Administering supplemental oxygen to prevent hypoxaemia is a fundamental treatment for patients hospitalised with acute injury or illness. However, the amount of oxygen administered frequently exceeds that needed to maintain normoxaemia, causing patients to experience hyperoxaemia and wasting supplemental oxygen. Closed-loop, autonomous oxygen titration systems are designed to optimise oxygen delivery by administering the lowest possible oxygen flow that maintains peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂) within a predefined range. For adults hospitalised with an acute injury or illness, it remains uncertain whether the use of a closed-loop, autonomous oxygen titration system safely increases the proportion of time spent in normoxaemia (SpO₂ 90%–96%) compared with usual care.

The Strategy to Avoid Excessive Oxygen using Autonomous Oxygen Titration Intervention trial is a multicentre, unblinded, parallel-group, randomised trial being conducted at four level 1 trauma centres in the USA. The trial compares an autonomous oxygen titration system versus usual care among 300 adults hospitalised for major trauma, burn, acute care surgery or acute respiratory illness. The primary outcome is the proportion of patient-time spent within the targeted normoxaemia range (SpO₂ 90%–96%) as measured by continuous non-invasive pulse oximetry, during the first 72 hours after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include the amount of supplemental oxygen administered and the proportion of time spent in hypoxaemia (SpO₂2 >96%). Specifying the protocol and statistical analysis plan before the conclusion of enrolment increases the rigour, reproducibility and interpretability of the trial. Enrolment began on 6 May 2024.

The trial protocol was approved by the single institutional review board at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and the Office of Human Research Oversight at the Department of Defense. We will present the results at scientific conferences and submit them for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

NCT06374225.

To develop and validate a bilingual experience survey for use in any NHS healthcare setting, to support service improvement.

A prospective mixed-methods study.

Any healthcare setting in NHS Wales including primary, secondary, urgent and planned care.

An opportunistic sample of people with experience of using local healthcare services. Qualitative interviews and focus groups were held to develop a draft survey. These were followed by online data collection from a wide participant sample for statistical validation. The tool was translated and linguistically validated following recognised methods. Patient engagement leads were involved to ensure the tool met their needs.

We conducted and analysed five focus groups and four interviews, consisting of 33 people in total. 12 draft questions were developed related to key aspects of patient experience. A series of online surveys were conducted to test the draft questions, with 769 responses received. Data were analysed to assess completion rates, intra-rater reliability, internal consistency and convergent validity. One question had both sub-par intrarater reliability and poor convergent validity, and despite attempts to improve the wording, it failed to meet minimum requirements of validity and was subsequently removed. The final validated People’s Experience Survey (PES) was subsequently translated into Welsh and validated with service users.

The PES is a reliable and valid tool, suitable for use in any healthcare setting. The robust processes that have been undertaken ensure that the questions included are available bilingually to collect reliable, meaningful data to support service improvement work.

The number of people living with multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs or ‘multimorbidity’) is growing. Evidence indicates that exercise-based rehabilitation can improve health-related quality of life and reduce hospital admissions for a number of single long-term conditions. However, it is increasingly recognised that such condition-focused rehabilitation programmes do not meet the needs of people living with MLTCs. The aims for this study were to (1) evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of the newly developed Personalised Exercise Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) intervention; (2) assess the feasibility of study methods to inform progression to a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) and (3) refine our intervention programme theory.

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with patients receiving and healthcare practitioners delivering the PERFORM intervention, to seek their experiences of the intervention and taking part in the study. Interviews were analysed thematically, informed by Normalisation Process Theory and the programme theory.

Three UK sites (two acute hospital settings, one community-based healthcare setting).

18 of the 60 PERFORM participants and 6 healthcare professionals were interviewed.

The intervention consisted of 8 weeks of supervised group-based exercise rehabilitation and structured self-care symptom-based support.

All participants and staff interviewed found PERFORM useful for physical and mental well-being and noted positive impacts of participation, although some specific modifications to the intervention delivery and training and study methods were identified. Scheduling, staffing and space limitations were barriers that must be considered for future evaluation and implementation. Key intervention mechanisms identified were social support, patient education, building routines and habits, as well as support from healthcare professionals.

We found the PERFORM intervention to be acceptable and feasible, with the potential to improve the health and well-being of people with MLTCs. The findings of the process evaluation inform the future delivery of the PERFORM intervention and the design of our planned full RCT. A definitive trial is needed to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness.

ISRCTN68786622.

Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) capture patients’ healthcare journey experiences. No validated PREMs are specific to vascular surgery patients. This study aims to develop and validate a vascular surgery-specific PREM to assess patient experience and satisfaction.

Patient Reported Experience Measures In Vascular Surgery Enhancement Study is a two-phase multisite sequential mixed-methods study. The qualitative phase will develop a draft PREM; the quantitative phase will validate it. The study will be conducted across three major vascular units in Wales. Up to 40 patients and healthcare professionals will participate in the qualitative phase. Approximately 150–200 patients will be recruited for the quantitative validation. Inclusion criteria are: (1) age ≥18; (2) recent vascular procedure; (3) inpatient vascular care; (4) not cognitively impaired; (5) consent to participate and (6) English or Welsh proficiency. Primary outcomes will be construct validity and reliability. Secondary outcomes will include patient engagement, healthcare provider perspectives and health system impacts. Thematic analysis will be conducted using NVivo. Psychometric validation will include item analysis, internal consistency testing and factor analysis.

The study was approved by the London—Camberwell St Giles Research Ethics Committee, coordinated by the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales (REC reference: 24/PR/0522).

NCT06363175.