The ‘time-limited trial’ for patients with critical illness is a collaborative plan made by clinicians, patients and families to use life-sustaining therapies for a defined duration. After this period, the patient’s response to therapy informs decisions about continuing recovery-focused care or transitioning to comfort-focused care. The promise of time-limited trials to help navigate the uncertain limits and benefits of life-sustaining therapies has been extensively discussed in the palliative and critical care literature, leading to their dissemination into clinical practice. However, we have little evidence to guide clinicians in how to conduct time-limited trials, leading to substantial variation in how and why they are currently used. The overall purpose of this study is to characterise the features of an optimal time-limited trial through a rich understanding of how they are currently shaping critical care delivery.
We are conducting an observational, multicentre, focused ethnography of time-limited trials in patients with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in six intensive care units (ICUs) within five hospitals across the US. Study participants include patients, their surrogate decision makers and ICU clinicians. We are pursuing two complementary analyses of this rich data set using the open-ended, inductive approach of constructivist grounded theory and, in parallel, the structured, deductive methods of systems engineering. This cross-disciplinary, tailored approach intentionally preserves the tension between time-limited trials’ conceptual formulation and their heterogeneous, real-world use.
This study has been reviewed and approved by the University of Wisconsin Institutional Review Board (IRB) as the single IRB (ID: 2022-1681; initial approval date 23 January 2023). Our findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations, and summaries for the public.
This study aimed to assess construct validity against commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), test–retest reliability and responsiveness of seven Dutch-Flemish Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computerised adaptive testing (CATs) in Dutch adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), and assess their acceptability in healthcare providers and people with T2D.
A cross-sectional observational study in people with T2D and qualitative study involving both people with T2D and healthcare professionals.
Participants with T2D were recruited from the ongoing Hoorn Diabetes Care System cohort in the West-Friesland area of the Netherlands. Additionally, people with T2D and advanced chronic kidney disease were recruited at the outpatient clinics of Amsterdam University Medical Centre and ‘Niercentrum aan de Amstel’, both in the Amsterdam area of the Netherlands. The healthcare professionals involved in the qualitative part were recruited at the Amsterdam University Medical Centre.
314 people with T2D (age 64.0±10.8 years, 63.7% men).
Participants completed seven PROMIS CATs (assessing (1) Physical Function, (2) Pain Interference, (3) Fatigue, (4) Sleep Disturbance, (5) Anxiety, (6) Depression and (7) Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities), and PROMs measuring similar constructs. After 2 weeks and 6 months, participants completed the CATs measures again, together with seven Global Rating Scales (GRS) on perceived change in each domain. Construct validity was assessed using Pearson’s correlations. Test–retest reliability was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Measurement error was assessed by the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Responsiveness was assessed by correlations between change scores on the PROMIS CAT and GRS. Acceptability was assessed through focus groups and interviews in healthcare providers and people with T2D.
Except for Fatigue, all PROMIS CAT domains demonstrated sufficient construct validity, since ≥75% of the results was in accordance with a priori hypotheses. All seven PROMIS CATs showed sufficient test–retest reliability (ICCs 0.73–0.91). SEM and MDC ranged from 2.1 to 2.7 and from 5.7 to 7.4, respectively. Responsiveness was rated as insufficient in this study design as there was almost no change in participants’ own rating of their health compared with 6 months ago according to a global rating of change.
During the focus groups and interviews, healthcare providers and people with T2D agreed that CATs could serve as a conversation starter in routine care, but should never replace personal consultations with a doctor. If implemented, participants would be willing to spend 15 min to complete the PROMIS CATs.
The PROMIS CATs showed sufficient construct validity and test–retest reliability in most domains in people with T2D. Responsiveness needs to be evaluated in a population with poorer diabetes control or in a study design with longer follow-up. The CATs are well accepted to be used in care to identify relevant topics, but should not replace personal contact with the doctor.
To understand why patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) may not be treated according to international guidelines for myocardial infarction (MI).
Multicentre qualitative interview study. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis approach as outlined by Braun and Clarke to generate themes associated with MI treatment decision-making for, and by, patients with CKD.
Four National Health Service hospital centres in the UK (February 2022 to July 2024).
