To explore why there is variation in implementation of multifactorial falls prevention practices that are recommended to reduce falls risks for older patients in hospital.

Mixed method, realist evaluation.

Three older persons and three orthopaedic wards in acute hospitals in England.

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, therapists and doctors (n=40), and patients aged 65 and over, and carers (n=31).

We examined mechanisms hypothesised to underpin the implementation of multifactorial falls risk assessment and multidomain, personalised prevention plans.

We developed an explanation detailing that how contextual factors supported or constrained implementation of recommended falls prevention practices.

Nurses led delivery of falls risk assessment and prevention planning using their organisation’s electronic health records (EHR) to guide and document these practices. Implementation of recommended practices was influenced by (1) organisational EHR systems that differed in falls risk assessment items they included, (2) competing priorities on nurse time that could reduce falls risk assessment to a tick box exercise, encourage ‘blanket’ rather than tailored interventions and that constrained nurse time with patients to personalise prevention plans and (3) established but not recommended falls prevention practices, such as risk screening, that focused multidisciplinary communication on patients screened as at high risk of falls and that emphasised nursing, rather than Multidisciplinary Team (MDT), responsibility for preventing falls through constant patient supervision.

To promote consistent delivery of multifactorial falls prevention practices, and to help ease the nursing burden, organisations should consider how electronic systems and established ward-based practices can be reconfigured to support greater multidisciplinary staff and patient and carer involvement in modification of individual falls risks.

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common paediatric spinal deformity with large curves surgically managed through spinal fusion. However, postoperative rehabilitation remains inconsistent and varies depending on clinician, hospital or location. Our international e-Delphi consensus established a broad range of statements from preoperative care until 12 months postoperatively. However, rehabilitation and graded return to sport between 3 and 12 months remains vague and further consensus work is needed. This study aims to understand the intermediate and late stages of rehabilitation in order to guide return to sport, exercise and physical activity. The primary objective is to explore content of rehabilitation and milestones between 3 and 12 months postoperatively. This understanding of postoperative care will form the basis for future postoperative guidance.

This protocol for a nominal group technique (NGT) study is written in accordance with the Accurate Consensus Reporting Document guidelines. A national sample of expert surgeons, physiotherapists and nurses in AIS will be recruited. The NGT will take place virtually and will consist of six stages: stage 1: idea generation; stage 2: round robin idea sharing; stage 3: discussion and clarification; stage 4: anonymous voting; stage 5: results feedback; and stage 6: discussion and final voting. This NGT will be preceded by a scoping review which will be disseminated a priori to inform stage 1 idea generation. The population, concept, context framework will be used to explore postoperative rehabilitation towards sports, exercise or physical activities following any kind of spinal surgery. The study steering group and patient and public involvement representative have been involved from conceptualisation and will continue to be involved until final dissemination.

The University of Birmingham has provided ethical approval: ERN_4201-Jun2025. Dissemination will take place through conference presentation and peer-reviewed publications.

The McMaster Monitoring My Mobility (MacM3) study aims to understand trajectories of mobility decline in later life using multisensor wearable technology. To our knowledge, MacM3 is the first major cohort to combine accelerometry and a Global Positioning System (GPS) to track real-world mobility in community-dwelling older adults.

Between May 2022 and May 2024, MacM3 recruited 1555 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 73.9 years, SD=5.5) from Hamilton and Toronto, Ontario. Of the cohort, 68.4% were female, 62.4% married/partnered, 75.3% had post-secondary education and 62.9% had≥3 comorbidities. Most were Canadian born (69.4%) and white/Caucasian (88.0%), with greater ethnocultural diversity observed at the Toronto site.

At baseline, 56.7% of participants reported no mobility limitations, 15.9% had preclinical limitations and 27.4% had minor mobility limitations. Mean gait speed for the total sample was 1.23 m/s, with a mean Timed Up and Go time of 9.4 s and a 5x sit-to-stand time of 13.0 s. A total of 1301 participants had valid wrist-worn device data, and 1008 participants who agreed to wear the thigh-worn device had valid data (≥7 days with ≥10 hours of wear per day). Step count data (n=1008) revealed a mean of 8437 steps per day (SD=2943), with 5073 steps in the lowest quartile and 12 303 steps in the highest.

