Implant-retained overdentures did not have a significant improvement in dietary intake

DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial.

INTERVENTION: Patients aged 65 or above edentate for a minimum of five years, with sufficient bone for two implants in the anterior mandible, were recruited. Those with systemic disease that contraindicated implants or had a low mini-mental state evaluation score were excluded. Patients in both groups had a standard maxillary complete denture fabricated. Patients randomised to the treatment group received a two-implant mandibular overdenture while those in the control group received a standard mandibular complete denture. Three 24-hour dietary recalls were collected by telephone interviews at baseline and at 12 months.

RESULTS: 255 patients were randomised: 128 received a standard complete denture (CD) and 127 a two-implant mandibular overdenture (IOD). 127 patients were available at 12-month follow up, 114 in the CD group and 103 in the IOD group. No significant between-group differences were found.

CONCLUSIONS: Although there is much evidence supporting the adoption of two-implant mandibular overdenture (IOD) treatment as the standard of care for edentate patients, this evidence does not include an improvement in dietary intake at one year for medically healthy independent edentate elders when given no specific dietary counselling.

Evaluating early administration of the hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitor simvastatin in the prevention and treatment of delirium in critically ill ventilated patients (MoDUS trial): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: The incidence of delirium in ventilated patients is estimated at up to 82%, and it is associated with longer intensive care and hospital stays, and long-term cognitive impairment and mortality. The pathophysiology of delirium has been linked with inflammation and neuronal apoptosis. Simvastatin has pleiotropic properties; it penetrates the brain and, as well as reducing cholesterol, reduces inflammation when used at clinically relevant doses over the short term. This is a single centre randomised, controlled trial which aims to test the hypothesis that treatment with simvastatin will modify delirium incidence and outcomes. 

Methods/Design: The ongoing study will include 142 adults admitted to the Watford General Hospital Intensive Care Unit who require mechanical ventilation in the first 72 hours of admission. The primary outcome is the number of delirium- and coma-free days in the first 14 days. Secondary outcomes include incidence of delirium, delirium- and coma-free days in the first 28 days, days in delirium and in coma at 14 and 28 days, number of ventilator-free days at 28 days, length of critical care and hospital stay, mortality, cognitive decline and healthcare resource use. Informed consent will be taken from patient's consultee before randomisation to receive either simvastatin (80 mg) or placebo once daily. Daily data will be recorded until day 28 after randomisation or until discharge from the ICU if sooner. Surviving patients will be followed up on at six months from discharge. Plasma and urine samples will be taken to investigate the biological effect of simvastatin on systemic markers of inflammation, as related to the number of delirium- and coma-free days, and the potential of cholinesterase activity and beta-amyloid as predictors of the risk of delirium and long-term cognitive impairment. 

Discussion: This trial will test the efficacy of simvastatin on reducing delirium in the critically ill. If patients receiving the statin show a reduced number of days in delirium compared with the placebo group, the inflammatory theory implicated in the pathogenesis of delirium will be strengthened. 

The implausibility of ‘usual care’ in an open system: sedation and weaning practices in Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs) in the United Kingdom (UK).

Background
The power of the randomised controlled trial depends upon its capacity to operate in a closed system whereby the intervention is the only causal force acting upon the experimental group and absent in the control group, permitting a valid assessment of intervention efficacy. Conversely, clinical arenas are open systems where factors relating to context, resources, interpretation and actions of individuals will affect implementation and effectiveness of interventions. Consequently, the comparator (usual care) can be difficult to define and variable in multi-centre trials. Hence outcomes cannot be understood without considering usual care and factors that may affect implementation and impact on the intervention.

Methods
Using a fieldwork approach, we describe PICU context, ‘usual’ practice in sedation and weaning from mechanical ventilation, and factors affecting implementation prior to designing a trial involving a sedation and ventilation weaning intervention. We collected data from 23 UK PICUs between June and November 2014 using observation, individual and multi-disciplinary group interviews with staff.

Results
Pain and sedation practices were broadly similar in terms of drug usage and assessment tools. Sedation protocols linking assessment to appropriate titration of sedatives and sedation holds were rarely used (9 % and 4 % of PICUs respectively). Ventilator weaning was primarily a medical-led process with 39 % of PICUs engaging senior nurses in the process: weaning protocols were rarely used (9 % of PICUs). Weaning methods were variably based on clinician preference. No formal criteria or use of spontaneous breathing trials were used to test weaning readiness. Seventeen PICUs (74 %) had prior engagement in multi-centre trials, but limited research nurse availability. Barriers to previous trial implementation were intervention complexity, lack of belief in the evidence and inadequate training. Facilitating factors were senior staff buy-in and dedicated research nurse provision.

Conclusions
We examined and identified contextual and organisational factors that may impact on the implementation of our intervention. We found usual practice relating to sedation, analgesia and ventilator weaning broadly similar, yet distinctively different from our proposed intervention, providing assurance in our ability to evaluate intervention effects. The data will enable us to develop an implementation plan; considering these factors we can more fully understand their impact on study outcomes.