A purposive sample of 46 participants (patients and clinicians). Clinicians (n=32) were senior doctors-in-training or consultants in cardiology, nephrology, acute or emergency care or cardiac surgery. Patient participants (n=14) had CKD, defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate 2, or receipt of kidney replacement therapy (KRT).
Despite expressing strong views regarding their health priorities, patients reported minimal involvement in treatment decision-making. Decision-making by clinicians was driven by the desire to avoid causing harm to patients by ‘active’ treatment initiation. In general, despite the concept of evidence-based medicine being widely accepted, there remained scepticism of guidelines or epidemiological data, especially in the light of personal adverse experiences or anecdotes. Clinicians described how, in the absence of collaborative decision-making and a clinical safety-net for managing treatment complications, they tended to make conservative treatment decisions for patients with CKD.
Interventions to foster teamworking between specialists and ensure adequately resourced specialist clinical service safety-nets may improve access to treatments for MI for people with CKD. Intervention development and evaluation should follow to determine if outcomes for people with CKD and MI can be improved.
Bronchoscopic thermal vapour ablation (BTVA) is a bronchoscopic lung volume reduction technique, also recommended by the global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease (GOLD) guidelines. Previous studies on BTVA have primarily focused on segmental treatment, targeting the most severely affected lung segments while preserving healthier areas. However, there is considerable variability in the severity of emphysema within subsegments of these lung segments, suggesting that a more precise approach could potentially improve treatment outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of subsegmental BTVA, which may better preserve healthy lung tissue while more accurately targeting the most severely affected regions in patients with severe emphysema.
This is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label clinical trial conducted in China. A total of 100 patients with severe emphysema, who continue to experience significant symptoms despite optimal medical therapy according to GOLD guidelines, will be enrolled. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the experimental group (subsegmental BTVA) or the control group (segmental BTVA), both receiving optimal medical therapy. BTVA will be performed in two separate procedures, with the second procedure occurring at least 6 weeks and no more than 6 months after the first. The primary endpoint is the change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s at 6 months following the second procedure. Secondary endpoints include changes in lung volumes, quality of life (measured by the St. George’s respiratory questionnaire for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients), other parameters in pulmonary function tests, and 6 min walk distance at 6 and 12 months, etc.
The trial protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shanghai Chest Hospital (IS23073). Additionally, study approval was obtained from local regulatory boards at each site before the study commenced. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on 16 November 2023 (NCT06152107).
Due to the growing use of high-dimensional data and methodological advances in medical research, reproducibility of research is increasingly dependent on the availability of reproducible code. However, code is rarely made available and too often only partly reproducible. Here, we aim to provide practical and easily implementable recommendations for medical researchers to improve the reproducibility of their code. We reviewed current coding practices in the population-based Rotterdam Study cohort. Based on this review, we formulated the following five recommendations to improve the reproducibility of code used in data analysis: (1) make reproducibility a priority and allocate time and resources; (2) implement systematic code review by peers, as it further strengthens reproducibility. We provide a code review checklist, which serves as a practical tool to facilitate structured code review; (3) write comprehensible code that is well-structured; (4) report decisions transparently, for instance by providing the annotated workflow code for data cleaning, formatting and sample selection; and (5) focus on accessibility of code and data and share both, when possible, via an open repository to foster accessibility. Ideally, this repository should be managed by the institution and should be accessible to everyone. Based on these five recommendations, medical researchers can take actionable steps to improve the reproducibility of their research. Importantly, these recommendations are thought to provide a practical starting point for enhancing reproducibility rather than mandatory guidelines.
Mediastinal and/or hilar lymphadenopathy (MHL) is increasingly identified owing to various underlying conditions. Minimally invasive biopsy techniques, including endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA), transbronchial mediastinal cryobiopsy (TBMC) and transbronchial forceps biopsy (TBFB), are common diagnosis tools. However, their safety and diagnostic efficiency remain unclear. This trial aims to compare the diagnostic yield and safety of these three techniques.
