Computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals; effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice does not always reflect best practice and evidence, partly because of unconscious acts of omission, information overload, or inaccessible information. Reminders may help clinicians overcome these problems by prompting the doctor to recall information that they already know or would be expected to know and by providing information or guidance in a more accessible and relevant format, at a particularly appropriate time. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of reminders automatically generated through a computerized system and delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes of care (related to healthcare professionals' practice) and outcomes of care (related to patients' health condition). SEARCH METHODS: For this update the EPOC Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the following databases between June 11-19, 2012: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Library (Economics, Methods, and Health Technology Assessment sections), Issue 6, 2012; MEDLINE, OVID (1946- ), Daily Update, and In-process; EMBASE, Ovid (1947- ); CINAHL, EbscoHost (1980- ); EPOC Specialised Register, Reference Manager, and INSPEC, Engineering Village. The authors reviewed reference lists of related reviews and studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included individual or cluster-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) that evaluated the impact of computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals on processes and/or outcomes of care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors working in pairs independently screened studies for eligibility and abstracted data. We contacted authors to obtain important missing information for studies that were published within the last 10 years. For each study, we extracted the primary outcome when it was defined or calculated the median effect size across all reported outcomes. We then calculated the median absolute improvement and interquartile range (IQR) in process adherence across included studies using the primary outcome or median outcome as representative outcome. MAIN RESULTS: In the 32 included studies, computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieved moderate improvement in professional practices, with a median improvement of processes of care of 7.0% (IQR: 3.9% to 16.4%). Implementing reminders alone improved care by 11.2% (IQR 6.5% to 19.6%) compared with usual care, while implementing reminders in addition to another intervention improved care by 4.0% only (IQR 3.0% to 6.0%) compared with the other intervention. The quality of evidence for these comparisons was rated as moderate according to the GRADE approach. Two reminder features were associated with larger effect sizes: providing space on the reminder for provider to enter a response (median 13.7% versus 4.3% for no response, P value = 0.01) and providing an explanation of the content or advice on the reminder (median 12.0% versus 4.2% for no explanation, P value = 0.02). Median improvement in processes of care also differed according to the behaviour the reminder targeted: for instance, reminders to vaccinate improved processes of care by 13.1% (IQR 12.2% to 20.7%) compared with other targeted behaviours. In the only study that had sufficient power to detect a clinically significant effect on outcomes of care, reminders were not associated with significant improvements. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate quality evidence that computer-generated reminders delivered on paper to healthcare professionals achieve moderate improvement in process of care. Two characteristics emerged as significant predictors of improvement: providing space on the reminder for a response from the clinician and providing an explanation of the reminder's content or advice. The heterogeneity of the reminder interventions included in this review also suggests that reminders can improve care in various settings under various conditions.

Effect of immunisation against angiotensin II with CYT006-AngQb on ambulatory blood pressure: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase IIa study.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension can be controlled adequately with existing drugs such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers. Nevertheless, treatment success is often restricted by patients not adhering to treatment. Immunisation against angiotensin II could solve this problem. We investigated the safety and efficacy of CYT006-AngQb-a vaccine based on a virus-like particle-that targets angiotensin II to reduce ambulatory blood pressure. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase IIa trial, 72 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension were randomly assigned with a computer-generated randomisation list to receive subcutaneous injections of either 100 mug CYT006-AngQb (n=24), 300 mug CYT006-AngQb (24), or placebo (24), at weeks 0, 4, and 12. 24-h ambulatory blood pressure was measured before treatment and at week 14. The primary outcomes were safety and tolerability. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00500786. FINDINGS: Two patients in the 100 mug group, three in the 300 mug group, and none in the placebo group discontinued study treatment. All patients were included in safety analyses; efficacy analyses did not include the five dropouts, for whom no data were available at week 14. Five serious adverse events were reported (two in the 100 mug group, two in the 300 mug group, and one in the placebo group); none were deemed to be treatment related. Most side-effects were mild, transient reactions at the injection site. Mild, transient influenza-like symptoms were seen in three patients in the 100 mug group, seven in the 300 mug group, and none in the placebo group. In the 300 mug group, there was a reduction from baseline in mean ambulatory daytime blood pressure at week 14 by -9.0/-4.0 mm Hg compared with placebo (p=0.015 for systolic and 0.064 for diastolic). The 300 mug dose reduced the early morning blood-pressure surge compared with placebo (change at 0800 h -25/-13 mm Hg; p<0.0001 for systolic, p=0.0035 for diastolic). INTERPRETATION: Immunisation with CYT006-AngQb was associated with no serious adverse events; most observed adverse events were consistent with local or systemic responses similar to those seen with other vaccines. The 300 mug dose reduced blood pressure in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension during the daytime, especially in the early morning. FUNDING: Cytos Biotechnology AG.

