Conectar
Over 777 million COVID-19 infections have occurred globally, with data suggesting that 10%–20% of those infected develop Long COVID. Fatigue is one of the most common and disabling symptoms of Long COVID. We aim to assess the feasibility and safety of a new, remotely delivered, multimodal rehabilitation intervention, paced to prevent post-exertional malaise (PEM), to support the conduct of a future, definitive randomised trial.
We will conduct a randomised, two-arm feasibility trial (COVIDEx intervention vs usual care). Sixty participants with Long COVID will be recruited and randomised prior to giving informed consent under a modified Zelen design using 1:1 allocation with random permuted blocks via central randomisation to receive either the COVIDEx intervention or usual care. The 50-minute, remotely delivered, COVIDEx intervention will occur twice weekly for 8 weeks. All participants will wear a non-invasive device throughout their entire study participation, to track heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, steps, sleep and monitor PEM. The primary feasibility objectives will be recruitment rates, intervention fidelity, adherence, acceptability (intervention and design), retention, blinding success and outcome completeness. Secondary objectives will include refined estimates for the standard deviation and correlation between baseline and follow-up measurements of fatigue. Feasibility and clinical outcomes will be collected at baseline, 4, 8, 12 and 24 weeks. Qualitative interviews with participants and physiotherapists will explore intervention acceptability and barriers/facilitators.
Ethical approval for this study was obtained by the Western University Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (REB# 123902). Dissemination plans include sharing of trial findings at conferences and through open access publications and patient/community channels.
To explore healthcare professionals', patients', and family members' experiences of managing regular medications across the perioperative pathway in a specialist cancer hospital in Melbourne.
An exploratory qualitative study using a descriptive-interpretive approach.
Interviews were conducted with 11 patients and seven family members, and focus groups with 10 anaesthetists, seven surgeons, four nurses, and 10 pharmacists (N = 49) between October 2024 and April 2025. Transcripts were analysed using Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic approach and mapped into the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 2.0 human factors framework.
Three interrelated themes were constructed: (1) Work system elements shaping perioperative medication management, encompassing medication and surgical contexts, documentation gaps, reliable medication information, communication infrastructures, roles and responsibilities, and perioperative area resources; (2) Processes influencing medication management practice, characterised by continuity of care at transition points and flagging processes, interdisciplinary collaboration and role interpretation in medication management, patient involvement, family member involvement, and healthcare professional perspectives; and (3) Outcomes of medication management, including patient and organisational outcomes, such as workflow inefficiencies, procedure cancellations, and unplanned readmissions.
Findings indicated that addressing the complexity of perioperative medication safety demands coordinated contributions across multiple professional disciplines. Strengthening interdisciplinary collaboration, clarifying shared responsibilities, embedding structured reconciliation processes at transitions of care, standardizing communication protocols, and involving patients and families are all critical strategies.
This study highlights the need for interdisciplinary coordination and clear role definitions, with nurses as the key contributor, to support collaborative medication decisions in perioperative cancer care.
This study explored challenges in managing regular medications during cancer surgery, offering insights to guide safer practices for perioperative teams, patients, and families in cancer care settings.
COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) guidelines.
None.
Despite low sensitivity and implementation challenges, the tuberculin skin test (TST) remains the standard-of-care tuberculosis (TB) infection test in Mexico. Interferon gamma release assays (IGRA) may overcome TST-related challenges. Within the confines of the local programmatic setting, this cross-sectional study evaluated the prevalence of TB infection (TBI) and concordance of TST and IGRA in three high-risk populations in Mexicali, Baja California, Mexico.
Household contacts (HHC) of individuals with TB, people who use drugs (PWUD), people deprived of liberty (PDL) and prison employees underwent evaluation for TBI using TST and QIAreach, a novel IGRA. Prevalence of infection, concordance of test results and reactivity trends of time-to-results (TTR) by TST-induration size were assessed.
In total, 214 of 411 (52.07%) people who had TST and 269 of 460 (58.48%) people who had IGRA tested positive for TBI. Frequency of infection varied across risk groups (HHC 29 (29.6%); PWUD 67 (70.53%); PDL 111 (56.06%) and prison employees 7 (35.0%), p20 mm, p=0.05).
All risk groups had a high frequency of TBI, necessitating locally tailored guidelines for screening, treatment and management of TBI to optimise care for vulnerable populations.
Primary care electronic health records provide a rich source of information for inequalities research. However, the reliability and validity of the research derived from these records depend on the completeness and resolution of the codelists (ie, collections of medical terms/codes) used to identify populations of interest. The aim of this project was to develop comprehensive codelists for identifying people from ethnic minority groups, people with learning disabilities (LDs), people with severe mental illness (SMI) and people who are transgender.
We followed a three-stage process to define and extract relevant codelists. First, groups of interest were defined a priori. Next, relevant clinical codes, relating to the groups, were identified by searching Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) publications, codelist repositories and the CPRD Code Browser. Relevant codelists were extracted and merged according to group, and duplicates were removed. Finally, the remaining codes were reviewed by two general practitioners (GPs).
