There are little available data on the prevalence, economic and quality of life impacts of musculoskeletal disorders in sub-Saharan Africa. This lack of evidence is wholly disproportionate to the significant disability burden of musculoskeletal disorders as reported in high-income countries. Our research aimed to undertake an adequately powered study to identify, measure and value the health impact of musculoskeletal conditions in the Kilimanjaro region, Tanzania.

A community-based cross-sectional survey was undertaken between January 2021 and September 2021. A two-stage cluster sampling with replacement and probability proportional to size was used to select a representative sample of the population.

The survey was conducted in 15 villages in the Hai District, Kilimanjaro region, Tanzania.

Economic and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires were administered to a sample of residents (aged over 5 years old) in selected households (N=1050). There were a total of 594 respondents, of whom 153 had a confirmed musculoskeletal disorder and 441 matched controls. Almost three-quarters of those identified as having a musculoskeletal disorder were female and had an average age of 66 years.

Questions on healthcare resource use, expenditure and quality of life were administered to all participants, with additional more detailed economic and quality of life questions administered to those who screened positive, indicating probable arthritis.

There is a statistically significant reduction in HRQOL, on average 25% from a utility score of 0.862 (0.837, 0.886) to 0.636 (0.580, 0.692) for those identified as having a musculoskeletal disorder compared with those without. The attributes ‘pain’ and ‘discomfort’ were the major contributors to this reduction in HRQOL.

This research has revealed a significant impact of musculoskeletal conditions on HRQOL in the Hai district in Tanzania. The evidence will be used to guide clinical health practices, interventions design, service provisions and health promotion and awareness activities at institutional, regional and national levels.

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.

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) commonly coexists with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Patients with symptomatic PAD often require endovascular revascularisation to relieve pain or salvage limbs. However, the iodinated intra-arterial contrast routinely used in these procedures is nephrotoxic, placing patients with CKD at increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) and long-term renal decline. Carbon dioxide (CO₂) delivered via automated injection is a potential alternative imaging contrast medium. This trial will evaluate whether using CO₂ instead of iodinated contrast reduces the risk of AKI and short-term renal function decline in this high-risk group.

This is a multicentre, open-label, prospective randomised controlled trial across six secondary-care National Health Service (NHS) vascular surgery centres. A total of 174 patients with PAD and CKD undergoing endovascular intervention will be randomised 1:1 to receive iodinated contrast (standard of care) or CO₂ via automated injector (Angiodroid). All perioperative care will follow local NHS protocols.

The primary outcome is log serum creatinine at 2, 30 and 90 days postprocedure. Key secondary outcomes include: incidence and severity of AKI within 48 hours postprocedure, major adverse kidney events (death, dialysis or >25% estimated glomerular filtration rate decline) by 90 days, inpatient length of stay, procedural pain, quality of life, procedural success, reinterventions, acceptability and feasibility (patient/practitioner questionnaires) of using CO₂, and cost-effectiveness (healthcare resource use analysis). A mixed-methods process evaluation will be undertaken with patients and clinicians.

The trial has been approved by an NHS ethical review committee (24/WA/0332) and patients have been involved in trial design. Findings will be disseminated to participants, clinicians and the wider public through patient groups, lay summaries, social media, conferences, peer-reviewed journals and NHS policy channels.

ISRCTN23564393.

Corticosteroid injections are widely used as first-line treatment for trigger finger, but their comparative efficacy against other non-surgical and surgical interventions remains unclear. While previous meta-analyses have explored this topic, many were limited by a narrow scope or methodological constraints. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of corticosteroid injections in adult trigger finger management compared with alternative treatment modalities, using robust methodology and updated evidence to guide clinical decision-making.

A systematic search will be conducted to identify the articles published on PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. All randomised controlled trials that compared (1) corticosteroid injection with alternative non-surgical modalities and (2) corticosteroid injection with surgical intervention in adults diagnosed with trigger finger will be included for the review. Two reviewers will independently perform the processes of study inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. The primary outcome will be assessed by improvement in triggering and pain symptoms. Secondary outcomes will be assessed through safety assessment. The risk of bias and meta-analysis will be conducted using by RevMan V.5.4.

Ethical approval is not required for this study as it is a review based on published studies. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis results are expected to provide valuable information for clinicians to choose an optimal strategy for the management of trigger finger.

CRD42024547312.

The Clinical Frailty Scale is an ordinal scale from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill) commonly used to assess frailty in older patients. It is simple for clinicians to apply and can help identify patients who may benefit from discussions around end-of-life care. We externally validated the Scale to assess its performance for predicting 90-day mortality in a cohort of admitted older patients who had screened positive for being at risk of nearing the end of life.