Evaluation of a Single Dose of Ferric Carboxymaltose in Fatigued, Iron-Deficient Women - PREFER a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND: Unexplained fatigue is often left untreated or treated with antidepressants. This randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blinded study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of single-dose intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) in iron-deficient, premenopausal women with symptomatic, unexplained fatigue. METHODS: Fatigued women (Piper Fatigue Scale [PFS] score ≥5) with iron deficiency (ferritin <50 µg/L and transferrin saturation <20%, or ferritin <15 µg/L) and normal or borderline hemoglobin (≥115 g/L) were enrolled in 21 sites in Austria, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland, blinded to the study drug and randomized (computer-generated randomization sequence) to a single FCM (1000 mg iron) or saline (placebo) infusion. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with reduced fatigue (≥1 point decrease in PFS score from baseline to Day 56). RESULTS: The full analysis included 290 women (FCM 144, placebo 146). Fatigue was reduced in 65.3% (FCM) and 52.7% (placebo) of patients (OR 1.68, 95%CI 1.05-2.70; p = 0.03). A 50% reduction of PFS score was achieved in 33.3% FCM- vs. 16.4% placebo-treated patients (p<0.001). At Day 56, all FCM-treated patients had hemoglobin levels ≥120 g/L (vs. 87% at baseline); with placebo, the proportion decreased from 86% to 81%. Mental quality-of-life (SF-12) and the cognitive function scores improved better with FCM. 'Power of attention' improved better in FCM-treated patients with ferritin <15 µg/L. Treatment-emergent adverse events (placebo 114, FCM 209; most frequently headache, nasopharyngitis, pyrexia and nausea) were mainly mild or moderate. CONCLUSION: A single infusion of FCM improved fatigue, mental quality-of-life, cognitive function and erythropoiesis in iron-deficient women with normal or borderline hemoglobin. Although more side effects were reported compared to placebo, FCM can be an effective alternative in patients who cannot tolerate or use oral iron, the common treatment of iron deficiency. Overall, the results support the hypothesis that iron deficiency can affect women's health, and a normal iron status should be maintained independent of hemoglobin levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01110356.