This study is a three-arm, parallel-design, randomised controlled trial involving 972 adult patients with MHL recruited from multiple medical centres. Participants will be randomly assigned to the EBUS-TBNA, TBMC via a tunnel or TBFB via a tunnel group. The primary outcome is diagnostic yield, and the secondary outcomes include diagnostic sensitivity, sample quality and procedure-related complications. Statistical analyses will be conducted using the appropriate methods. An independent sample ² test will be used to test the differences in the diagnostic yield and incidence of procedure-related complications.
Ethics approval was obtained from the China-Japan Friendship Hospital Ethics Committee (2022-KY-194).
Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients or their guardians before their enrolment in the study. This study will be conducted per the principles established in the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Council for Harmonisation Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice.
Surgery represents the cornerstone for the treatment of several benign and malignant oesophageal disorders. Yet synthesising the growing body of evidence from clinical research is becoming increasingly challenging. Evidence mapping with living systematic reviews (SRs) and living meta-analyses offers a structured, continuously updated approach to navigating emerging data. This study aims to provide a real-time, interactive resource to support evidence-based decision-making for oesophageal surgery.
This study follows PRISMA guidelines and uses the EVIglance Studio web application to develop a living evidence map in oesophageal surgery. A systematic literature search will be conducted across the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and MEDLINE (PubMed) to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and SRs related to oesophageal surgery, without any date or language restrictions. Study selection and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Key clinical and surgical outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, quality of life and oncological endpoints, will be extracted. Risk of bias in RCTs will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system will be applied to evaluate the certainty of evidence. If at least three randomised trials address the same research question, a living meta-analysis will be conducted using random-effects models. The evidence map will be updated at least every 6 months.
This study does not involve individual patient data or any private information. Therefore, ethical approval is not required. As it uses only publicly available data, this study design qualifies as exempt from institutional review. The resulting evidence map is designed to support fast and structured access to high-quality surgical data - an approach not yet available in oesophageal surgery. The tool is expected to aid patients, clinicians and researchers alike by improving access to reliable information, supporting clinical decision-making and highlighting gaps in current evidence. On completion, results will be published in an open-access format and made permanently accessible via www.evidencemap.surgery, with continuous updates.
CRD420251022736 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/)
Ischaemia reperfusion injury (IRI) is inevitable in kidney transplantation and negatively affects patient and graft outcomes. Anaesthetic conditioning (AC) refers to the use of anaesthetic agents to mitigate IRI. AC is particularly associated with volatile anaesthetic (VA) agents and to a lesser extent to intravenous agents like propofol. VA like sevoflurane interferes with many of the processes underlying IRI and exerts renal protective properties in various models of injury and inflammation. We hypothesise that a sevoflurane-based anaesthesia is able to induce AC and thereby reduce post-transplant renal injury, reflected in improved graft and patient outcome, compared with a propofol-based anaesthesia in transplant recipients of a deceased donor kidney.
Investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomised, controlled and prospective clinical trial with two parallel groups. The study will include 488 kidney transplant recipients from donation after brain death (DBD) or donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors. Participants are randomised in a 1:1 design to a sevoflurane (intervention) or propofol (control) group. The primary endpoint is the incidence of delayed graft function in recipients of DCD and DBD donor kidneys and/or 1-year biopsy-proven and treated acute rejection. Secondary endpoints include functional delayed graft function defined as failure of serum creatinine levels to decrease by at least 10% per day for three consecutive days; primary non-function is defined as a permanent lack of function of the allograft; length of hospital stay and postoperative complications of all kinds, estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 week and 3 and 12 months calculated with the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) formula; readmissions at 3 and 12 months, graft survival and all-cause mortality at 12 months.
The study is approved by the local ethical committees and national data security agencies. Results are expected to be published in 2025.
Procedure-related pain should be minimised to prevent psychological trauma and the potential negative consequences on body physiology. Dressing changes in paediatric patients with burn injuries are frequently performed with analgesics alone where sedation is not indicated, especially in minor and superficial burns. It is hypothesised that distraction methods can be used in addition to pain alleviating medication to reduce the experience of pain in these patients.
With this research project, we aim to assess the effectiveness of a simple, inexpensive, non-electronic distraction method, a kaleidoscope, to reduce acute pain experienced in paediatric patients undergoing dressing changes in the outpatient clinic.
