Breast and cervical cancers are among the most commonly diagnosed cancers in Ghana and impose substantial financial burden on households. Although diagnosis and treatment for these cancers are included in the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) benefits package, stakeholders report limitations in the scope and implementation of coverage, leading to out-of-pocket payments and potential delays in care.

To characterise NHIS coverage for breast and cervical cancer care and to explore challenges affecting implementation from the perspectives of key stakeholders.

Qualitative exploratory study using semi-structured key informant interviews and a focused desk review of national guidelines and NHIS policy documents.

12 key informants were purposively sampled based on roles in cancer policy, financing or service delivery.

Although the NHIS officially lists coverage for consultation, diagnosis, radiotherapy and selected chemotherapy medications, participants reported that these benefits are not fully realised in practice. Respondents described persistent out-of-pocket payments for breast and cervical cancer services due to incomplete or delayed reimbursement of screening and diagnostic costs, limited inclusion of costly imaging procedures and the exclusion of some essential and innovative therapies, including immunotherapy. Delayed NHIS reimbursement was cited as a recurrent problem that constrains facility cash flow and contributes to co-payments at the point of care. Stakeholders also highlighted misalignment between NHIS reimbursement tariffs and actual service costs, which discourages some facilities from providing certain listed services and thereby limits patient access.

NHIS coverage for breast and cervical cancer care still contains significant gaps, particularly in preventive services and access to advanced therapies. Policy actions should focus on strengthening preventive coverage (including screening and human papillomavirus vaccination), aligning tariffs with service costs, ensuring timely reimbursements and updating the medicines list through transparent, evidence-informed review processes.

Although individuals with dementia who reside in nursing homes are particularly susceptible to developing delirium, this condition is rarely recognised in these settings. Detection of delirium requires validated and reliable tools for this setting that can be applied by nursing staff. The primary objective of the study is to assess the comprehensibility, practicality and inter-rater reliability of two delirium detection tools (4 A’s test (4AT) and 4-item delirium superimposed on dementia (4-DSD)) and one tool for assessing both the diagnosis and severity of delirium (Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R-98)) in people with dementia who reside in nursing homes when used by nurses.

The comprehensibility and practicality of the German versions of the 4AT, 4-DSD and DRS-R-98 will be evaluated using cognitive interviews in accordance with the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments framework. On the basis of the results of the cognitive interviews, a manual for each of the three tools will be developed and finalised by an expert panel. Finally, the inter-rater reliability and measurement error of the three tools will be determined using the manuals. For this purpose, a total of 70 residents from six nursing homes will be assessed by at least two nurses. The data analysis will include descriptive statistics and inter-rater reliability assessment for individual items (kappa value) and total scores (Intraclass correlation coefficients).

This study will assess the comprehensibility, practicality and inter-rater reliability of the 4AT, 4-DSD and DRS-R-98 for use in residents with dementia in nursing homes. The project was approved by the medical ethics committee of the University of Oldenburg (reference number: 2025-093).

The inter-rater reliability study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register. Registration number: DRKS00037458 (https://www.drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00037458/details).

Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) frequently require mechanical ventilation, with approximately half needing invasive ventilation through an orotracheal tube. For these patients, gastric tube (GT) insertion is routinely performed to administer nutrition and medications or to drain gastric contents. The insertion route (oral or nasal) may affect the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), a significant ICU care complication. This study aims to compare the impact of oral versus nasal GT insertion on the incidence of VAP in intubated ICU patients.

The SONG trial (NCT 05915663) is a multicentre, open-label, two-period, two-intervention, cluster randomised crossover superiority trial. 16 French ICUs will participate. ICUs will be randomised to periods of nasogastric or orogastric tube placement. The trial includes a practice standardisation period, followed by two 12-month inclusion periods separated by a monitoring and washout period. The primary endpoint is the incidence rate of VAP at day 28, confirmed by three independent physicians. Secondary endpoints include the ease of GT insertion, measured by the number of attempts.

This study received approval from a central ethical review board on 12 April 2024 (CPP Sud-est VI, registration number 23.00943.000175). Patients are included after informed consent or, when not possible, from next of kin. If none are available, the investigator will proceed with emergency inclusion, following French law. When consent is initially obtained from the next of kin or through emergency inclusion, the investigator will seek consent from the patient as soon as possible. Data will be anonymised and patient confidentiality maintained. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings.

NCT05915663.

In the intensive care unit (ICU), brain-injured patients are frequently exposed to mechanical ventilation to protect the brain and preserve physiology. After intracranial pressure control and sedation withdrawal, this population is prone to residual disorder of consciousness and altered neurological control of respiratory drive, cough and airway protection. Consequently, extubation failure is more frequent than in general ICU patients, and there is no clear evidence-based clinical trigger for extubation. Different risk factors for extubation failure were described in observational trials, and clinical scores were constructed to detect patients at higher risk of extubation failure. Nevertheless, none of these scores were prospectively tested as interventional tools to prevent extubation failure. The Brain-Injured Patients Extubation Readiness (BIPER) study is an ongoing multicentre stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial aiming to test one of these scores as an intervention protocol to decrease extubation failure in neurocritical care patients with residual disorder of consciousness.

Trial design: Stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial with five groups of three to six clusters (20 ICUs). Groups of clusters are randomised to five possible sequences of nine periods with crossing from a control condition period (usual care for extubation) to an intervention condition period (BIPER-guided extubation protocol), separated by a 3-month transition period.

Participants: Participants are clinically stable brain-injured patients (18–75 years old), requiring more than 48 hours of invasive mechanical ventilation with residual disorder of consciousness after sedation withdrawal, and who achieved a spontaneous breathing trial.

Interventions: The control condition consists of extubation based on usual care and local practice. The intervention condition consists of extubation triggered by a clinical score evaluating deglutition, gag reflex, cough and visual tracking (Coma Recovery Scale-Revised Visual Scale).

Objective: To determine whether adoption of an extubation protocol based on a clinical score can lessen extubation failure compared with usual care in brain-injured patients with residual disorder of consciousness.

Outcome: The primary outcome measure is extubation failure, defined within 5 days following extubation. The key secondary outcome measure is time to effective extubation.

Randomisation: Clusters are allocated to sequence of treatments using random blocks randomisation. The constitution of groups of clusters was stratified according to planned recruitment of each centre.

Blinding: Investigators and outcome assessors are not blinded to condition allocation.

Number of participants: 660 patients (220 in the control condition and 440 in the intervention condition).

The BIPER trial was approved by an independent ethics committee. The study began on 9 February 2020, and 571 participants are now included. Results will be published in an international peer-reviewed medical journal. 

NCT04080440.