We used data from a randomised controlled trial assessing a tailored feedback loop for reducing non-beneficial care. Our study included patients aged 75 and above admitted between May 2020 and June 2021 from 3 Australian hospitals. We assessed whether the Scale could be used in a frail population to identify patients who were at risk of short-term mortality. Predictive performance was assessed using the c-statistic, smoothed calibration curves and decision curves. Models were tested for coefficient stability.

Our dataset contained 4639 patients and 956 deaths within 90 days. The Clinical Frailty Scale had a c-statistic of 0.62 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.64) or 0.63 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.65) by adding age and transforming the Scale using a cubic spline. Risks were underestimated without a non-linear transformation as scores of 8 and 9 had a higher risk that diverged from a linear association. The net benefit of using the tool was greatest between 5 and 8 on the Scale.

The utility of the Clinical Frailty Scale may be as a flag to encourage clinicians to become more comfortable with discussing ageing and death, rather than as a highly discriminating model to classify patients as high risk or low risk. Statistical uncertainty over mortality should not be a barrier to initiating end-of-life care discussions with frail older patients.

In Tanzania, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is underdiagnosed, and uptake of evidence-based care is suboptimal. Using an implementation science approach, an intervention was developed to address local barriers to care: the Multicomponent Intervention for Improving Myocardial Infarction Care in Tanzania (MIMIC).

This sequential cohort design trial was conducted in a single northern Tanzanian emergency department (ED). During the preintervention phase (February–August 2023) and the postintervention phase (September 2023–August 2024), adults presenting with chest pain and/or dyspnoea were prospectively enrolled and their ED care was observed. AMI was defined by the Fourth Universal Definition criteria. Telephone follow-ups were conducted to ascertain 30-day mortality. Pearson’s ² was used to compare care before and after MIMIC implementation.

A total of 275 participants were enrolled in the preintervention phase and 577 were enrolled in the postintervention phase. Following MIMIC implementation, significant increases were observed in ECG testing (89.4% of postintervention participants vs 55.3% preintervention, OR 6.82, 95% CI 4.79 to 9.79, p

The MIMIC intervention was associated with large increases in uptake of AMI testing, case identification and evidence-based treatment in a single Tanzanian ED. Multisite studies are needed to evaluate the effect of MIMIC on AMI care in diverse settings across Tanzania.

NCT04563546.

Traditional wellness programming focuses on bringing together individual clinicians during personal time for resources and skill building, without a focus on skill building in the contexts and teams they are embedded in daily. We developed a dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT)-informed consultation group, ‘Complex Care Rounds’ (CCR), implemented within the usual workflow of a primary care clinic. The goal of CCR was to facilitate interprofessional team communication and enhance clinician motivation and efficacy, while simultaneously addressing medical and social needs of patients. During the twice-weekly group, team members provided validation and shared feedback while acknowledging the needs of the clinician and patient. The aim of this study was to explore clinician perspectives on participation in CCR and to create a conceptual model to understand CCR’s influence on individual team members as well as team dynamics.

The research was completed at the Comprehensive Care Programme, a primary care programme for patients with Medicare insurance at high risk of hospitalisation at an academic institution in Chicago, Illinois, USA.

This was a qualitative research study examining reflective essays written by participants on how participating in CCR has impacted them. Template analysis, a form of thematic analysis, was applied to code and organise themes.

Participants included 12 clinical team members (physicians, nurses, social service team members) and 7 trainees (AmeriCorps members, medical students) from the Comprehensive Care Programme.

We found that CCR’s shared team frameworks (theme 1) grounded in DBT promoted a practice of self-compassion (theme 2) as well as a validating team environment (theme 3) within our interprofessional team. Improvements to patient care (theme 4) extended from increased personal capacity, support from team members and a structured approach to team interactions.

DBT-informed consultation groups embedded within a clinical practice have the potential to promote a practice and culture of interprofessional team members tending to self and others, while also building one’s own skills and capacity to care for complex patients.

Clinical trial: NCT04489693; Pre-results"

To examine chronic kidney disease (CKD) prevalence, incidence, prognosis, kidney function decline and associated risk factors among people with diabetes and/or hypertension.

Cross-sectional multicentre study.

14 primary care centres across Jakarta.

Adults (≥18 years) with diabetes and/or hypertension were included. Exclusion criteria were receiving kidney replacement therapy, language barrier, cognitive impairments, refusal to consent and pregnancy. Participants were grouped into three categories: hypertension only, diabetes only and both.

None.

Primary outcomes included CKD prevalence, incidence, number-needed-to-screen, KDIGO-based prognosis and annual kidney function decline. Secondary outcomes were risk factors for CKD, uncontrolled blood glucose, blood pressure and albuminuria.