A randomised controlled trial will be performed at the Ngwelezana Tertiary Hospital, Empangeni, South Africa. Paediatric patients between the ages of 5 years and 12 years with minor and superficial partial thickness burn injuries who require dressing changes in the outpatient clinic, without sedation, will be randomised into two groups with a 1:1 allocation ratio. Fixed randomisation will be performed by a computer random number generator. The control group will receive standard practice of care which concerns a dressing change without any distraction methods, and the intervention group will receive distraction by use of a kaleidoscope as an additional method for potential pain alleviation. Patients in both groups will receive paracetamol or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs when indicated according to hospital protocol. The primary outcome will be the change in pain score from pre-procedural to pain score during the dressing change and will be analysed with a linear regression analysis. Additionally, subanalyses will be performed to evaluate potentially modifying factors on the treatment effect. This will also be evaluated with a linear regression analysis and correlated with caregiver and healthcare worker observational pain scores. Participants and assessors are not blinded to group assignment due to the nature of the intervention. To achieve a power of 80% and a level of significance of 5% for detecting at least a 1-point difference in change in pain scores between the intervention and control group, a sample size of 50 patients in each group is required.
This study evaluates a non-invasive adjunct to reduce pain in children who undergo a painful procedure. Ethical approval has been granted from the University of Kwazulu-Natal’s biomedical research and ethics committee and the ethics and research committee of Ngwelezana Tertiary Hospital prior to recruitment (ref no. BREC/00005194/2023). Written informed consent will be acquired from all study participants’ caregivers. Study findings will be presented orally to staff at the paediatric burn unit of Ngwelezana Tertiary Hospital (study location). The research methodology and results will be presented at scientific conferences and will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing, heterogeneous skin disease affecting 2%–7% of adults, with roughly 30% having moderate-to-severe disease. AD symptoms, like intense itching and skin pain, carry a substantial disease burden that negatively impacts patients’ quality of life (QoL) and psychosocial well-being. Lebrikizumab is a novel, high-affinity monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to and neutralises interleukin-13 with high potency. Three clinical trials with lebrikizumab (ADvocate 1 and 2; ADhere) demonstrated significant clinical benefit in patients with AD, while the 3-year long-term extension study of lebrikizumab (ADjoin) further demonstrated long-term efficacy and safety in patients with AD. The ADTrust study will evaluate patient well-being, their relationship with their skin, long-term effectiveness, and safety of lebrikizumab, treatment satisfaction, and long-term effect of lebrikizumab treatment on different aspects of patients’ lives, including itch, pain, sleep, fatigue, work impairment and overall QoL among adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD in a real-world setting.
This non-interventional, prospective, observational, real-world evidence study will involve approximately 150 sites across Europe and approximately 1200 adults with moderate-to-severe AD treated with lebrikizumab for 2 years. The primary endpoint is patient well-being assessed by the 5-item WHO Well-Being Index (WHO-5) questionnaire. Key secondary endpoints include clinical effectiveness (Eczema Area and Severity Index and Investigator’s Global Assessment Scale), disease symptomatology and control (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, 24-hour peak pruritus, skin pain, fatigue and sleep quality Numerical Rating Scale, and safety and tolerability. Other validated endpoints will evaluate physician-reported and patient-reported QoL and treatment satisfaction (Dermatology Life Quality Index, Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire-9), patients’ work productivity and impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI)-AD) and disease control (AD Control Tool). Novel experimental endpoints will also be evaluated with the aim to assess patients’ relationship with their skin (SkinLove questionnaire), disease control (intensity and frequency of flares) and an Effectiveness Diary+© (a brief monthly survey on a voluntary basis with the aim to assess the long-term impact of lebrikizumab on three fundamental aspects of the patients’ life: the well-being (WHO-5), the itch intensity (24 hours peak pruritus) and the frequency and intensity of flares). Statistical analyses will be descriptive and explorative and based on observed cases. Missing data imputation may be used to handle missing data for primary endpoints and secondary effectiveness endpoints.
This study will be conducted according to the protocol, which has ethics committee approval (Hamburg Ethic Committee in Germany: 2024-101358-BO-ff), and all applicable laws and regulatory requirements for each participating country. The results will be disseminated through scientific publications and congress presentations.
NCT06815380 (Pre-results).