The curated codelists were compared using a representative sample in the UK. The frequencies of individuals identified using the curated codelists were assessed and compared with widely used alternative codelists.
Comprehensiveness was assessed in a representative CPRD population of 10 966 759 people.
After removal of duplicates and GP review, codelists were finalised with 325 unique codes for ethnicity, 558 for LD, 499 for SMI and 38 for transgender. Compared with comparator codelists, an additional 48 017 (76.6%), 52 953 (68.9%) and 508 (36.9%) people with LD, SMI or transgender code were identified. The proportions identified for ethnicity, meanwhile, were consistent with expectations for the UK (eg, 6.50% Asian, 2.66% black and 1.44% mixed).
The curated codelists are more sensitive than those widely used in practice and research. Discrepancies between national estimates and primary care records suggest potential record/retention issues. Resolving these requires further investigation and could lead to improved data quality for research.
We calculate positive predictive values (PPVs) of patients presenting with unexpected weight loss (UWL) being diagnosed with cancer within 6 months, using data from a population of Australian primary care patients to replicate results from a previous UK study.
A diagnostic accuracy study involving calculation of the PPV for any cancer using retrospective data from routinely collected electronic healthcare records. The index date is defined as the first recorded UWL presentation and the reference standard is cancer diagnosis within 6 months of the index date.
This study uses primary care data from the Patron primary care database, linked to hospital admissions data and the Victorian Cancer Registry. We include only patients who presented to their General Practitioners (GPs) at least once between 1 July 2007 and 1 February 2022.
Patients were included if they were at least 18 years of age at the index date, had no previous diagnosis of cancer or previous weight loss intervention, including being prescribed medications for weight loss. 13 306 patients out of a primary care population of 1 791 051 patients were identified that met the eligibility criteria.
When stratified by age, sex and smoking status, we found PPVs lower than those derived in a previous UK primary care study, though still above 3% for male non-smokers over 60, female smokers over 70 and all males over 70. Patients from ages 60–79 with at least one abnormal blood test result had PPVs consistently above 3%, while overall, patients with abnormal blood test results have PPVs of up to 35%.
We confirmed that many PPVs, while consistently below those derived in the UK study, are above clinically significant thresholds and increasing with age and the number of different abnormal blood test results.
Acknowledging equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in research is not only a moral imperative but also an important step in avoiding bias and ensuring generalisability of results. This protocol describes the development of STAndards for ReporTing EDI (START-EDI) in research, which will provide a set of minimum standards to help researchers improve their consistency, completeness and transparency in EDI reporting. We anticipate that these guidelines will benefit authors, reviewers, editors, funding organisations, healthcare providers, patients and the public.
To create START-EDI reporting guidelines, the following five stages are proposed: (i) establish a diverse, multidisciplinary Steering Committee that will lead and coordinate guideline development; (ii) a systematic review to identify the essential principles and methodological approaches for EDI to generate preliminary checklist items; (iii) conduct an international Delphi process to reach a consensus on the checklist items; (iv) finalise the reporting guidelines and create a separate explanation and elaboration document; and (v) broad dissemination and implementation of START-EDI guidelines. We will work with patient and public involvement representatives and under-served groups in research throughout the project stages.
The study has received ethical approval from the Imperial College London Research Ethics Committee (study ID: 7592283). The reporting guidelines will be published in open access peer-reviewed publications and presented in international conferences, and disseminated through community networks and forums.
The project is pre-registered within the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/8udbq/) and the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research Network.
Semi-urgent surgery where surgical intervention is required within 48 h of admission and the patient is medically stable is vulnerable to scheduling delays. Given the challenges in accessing health care, there is a need for a detailed understanding of the factors that impact decisions on scheduling semi-urgent surgeries.
To identify and describe the organisational, departmental and contextual factors that determine healthcare professionals' prioritising patients for semi-urgent surgeries.
We used the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for scoping reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. Four online databases were used: EBSCO Academic Search Complete, EBSCO Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, OVID Embase and EBSCO Medline. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they published in English and focussed on the scheduling of patients for surgery were included. Data were extracted by one author and checked by another and analysed descriptively. Findings were synthesises using the Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations framework.
Twelve articles published between 1999 and 2022 were included. The Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations framework highlighted themes of emergency surgery scheduling and its impact on operating room utilisation. Gaps in the management of operating room utilisation and the incorporation of semi-urgent surgeries into operating schedules were also identified. Finally, the lack of consensus on the definition of semi-urgent surgery and the parameters used to assign surgical acuity to patients was evident.
This scoping review identified patterns in the scheduling methods, and involvement of key decision makers. Yet there is limited evidence about how key decision makers reach consensus on prioritising patients for semi-urgent surgery and its impact on patient experience.
No Patient or Public Contribution.
FreshRSS 