A total of 1263 participants were enrolled: 51% had hypertension, 17.6% diabetes and 31.4% both. Mean age: 57.1±10.2 years, 72.2% female and 76% obese. Renin angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors were prescribed in 32.3%, and only 1.2% used insulin despite a median glycated haemoglobin of 7.5% (IQR: 6.5–9.1). CKD prevalence was 14.8%, with an incidence rate of 9.1 per 100 person-years; number-needed-to-screen was 7. Based on KDIGO criteria, 48.9% were at moderate-to-very high risk of adverse outcomes. Baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was 80.9 (SE=10.1), declining by 4.7 (SE=9.9) mL/min/1.73 m² annually. CKD incidence was higher with albuminuria (OR 3.6, p=0.007) in the combined group; older age (OR 4.5, p

CKD burden is high among people with diabetes and hypertension. Nearly half were at elevated risk despite preserved kidney function, highlighting the need for targeted early screening.

This study aimed to translate and validate the Malay version of the Patient Measure of Safety-10 (M-PMOS-10) for use in Malaysian healthcare settings. The study also sought to establish its content and face validity to ensure cultural relevance, psychometric validity and reliability in assessing patient perceptions of safety.

A cross-sectional validation study.

The study was conducted in tertiary-level care at a teaching hospital in Kelantan, Malaysia.

30 hospitalised patients participated in face validity assessment, while another 100 patients were involved in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for construct validation. Eligible participants were adults aged 18–60, fluent in Malay, clinically stable and without a formally diagnosed psychiatric illness.

The primary outcome was the psychometric validation of the M-PMOS-10, assessed through CFA and internal consistency reliability (Raykov’s rho). Content validity was determined using expert evaluations, and face validity was assessed through cognitive interviews with patients. Secondary outcomes included descriptive statistics of patient safety perceptions.

The M-PMOS-10 demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Raykov’s rho=0.929) and strong factor loadings (majority >0.70). CFA supported a revised single-factor structure (Comparative Fit Index=0.986, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation=0.067). Scale-Level Content Validity Index/Average method (Ave) (0.96) confirmed the relevance of the translated items, while Scale-Level Face Validity Index/Ave (0.87) indicated that patients found the questionnaire items clear and comprehensible. The mean total M-PMOS-10 score was 42.98 (SD=6.14), indicating positive patient safety perceptions, though communication regarding care plans showed room for improvement.

The validated M-PMOS-10 is a reliable and culturally appropriate tool for assessing patient safety perceptions in Malaysia. Its strong content and face validity reinforce its utility in patient safety research and clinical applications. Implementing this tool can help healthcare institutions identify safety gaps, refine staff training and improve communication strategies. Future studies should explore its applicability in different healthcare settings and assess its responsiveness to interventions to enhance patient safety.

While group, task-oriented, community-based exercise programs (CBEPs) delivered in-person can increase exercise and social participation in people with mobility limitations, challenges with transportation, cost and human resources, threaten sustainability. A virtual delivery model may help overcome challenges with accessing and delivering in-person CBEPs. The study objective is to estimate the short-term effect of an 8-week, virtual, group, task-oriented CBEP called TIME™ (Together in Movement and Exercise) at Home compared with a waitlist control on improving everyday function in community-dwelling adults with mobility limitations.

A randomised controlled trial incorporating a type 1 effectiveness-implementation hybrid design is being conducted in four Canadian metropolitan centres. We aim to stratify 200 adults with self-reported mobility limitations by site, participation alone or with a partner, and functional mobility level, and randomise them using REDCap software to either TIME™ at Home or a waitlist control group. During TIME™ at Home classes (2 classes/week, 1.5 hours/class), two trained facilitators stream a 1-hour exercise video and facilitate social interaction prevideo and postvideo using Zoom. A registered healthcare professional at each site completes three e-visits to monitor and support implementation. Masked evaluators with physical therapy training evaluate participants and their caregivers at 0, 2 and 5 months using Zoom. The primary outcome is the change in everyday function from 0 to 2 months, measured using the physical scale of the Subjective Index of Physical and Social Outcome. The study is powered to detect an effect size of 0.4, given α=0.05, power=80% and a 15% attrition rate. Secondary outcomes are mobility, well-being, reliance on walking aids, caregiver assistance, caregiver mood, caregiver confidence in care-recipient balance and cost-effectiveness. A multimethod process evaluation is proposed to increase understanding of implementation fidelity, mechanisms of effect and contextual factors influencing the complex intervention. Qualitative data collection immediately postintervention involves interviewing approximately 16 participants and 4 caregivers from the experimental group, and 8 participants and 4 caregivers from the waitlist control group, and all healthcare professionals, and conducting focus groups with all facilitators to explore experiences during the intervention period. A directed content analysis will be undertaken to help explain the quantitative results.

TIME™ at Home has received ethics approval at all sites. Participants provide verbal informed consent. A data safety monitoring board is monitoring adverse events. We will disseminate findings through lay summaries, conference presentations, reports and journal articles.

NCT06245135.