Visual impairment is reported to affect 40%–50% of children with cerebral palsy (CP). Vision difficulties in the context of rehabilitation are often under-recognised, under-treated and therefore under-studied, pointing to an urgent need for the development of evidence-based vision interventions for infants and toddlers with cerebral vision impairment (CVI). We present the protocol of a multisite pragmatic pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) of feasibility, acceptability and preliminary efficacy of an early vision-awareness and parent-directed environmental enrichment programme for infants with or at risk of CP under 7 months corrected age (CA) with vision impairment.

The main objective is to determine the feasibility and acceptability of the Vision Intervention for Seeing Impaired Babies: Learning through Enrichment (VISIBLE) intervention. We will estimate the preliminary effects of the programme on infants’ visual functions and early development, as compared with standard community-based care (SCC).

A two-group RCT will be conducted. Infants at 3–6 months at entry, with severe visual impairment and at high risk of CP, will be enrolled and randomised (n=16 per group) to receive the VISIBLE intervention compared to SCC. Randomisation will be completed through an independent automated process (Research Electronic Data Capture). VISIBLE intervention will be delivered by a therapist through home visits (90–120 min) once every 2 weeks. Completion of 10 visits (80% of the intervention target dose) within 6 months is required for adherence to the VISIBLE trial. Outcome will be assessed at 12 months CA. Visual function will be evaluated with the Infant Battery for Vision, motor outcomes with the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales, Second Edition. Developmental quotients, infant quality of life, parent well-being and parent-infant relationship will be also monitored through standardised tools.

The enrolling sites have historically demonstrated rapid and effective translation of successful evidence-based interventions into routine clinical practice, as well as the dissemination of the findings through local, national and international scientific meetings.

ACTRN12618000932268.

Shared decision-making is widely advocated in policy and practice, but how it is to be applied in a high-stakes clinical decision such as major lower limb amputation due to chronic limb-threatening ischaemia or diabetic foot is unclear. The aim of this study was to explore the communication, consent, risk prediction and decision-making process in relation to major lower limb amputation.

A qualitative study (done as part of a broader mixed-methods study) using semi-structured interviews. Interview transcriptions were analysed using thematic analysis.

Vascular centres in three large National Health Service hospitals in Wales and England, UK, between 1 October 2020 and 30 September 2022.

A purposive sample of 18 patients for whom major lower limb amputation was considered as a treatment option/carried out, with interviews conducted before or within 4 months of amputation and 4–6 months after amputation. A further purposive sample of 20 healthcare professionals (including eight surgeons) involved in supporting or conducting major lower limb amputation decision-making.

Five major categories were identified that highlighted the challenges of ensuring shared decision-making associated with major lower limb amputation: (i) patients’ limited understanding, (ii) variable patient attitudes to decision-making, (iii) healthcare professionals’ perceived challenges to sharing decision-making, (iv) surgeons’ paternalism and (v) patients’ and healthcare professionals’ decisional regret/possible consequences of challenges.

Amputation is a life-changing decision for both patients and healthcare professionals, with huge consequences. Despite being considered the gold standard, our findings highlight several challenges to effective shared decision-making for major lower limb amputation. Shared decision-making training for healthcare professionals is paramount if these limitations are to be addressed and patients are to feel confident in being adequately informed about the treatment decisions that they make.

NCT04903756.

Major lower limb amputation, defined as an amputation above the level of the ankle joint, is a substantial cause of morbidity and mortality. Limited data exist on the burden, aetiology and outcomes of major lower limb amputations in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This is despite increasing rates of diabetes, peripheral arterial disease and trauma, with further projected increases in these conditions, which often precede major lower limb amputation. The Regional Assessment of Amputations in sub-Saharan Africa (RAMPs) study aims to address this knowledge gap by performing a multicentre, prospective study of major lower limb amputations across the region.

We describe a prospective, multicentre observational cohort study enrolling patients undergoing major lower limb amputation at hospitals in SSA over a consecutive 6-month period. Consecutive patients will be included, and data will be collected from medical records until discharge, death or 30 days postoperatively, whichever is sooner. The primary outcome is in-hospital or 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes include the aetiology of amputations and in-hospital complications. We will also examine systems and processes using a facility survey of each participating centre. The study will collect system-level, patient-level and outcome-level data. Our sample size calculation suggests 904 patients need to be recruited.

The RAMPs study will provide a snapshot of the current outcomes and aetiology of major lower limb amputation in SSA. It will show if variation in outcomes and aetiology in patients in the region exists and provide information on the healthcare processes and systems in those who may be at risk of lower limb amputation. Ethical approval has been granted by the University of Birmingham (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Committee reference: ERN_2929-Jan2025) and the College of Surgeons of East, Central and Southern Africa (COSECSA Institutional review board reference COSECSA/REC/2025/07). Findings will be disseminated throughout the region at local, national and international conferences and through at least one peer-reviewed manuscript.

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.