Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurs when a blood clot forms in a vein. It is comprised of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism and can be potentially life-threatening. Patients undergoing surgery are at increased risk of developing VTE within hospital admission and 90 days after hospital discharge are collectively known as hospital-acquired thrombosis (HAT). Without the use of thromboprophylaxis, the untreated risk of VTE is reported to be as high as 40–60% in those undergoing major orthopaedic procedures and around 15–40% in the general surgical population.
HAT accounts for around 12 000 deaths per year in the UK. For patients undergoing surgery, there is good evidence for the use of thromboprophylaxis to prevent VTE.
Thromboprophylaxis is available in both pharmacological and mechanical forms. While there is a huge body of evidence demonstrating that pharmacological thromboprophylaxis significantly reduces VTE by 30–65%, the benefit of graduated compression stockings (GCS) has been called into question. The GRACE study (Graduated Compression stocking as an adjunct to Extended duration pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for venous thromboembolism prevention) aims to evaluate the adjuvant benefit of GCS in addition to extended duration pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (EDPTP) for elective surgical patients at highest risk of VTE.
GRACE is a pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial of adults undergoing surgery who are at high risk of VTE. Participants are randomised into a 1:1 ratio to either EDPTP and compression stockings (control arm) or EDPTP (intervention arm). Following randomisation, participants will undergo surgery and be followed up centrally at 7, 21–35 and 90 days after their procedure. All participants will be offered a bilateral full lower limb duplex scan at 21–35 days post procedure to capture any asymptomatic DVT.
The trial aims to randomise 8608 participants from around 50 National Health Service (NHS) and non-NHS sites in the UK over a 24-month period. The primary endpoint is any imaging-confirmed incidence of VTE within 90 days of surgery.
On 20 December 2023, GRACE received favourable ethical approval from the Wales Research Ethics Committee 3 Cardiff (23/WA/0350) and the Health Research Authority (IRAS 333539). The results of the study will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, presentation at national and international conferences and to study participants via electronic newsletter and social media channels.
To examine the number of patients screening positive for depression, while self-completing an automated check-in screen prior to a general practice consultation.
A descriptive cross-sectional study.
10 general practices in the West Midlands, England. Recruitment commenced in March 2023 and concluded in June 2023.
All patients aged 18 years and over, self-completing an automated check-in screen for any general practice prebooked appointment, were invited to participate during a 3-week recruitment period.
The number of patients screening positive for depression using the Whooley case finding research questions was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures included: demographic and (general practice level) deprivation differences in completion responses.
73.5% (n=3666) of patients self-completing an automated check-in screen participated in the CAse-fInding foR depressiOn in primary care (CAIRO) study, (61.1% (n=2239) female, mean age 55.0 years (18–96 years, SD=18.5)).
28.3% (n=1039) of participants provided a positive response to at least one of the two Whooley research questions (31.2% female and 23.8% male). Significantly more positive responses were obtained from females, those aged between 35 years and 49 years and those from more deprived practices.
Over a quarter of CAIRO participants provided a positive response to at least one of the two Whooley questions, suggesting possible unmet need in the population studied. A follow-up study could investigate whether responses provided at the point of check-in are raised and addressed in the subsequent consultation.
Musculoskeletal shoulder pain is a common reason for people to be treated in physiotherapy services, but diagnosis can be difficult and often does not guide treatment or predict outcome. People with shoulder pain cite a need for clear information, and timely, tailored consultations for their pain. This trial will evaluate the introduction of a personalised guided consultation to help physiotherapists manage care for individuals with shoulder pain.
This is a cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of introducing a personalised guided consultation compared with usual UK NHS physiotherapy care. Physiotherapy services (n=16) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either intervention (physiotherapy training package and personalised guided consultation incorporating a new prognostic tool) or control (usual care); 832 participants (416 in each arm) identified from participating physiotherapy service waiting lists aged 18 years or over with shoulder pain will be enrolled. Follow-up will occur at 3 time points: 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months. The primary outcome will be the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score over 12 months. Secondary outcomes include global perceived change of the shoulder condition, sleep, work absence and the impact of shoulder pain on work performance, healthcare utilisation and health-related quality of life (using EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L)). A multimethod process evaluation will investigate views and experiences of participants and physiotherapists, assess uptake, facilitators and barriers to delivery, and changes in factors assumed to explain intervention outcomes. Primary analysis of effectiveness will be by intention-to-treat, and a health economic evaluation will assess cost-utility of introducing the personalised consultation.
The trial received ethics approval from the Yorkshire & The Humber (South Yorkshire) Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 23/YH/0070). Findings will be shared through journal publications, media outlets and conference presentations. Supported by patient contributors and clinical advisors, we will communicate findings through a designated website, networks, newsletters, leaflets and in the participating physiotherapy services.
by Alan Reubenson, Leo Ng, Vidya Lawton, Irmina Nahon, Rebecca Terry, Claire Baldwin, Julia Blackford, Alex Bond, Rosemary Corrigan, Megan Dalton, Amabile Borges Dario, Michael Donovan, Ruth Dunwoodie, Genevieve M. Dwyer, Roma Forbes, Alison Francis-Cracknell, Janelle Gill, Andrea Hams, Anne Jones, Taryn Jones, Belinda Judd, Ewan Kennedy, Prue Morgan, Tanya Palmer, Casey Peiris, Carolyn Taylor, Debra Virtue, Cherie Zischke, Daniel F. Gucciardi, on behalf of the Physiotherapy Clinical Education Research Collaborative (PCERC)
The Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice (APP) is a 20-item assessment instrument used to assess entry-level physiotherapy practice in Australia, New Zealand and other international locations. Initial APP reliability and validity evidence supported a unidimensional or single latent factor as the best representation of entry-level physiotherapy practice performance. However, there remains inconsistency in how the APP is interpreted and operationalised across Australian and New Zealand universities offering entry-level physiotherapy programs. In essence, the presumption that the psychometric integrity of the APP generalises across people, time, and contexts remains largely untested. This multi-site, archival replication study utilised APP assessment data from 8,979 clinical placement assessments, across 19 Australian and New Zealand universities, graduating entry-level physiotherapy students (n=1865) in 2019. Structural representation of APP scores were examined via confirmatory factor analysis and penalised structural equation models. Factor analyses indicated a 2-factor representation, with four items (1–4) for the professional dimension and 16 items (5–20) for the clinical dimension, is the best approximation of entry-level physiotherapy performance. Measurement invariance analyses supported the robustness of this 2-factor representation over time and across diverse practice areas in both penultimate and final years of study. The findings provide strong evidence for the psychometric integrity of the APP, and the 2-factor alternative interpretation and operationalisation is recommended. To meet entry-level standards students should be assessed as competent across both professional and clinical dimensions of physiotherapy practice.