Parents’ and young people’s involvement in designing a trial of ventilator weaning

Consulting with users is considered best practice and is highly recommended in designing new trials. As part of our feasibility work, we undertook a consultation exercise with parents, ex-patients and young people prior to designing a trial of protocol-based ventilator weaning. Our aims were to (1) ascertain views on the relevance and importance of the trial; (2) determine the important parent/patient outcome measures; and (3) ascertain views on informed consent in a cluster randomized controlled trial. We conducted audio-recorded face-to-face, telephone and focus group interviews with parents and young people. Data were content analysed to generate information to address our specific consultation objectives. The setting was the north-western region of England. A total of 16 participants were interviewed: 2 parents of paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) survivors; 1 PICU survivor; and 13 young people from the former Medicines for Children Research Network. The trial objectives were deemed important and relevant, and participants considered the most important outcome measure to be the length of time on ventilation. Parents and young people did not consider written informed consent to be a necessary requirement in the context of this trial, rather awareness of unit participation in the trial was important with the opportunity of opting out of data collection. This consultation provided useful, pragmatic insights to inform trial design. We encountered significant challenges in recruiting parents and young people for this consultation exercise, and novel recruitment methods need to be considered for future work in this field. Patient and public involvement is essential to ensure that future trials answer parent-relevant questions and have meaningful outcome measures, as well as involving parents and young people in the general development of health care services.

Design characteristic of randomised controlled trials for geographic atrophy in age-related macular degeneration: selection of outcomes and sample size calculation

PurposeThe selection of suitable outcomes and sample size calculation are critical factors in the design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT). The goal of this study was to identify the range of outcomes and information on sample size calculation in RCTs on geographic atrophy (GA).MethodsWe carried out a systematic review of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) RCTs. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, www.controlled-trials.com, and www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Two independent reviewers screened records. One reviewer collected data and the second reviewer appraised 10% of collected data. We scanned references lists of selected papers to include other relevant RCTs.ResultsLiterature and registry search identified 3816 abstracts of journal articles and 493 records from trial registries. From a total of 177 RCTs on all types of AMD, 23 RCTs on GA were included. Eighty-one clinical outcomes were identified. Visual acuity (VA) was the most frequently used outcome, presented in 18 out of 23 RCTs and followed by the measures of lesion area. For sample size analysis, 8 GA RCTs were included. None of them provided sufficient Information on sample size calculations.ConclusionsThis systematic review illustrates a lack of standardisation in terms of outcome reporting in GA trials and issues regarding sample size calculation. These limitations significantly hamper attempts to compare outcomes across studies and also perform meta-analyses.

The effectiveness of disaster risk communication: a systematic review of intervention studies

INTRODUCTION: A disaster is a serious disruption to the functioning of a community that exceeds its capacity to cope within its own resources. Risk communication in disasters aims to prevent and mitigate harm from disasters, prepare the population before a disaster, disseminate information during disasters and aid subsequent recovery. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, appraise and synthesise the findings of studies of the effects of risk communication interventions during four stages of the disaster cycle.

METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science and grey literature sources for randomised trials, cluster randomised trials, controlled and uncontrolled before and after studies, interrupted time series studies and qualitative studies of any method of disaster risk communication to at-risk populations. Outcome criteria were disaster-related knowledge and behaviour, and health outcomes.

RESULTS: Searches yielded 5,224 unique articles, of which 100 were judged to be potentially relevant. Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria, and two additional studies were identified from other searching. The studies evaluated interventions in all four stages of the disaster cycle, included a variety of man-made, natural and infectious disease disasters, and were conducted in many disparate settings. Only one randomised trial and one cluster randomised trial were identified, with less robust designs used in the other studies. Several studies reported improvements in disaster-related knowledge and behaviour.

DISCUSSION: We identified and appraised intervention studies of disaster risk communication and present an overview of the contemporary literature. Most studies used non-randomised designs that make interpretation challenging. We do not make specific recommendations for practice but highlight the need for high-quality randomised trials and appropriately-analysed cluster randomised trials in the field of disaster risk communication where these can be conducted within an appropriate research ethics framework.

Impact of the Roots of Empathy Programme on Social-Emotional Learning: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Roots of Empathy (ROE) is a universal, school-based social and emotional learning programme aimed at increasing prosocial behaviour and reducing difficult behaviour. This paper reports the findings of a cluster randomized controlled trial of the effects of ROE on 8-9 year old children. 74 schools and 1,181 children took part. The findings provide evidence that ROE is effective in increasing prosocial behaviour (g=+.20, p=.043) and some potential evidence that it may reduce difficult behaviour (g=-.15, p=.070). While ROE was found to lead to improvements in positive behaviour, these were not associated with improvements in empathy or other social and emotional learning outcomes.

Exploring the Findings from Three Randomised Controlled Trials of Bookgifting Programmes

Aims: This paper explores the effects from three similar bookgifting programmes on improving reading outcomes of early years’ children, their parents and teachers.
Methods: The paper draws on research data produced by the Centre for Effective Education during three randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluations of bookgifting programmes (N=1694 participant families in total). The three studies used pre and post test measures to identify effects across a total of 15 social, cognitive and behavioural reading outcomes.
Results: The overall average effect across the 15 outcomes from data provided by 1694 participant families, was d=0.07. This is a relatively small overall effect and there was an overall pattern of small positive effects of this scale across the wide range of the reading outcomes assessed. However, only one significant effect was identified in the 15 outcomes assessed across all three studies.
Conclusions: The review of these three studies suggests that the RCTs struggle to identify significant effects in these low exposure and low cost bookgifting interventions. Furthermore, it is recommended that future RCT studies of this type of programme require very large sample sizes in the scale of 1000’s rather than 100’s to generate enough study power. Or alternatively, these programmes could be evaluated as a component part of more intensive reading interventions.