Case reports (CRs) are essential in physiotherapy, yet reporting remains heterogeneous and insufficiently standardised. The 2013 CAse REport (CARE) guideline improves transparency but lacks physiotherapy-specific detail. This study aimed to develop a consensus-driven extension of the CARE reporting guideline to support structured reporting of physiotherapy CRs, encompassing physiotherapy-specific assessments and interventions.

An e-Delphi consensus process study following the ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document (ACCORD) guidelines.

Online.

Forty-four international experts in physiotherapy practice, research and education, along with six core committee members.

Experts objectively scored items for relevance (5-point Likert scale) and provided open-ended responses for each item of the drafts. Scores and responses were analysed to facilitate iterative refinement of the Physiotherapy CAse REport (PhyCARE) reporting guidelines. Consensus was predetermined at over 70% agreement.

Round 1 had the majority of items achieving ≥70% agreement, except two items that did not meet the threshold were revised and replaced with an alternative. Five new items addressing physiotherapy-specific reporting needs were added, and 10 items were relocated. In round 2, all 35 items across 13 domains achieved 84%–100% agreement. The nomenclature of one domain was revised to ‘Outcomes and Follow-up’. Following two e-Delphi rounds, consensus was achieved, and suggestions from online meeting, piloting led to item rephrasing, after which the PhyCARE guidelines were finalised.

The PhyCARE guidelines have the potential to provide a physiotherapy-specific extension of CARE to support structured, transparent and reproducible reporting of physiotherapy CRs.

This study aimed to determine the prevalence and factors associated with pre-diabetes and undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (UDD) in Cambodia.

This analysis used data from the WHO World Health Survey Plus, which was collected using a cross-sectional design with a GIS-based, three-stage sampling approach. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify key associated factors, based on a significance level of p

Data were collected from all 25 provinces in Cambodia between 12 March 2023 and 31 May 2023.

4427 individuals aged 18 years or older, residing in the selected household for at least 6 months in the past year.

Pre-diabetes (Haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 5.7%–6.4%) and UDD (HbA1c≥6.5%), without prior knowledge of having type 2 diabetes (T2D).

The weighted prevalences of pre-diabetes and UDD were 26.4% (95% CI 24.0% to 29.0%) and 9.3% (95% CI 7.9% to 11.0%). Pre-diabetes prevalence was higher in urban areas compared with rural areas (adjusted OR, aOR=1.2, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.4), males (aOR=1.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.3), individuals aged 40–49 (aOR=1.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.4), individuals aged 50+ years group (aOR=2.9, 95% CI 2.3 to 3.6) compared with the 18–39 years group, overweight individuals (aOR=1.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.0), obese (aOR=2.1, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.0) and those with elevated total triglycerides (aOR=1.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.5). Similar risk factors were identified for UDD, with the addition of hypertension (aOR=1.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.0) and high waist circumference (aOR=2.0, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.7).

The high prevalence of pre-diabetes and UDD in Cambodia is a pressing public health concern. Urgent and intensive interventions are needed to effectively prevent and manage T2D, particularly among urban residents, older persons and individuals with metabolic risk factors.

Process evaluation provides insight into how interventions are delivered across varying contexts and why interventions work in some contexts and not in others. This manuscript outlines the protocol for a process evaluation embedded in a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation randomised clinical trial of incremental-start haemodialysis (HD) versus conventional HD delivered to patients starting chronic dialysis (the TwoPlus Study). The trial will simultaneously assess the effectiveness of incremental-start HD in real-world settings and the implementation strategies needed to successfully integrate this intervention into routine practice. This manuscript describes the rationale and methods used to capture how incremental-start HD is implemented across settings and the factors influencing its implementation success or failure within this trial.

We will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) frameworks to inform process evaluation. Mixed methods include surveys conducted with treating providers (physicians) and dialysis personnel (nurses and dialysis administrators); semi-structured interviews with patient participants, caregivers of patient participants, treating providers (physicians and advanced practice practitioners), dialysis personnel (nurses, dieticians and social workers); and focus group meetings with study investigators and stakeholder partners. Data will be collected on the following implementation determinants: (a) organisational readiness to change, intervention acceptability and appropriateness; (b) inner setting characteristics underlying barriers and facilitators to the adoption of HD intervention at the enrollment centres; (c) external factors that mediate implementation; (d) adoption; (e) reach; (f) fidelity, to assess adherence to serial timed urine collection and HD treatment schedule; and (g) sustainability, to assess barriers and facilitators to maintaining intervention. Qualitative and quantitative data will be analysed iteratively and triangulated following a convergent parallel and pragmatic approach. Mixed methods analysis will use qualitative data to lend insight to quantitative findings. Process evaluation is important to understand factors influencing trial outcomes and identify potential contextual barriers and facilitators for the potential implementation of incremental-start HD into usual workflows in varied outpatient dialysis clinics and clinical practices. The process evaluation will help interpret and contextualise the trial clinical outcomes’ findings.

The study protocol was approved by the Wake Forest University School of Medicine Institutional Review Board (IRB). Findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.

NCT05828823.

Ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs) are conditions for which the provision of timely and skilled primary care can reduce risks of hospitalisation when preventing, treating or controlling a disease. For this reason, hospitalisations for ACSC have been commonly employed by health systems as an indicator of effectiveness for the primary level of care. This study aims to evaluate whether the provision of primary care services by physicians with residency training in family medicine is associated with rates of general hospitalisations for ACSCs in the Brazilian Unified Health System network in the city of Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

Longitudinal ecological study using a Generalised Linear Model for Gamma-distributed variables.

Primary healthcare centres in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, from January 2017 to December 2021, aggregated at the primary healthcare centres level.

Data aggregated at the primary healthcare centre level, encompassing socioeconomic, professional and health-related variables.

Incidence rates of hospitalisations for ACSCs, adjusted for age and sex.

After adjusting for age, sex and socioeconomic variables using the Health Vulnerability Index, a higher concentration of family physicians was significantly associated with a lower incidence of hospitalisations for ACSCs. If all physicians in the primary care network were family physicians, compared with a scenario in which none were, an estimated 11.89% reduction in hospitalisations would be expected (95% CI 7.3% to 16.3%, p

The findings suggest that specialisation in family medicine positively impacts health outcomes by reducing hospitalisations for ACSCs. These results can inform the development of evidence-based public policies to enhance primary care effectiveness.