Ongoing work aims to develop predictive models of mobility decline by integrating wearable, clinical and environmental data. Pipeline enhancements will enable GPS/inertial measurement unit fusion to explore mobility-environment interactions and support ageing-in-place tools.

Progress at the intersection of artificial intelligence and paediatric neuroimaging necessitates large, heterogeneous datasets to generate robust and generalisable models. Retrospective analysis of clinical brain MRI scans offers a promising avenue to augment prospective research datasets, leveraging the extensive repositories of scans routinely acquired by hospital systems in the course of clinical care. Here, we present a systematic protocol for identifying ‘scans with limited imaging pathology’ through machine-assisted manual review of radiology reports.

The protocol employs a standardised grading scheme developed with expert neuroradiologists and implemented by non-clinician graders. Categorising scans based on the presence or absence of significant pathology and image quality concerns facilitates the repurposing of clinical brain MRI data for brain research. Such an approach has the potential to harness vast clinical imaging archives—exemplified by over 250 000 brain MRIs at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia—to address demographic biases in research participation, to increase sample size and to improve replicability in neurodevelopmental imaging research. Ultimately, this protocol aims to enable scalable, reliable identification of clinical control brain MRIs, supporting large-scale, generalisable neuroimaging studies of typical brain development and neurogenetic conditions.

Studies using datasets generated from this protocol will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at academic conferences.

Lower gastrointestinal symptoms attributed to colorectal disease are common. Early diagnosis of serious colorectal disease such as colorectal cancer (CRC), precancerous growths (polyps) and inflammation is important to ensure the best possible outcomes for a patient. The current ‘gold standard’ diagnostic test is colonoscopy. Colonoscopy is an invasive procedure. Some people struggle to cope with it and require intravenous sedation and/or analgesia. It is also resource-intensive, needing to be performed in specialist endoscopy units by a trained team. Across the UK, the demand for colonoscopy is outstripping capacity and the diagnosis of colorectal disease is being delayed. A colon capsule endoscope (CCE) is an alternative colorectal diagnostic. It is a ‘camera in a pill’ that can be swallowed and which passes through the gastrointestinal tract, obtaining visual images on the colon. There is now established experience of CCE in the UK. CCE might provide a less invasive method to diagnose colorectal disease if found to be accurate and effective and provide a means by which to increase the National Health Service (NHS) diagnostic capacity.

The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CCE when compared with colonoscopy in representative and clinically meaningful cohorts of patients. An evaluation of the experiences of CCE for the patient and clinical team and an assessment of cost effectiveness will be undertaken.

We will undertake three research workstreams (WS). In WS1, we shall perform a paired (back-to-back) study. Each participant will swallow the CCE and then later on the same day they will have a colonoscopy. The study has been designed in collaboration with our Patient Advisory Group and as closely mirrors standard care as is possible. 973 participants will be recruited from three representative clinical contexts; suspected CRC, suspected inflammatory bowel disease and postpolypectomy surveillance. Up to 30 sites across the UK will be involved to maximise inclusivity. Measures of diagnostic accuracy will be reported along with CCE completion rates, number of colonoscopy procedures potentially prevented and adverse events, such as capsule retention. A nested substudy of intraobserver and interobserver agreement will be performed. WS2 will develop models of cost-effectiveness and WS3 will evaluate the patient and clinician experience, with reference to acceptability and choice.

The study findings will provide the evidence base to inform future colorectal diagnostic services.

The study has approval from the North East—Tyne and Wear South research ethics committee (REC reference 24/NE/0178, IRAS 331349). The findings will be disseminated to the NHS, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, other clinical stakeholders and participants, patients and the public.

ISRCTN16126290.