectiveness of this strategy among this cohort of Australian primary care patients, will strengthen the policy and programme urgency of addressing wider dissemination of these strategies and replicating the study elsewhere.Ethics and disseminationThe ACCORd Study received approval from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee: CF16/188-201000080. Additionally, an amendment to conduct this 3-year longitudinal follow-up survey has been approved. The trial follow-up outcomes will be disseminated through formal academic pathways, including journal articles, national and international conferences and reports as well as using more 'mainstream' strategies such as seminars, workshops and media engagement. Additionally, outcomes will be communicated through policy briefs to Australian state and federal governments.Trail registration numberThis trial is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Trials Registry ACTRN12615001346561. Recruitment and data collection have been completed for the baseline, 6-month and 12-month surveys. Data collection for the 3-year survey commenced in August 2019.
| S-EPMC7509957 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe paper examines the key issues experienced in recruiting and retaining practice involvement in a large complex intervention trial in Australian General Practice.MethodsReflective notes made by research staff and telephone interviews with staff from general practices which expressed interest, took part or withdrew from a trial of a complex general practice intervention.ResultsRecruitment and retention difficulties were due to factors inherent in the demands and context of general practice, the degree of engagement of primary care organisations (Divisions of General Practice), perceived benefits by practices, the design of the trial and the timing and complexity of data collection.ConclusionThere needs to be clearer articulation to practices of the benefits of the research to participants and streamlining of the design and processes of data collection and intervention to fit in with their work practices. Ultimately deeper engagement may require additional funding and ongoing participation through practice research networks.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ACTRN12605000788673.
| S-EPMC2533668 | biostudies-literature
Project description:An increasing number of people are living with multimorbidity. The evidence base for how best to manage these patients is weak. Current clinical guidelines generally focus on single conditions, which may not reflect the needs of patients with multimorbidity. The aim of the 3D study is to develop, implement and evaluate an intervention to improve the management of patients with multimorbidity in general practice.This is a pragmatic two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial. 32 general practices around Bristol, Greater Manchester and Glasgow will be randomised to receive either the '3D intervention' or usual care. 3D is a complex intervention including components affecting practice organisation, the conduct of patient reviews, integration with secondary care and measures to promote change in practice organisation. Changes include improving continuity of care and replacing reviews of each disease with patient-centred reviews with a focus on patients' quality of life, mental health and polypharmacy. We aim to recruit 1383 patients who have 3 or more chronic conditions. This provides 90% power at 5% significance level to detect an effect size of 0.27 SDs in the primary outcome, which is health-related quality of life at 15 months using the EQ-5D-5L. Secondary outcome measures assess patient centredness, illness burden and treatment burden. The primary analysis will be a multilevel regression model adjusted for baseline, stratification/minimisation, clustering and important co-variables. Nested process evaluation will assess implementation, mechanisms of effectiveness and interaction of the intervention with local context. Economic analysis of cost-consequences and cost-effectiveness will be based on quality-adjusted life years.This study has approval from South-West (Frenchay) National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee (14/SW/0011). Findings will be disseminated via final report, peer-reviewed publications and guidance to healthcare professionals, commissioners and policymakers.ISRCTN06180958; Pre-results.
| S-EPMC4854003 | biostudies-other
Project description:Objective. To investigate whether patients on long-term antisecretory medication need to continue treatment to control symptoms. Methods. A double-blinded randomised placebo-controlled trial in general practices in Denmark. Patients aged 18-90 who were treated with antisecretory drugs on a long-term basis were randomized to esomeprazole 40?mg or identical placebo. Outcome measures were time to discontinuation with trial medication due to failed symptom control analysed as survival data. The proportion of patients stopping trial medication during the one-year follow-up was estimated. Results. A total of 171 patients were included with a median prior duration of antisecretory treatment of four years (range: 0.5 to 14.6 years). 86 patients received esomeprazole 40?mg and 85 patients received placebo. At 12 months, statistically significantly more patients in the placebo group had discontinued (73% (62/85)) compared with the esomeprazole group (21% (18/86); p < 0.001). Conclusions. Long-term users of antisecretory drugs showed a preference for the active drug compared to placebo. However, 27% of patients continued on placebo throughout the study and did not need to reinstitute usual treatment. One in five patients treated with esomeprazole discontinued trial medication due to unsatisfactory symptom control. Discontinuation of antisecretory treatment should be considered in long-term users of antisecretory drugs. This trial is registered with Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00120315.
| S-EPMC4515283 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Falls are common among older people, and General Practitioners (GPs) could play an important role in implementing strategies to manage fall risk. Despite this, fall prevention is not a routine activity in general practice settings. The iSOLVE cluster randomised controlled trial aimed to evaluate implementation of a fall prevention decision tool in general practice. This paper sought to describe the strategies used and reflect on the enablers and barriers relevant to successful recruitment of general practices, GPs and their patients. METHODS:Recruitment was conducted within the geographical area of a Primary Health Network in Northern Sydney, Australia. General practices and GPs were engaged via online surveys, mailed invitations to participate, educational workshops, practitioner networks and promotional practice visits. Patients 65?years or older were recruited via mailed invitations, incorporating the practice letterhead and the name(s) of participating GP(s). Observations of recruitment strategies, results and enabling factors were recorded in field notes as descriptive and narrative data, and analysed using mixed-methods. RESULTS:It took 19?months to complete recruitment of 27 general practices, 75 GPs and 560 patients. The multiple strategies used to engage general practices and GPs were collectively useful in reaching the targeted sample size. Practice visits were valuable in engaging GPs and staff, establishing interest in fall prevention and commitment to the trial. A mix of small, medium and large practices were recruited. While some were recruited as a whole-practice, other practices had few or half of the number of GPs recruited. The importance of preventing falls in older patients, simplicity of research design, provision of resources and logistic facilitation of patient recruitment appealed to GPs. Recruitment of older patients was successfully achieved by mailed invitations which was a strategy that was familiar to practice staff and patients. Patient response rates were above the expected 10% for most practices. Many practices (n =?17) achieved the targeted number of 20 or more patients. CONCLUSIONS:Recruitment in general practice settings can be successfully achieved through multiple recruitment strategies, effective communication and rapport building, ensuring research topic and design suit general practice needs, and using familiar communication strategies to engage patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The trial was prospectively registered on 29 April 2015 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry www.anzctr.org.au (trial ID: ACTRN12615000401550).
| S-EPMC6907149 | biostudies-literature