Existential behavioural therapy for informal caregivers of palliative patients: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Existential behavioural therapy (EBT) was developed to support informal caregivers of palliative patients in the last stage of life and during bereavement as a manualised group psychotherapy comprising six sessions. We tested the effectiveness of EBT on mental stress and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: Informal caregivers were randomly assigned (1:1) to EBT or a treatment-as-usual control group using computer-generated numbers in blocks of 10. Primary outcomes were assessed with the Brief Symptom Inventory (subscales somatisation, anxiety and depression), the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), the WHOQOL-BREF and a numeric rating scale for QOL (QOL-NRS, range 0-10). Data were collected at baseline, pre-treatment, post-treatment and follow-ups after 3 and 12âeuro0/00months. Treatment effects were assessed with a multivariate analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Out of 160 relatives, 81 were assigned to EBT and 79 to the control group. Participants were 54.5âeuro0/00±âeuro0/0013.2âeuro0/00years old; 69.9% were female. The multivariate model was significant for the pre-/post-comparison (pâeuro0/00=âeuro0/000.005) and the pre-/12-month comparison (pâeuro0/00=âeuro0/000.05) but not for the pre-/3-month comparison. Medium to large effects on anxiety and QOL (SWLS, WHOQOL-BREF, QOL-NRS) were found at post-treatment; medium effects on depression and QOL (QOL-NRS) emerged in the 12-month follow-up. No adverse effects of the intervention were observed. CONCLUSION: Existential behavioural therapy appears to exert beneficial effects on distress and QOL of informal caregivers of palliative patients. Further longitudinal evidence is needed to confirm these findings. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Impact of physical activity on energy balance, food intake and choice in normal weight and obese children in the setting of acute social stress: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychological stress negatively influences food intake and food choices, thereby contributing to the development of childhood obesity. Physical activity can also moderate eating behavior and influence calorie intake. However, it is unknown if acute physical activity influences food intake and overall energy balance after acute stress exposure in children. We therefore investigated the impact of acute physical activity on overall energy balance (food intake minus energy expenditure), food intake, and choice in the setting of acute social stress in normal weight (NW) and overweight/obese (OW/OB) children as well as the impact of psychological risk factors. METHOD: After receiving written consent from their parents, 26 NW (BMI < 90(th) percentile) and 24 7-to 11-year-old OW (n = 5)/OB (n = 19, BMI ≥ 90(th) percentile) children were randomly allocated using computer-generated numbers (1:1, after stratification for weight status) to acute moderate physical or to sedentary activity for 30 min. Afterwards, all children were exposed to an acute social stressor. Children and their parents completed self-report questionnaires. At the end of the stressor, children were allowed to eat freely from a range of 12 different foods (6 sweet/6 salty; each of low/high caloric density). Energy balance, food intake/choice and obesity-related psychological risk factors were assessed. RESULTS: Lower overall energy balance (p = 0.019) and a decreased choice of low density salty foods (p < 0.001) in NW children compared with OW/OB children was found after acute moderate physical activity but not sedentary activity. Independent of their allocation, OW/OB children ate more high density salty foods (104 kcal (34 to 173), p = 0.004) following stress. They scored higher on impulsive behavior (p = 0.005), restrained eating (p < 0.001) and parental corporal punishment (p = 0.03), but these psychological factors were not related to stress-induced food intake/choice. Positive parenting tended to be related to lower intake of sweet high density food (-132 kcal, -277 to 2, p = 0.054). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of stress, acute moderate physical activity can address energy balance in children, a benefit which is especially pronounced in the OW/OB. Positive parenting may act as a protective factor preventing stress-induced eating of comfort food. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT01693926 The study was a pilot study of a project funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (CRSII3_147673).

Case management for frequent users of the emergency department: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We devised a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of an intervention based on case management care for frequent emergency department users. The aim of the intervention is to reduce such patients' emergency department use, to improve their quality of life, and to reduce costs consequent on frequent use. The intervention consists of a combination of comprehensive case management care and standard emergency care. It uses a clinical case management model that is patient-identified, patient-directed, and developed to provide high intensity services. It provides a continuum of hospital- and community-based patient services, which include clinical assessment, outreach referral, and coordination and communication with other service providers. METHODS/DESIGN: We aim to recruit, during the first year of the study, 250 patients who visit the emergency department of the University Hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland. Eligible patients will have visited the emergency department 5 or more times during the previous 12 months. Randomisation of the participants to the intervention or control groups will be computer generated and concealed. The statistician and each patient will be blinded to the patient's allocation. Participants in the intervention group (N = 125), additionally to standard emergency care, will receive case management from a team, 1 (ambulatory care) to 3 (hospitalization) times during their stay and after 1, 3, and 5 months, at their residence, in the hospital or in the ambulatory care setting. In between the consultations provided, the patients will have the opportunity to contact, at any moment, the case management team. Participants in the control group (N = 125) will receive standard emergency care only. Data will be collected at baseline and 2, 5.5, 9, and 12 months later, including: number of emergency department visits, quality of life (EuroQOL and WHOQOL), health services use, and relevant costs. Data on feelings of discrimination and patient's satisfaction will also be collected at the baseline and 12 months later. DISCUSSION: Our study will help to clarify knowledge gaps regarding the positive outcomes (emergency department visits, quality of life, efficiency, and cost-utility) of an intervention based on case management care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01934322.

Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism by multidetector CT alone or combined with venous ultrasonography of the leg: a randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Multislice CT (MSCT) combined with D-dimer measurement can safely exclude pulmonary embolism in patients with a low or intermediate clinical probability of this disease. We compared this combination with a strategy in which both a negative venous ultrasonography of the leg and MSCT were needed to exclude pulmonary embolism. METHODS: We included 1819 consecutive outpatients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism in a multicentre non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing two strategies: clinical probability assessment and either D-dimer measurement and MSCT (DD-CT strategy [n=903]) or D-dimer measurement, venous compression ultrasonography of the leg, and MSCT (DD-US-CT strategy [n=916]). Randomisation was by computer-generated blocks with stratification according to centre. Patients with a high clinical probability according to the revised Geneva score and a negative work-up for pulmonary embolism were further investigated in both groups. The primary outcome was the 3-month thromboembolic risk in patients who were left untreated on the basis of the exclusion of pulmonary embolism by diagnostic strategy. Clinicians assessing outcome were blinded to group assignment. Analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00117169. FINDINGS: The prevalence of pulmonary embolism was 20.6% in both groups (189 cases in DD-US-CT group and 186 in DD-CT group). We analysed 855 patients in the DD-US-CT group and 838 in the DD-CT group per protocol. The 3-month thromboembolic risk was 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-1.1) in the DD-US-CT group and 0.3% (0.1-1.2) in the DD-CT group (difference 0.0% [-0.9 to 0.8]). In the DD-US-CT group, ultrasonography showed a deep-venous thrombosis in 53 (9% [7-12]) of 574 patients, and thus MSCT was not undertaken. INTERPRETATION: The strategy combining D-dimer and MSCT is as safe as the strategy using D-dimer followed by venous compression ultrasonography of the leg and MSCT for exclusion of pulmonary embolism. An ultrasound could be of use in patients with a contraindication to CT.

Effect of white-matter lesions on the risk of periprocedural stroke after carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy in the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS): a prespecified analysis of data from a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Findings from randomised trials have shown a higher early risk of stroke after carotid artery stenting than after carotid endarterectomy. We assessed whether white-matter lesions affect the perioperative risk of stroke in patients treated with carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis included in the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) were randomly allocated to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Copies of baseline brain imaging were analysed by two investigators, who were masked to treatment, for the severity of white-matter lesions using the age-related white-matter changes (ARWMC) score. Randomisation was done with a computer-generated sequence (1:1). Patients were divided into two groups using the median ARWMC. We analysed the risk of stroke within 30 days of revascularisation using a per-protocol analysis. ICSS is registered with controlled-trials.com, number ISRCTN 25337470. FINDINGS: 1036 patients (536 randomly allocated to carotid artery stenting, 500 to carotid endarterectomy) had baseline imaging available. Median ARWMC score was 7, and patients were dichotomised into those with a score of 7 or more and those with a score of less than 7. In patients treated with carotid artery stenting, those with an ARWMC score of 7 or more had an increased risk of stroke compared with those with a score of less than 7 (HR for any stroke 2·76, 95% CI 1·17-6·51; p=0·021; HR for non-disabling stroke 3·00, 1·10-8·36; p=0·031), but we did not see a similar association in patients treated with carotid endarterectomy (HR for any stroke 1·18, 0·40-3·55; p=0·76; HR for disabling or fatal stroke 1·41, 0·38-5·26; p=0·607). Carotid artery stenting was associated with a higher risk of stroke compared with carotid endarterectomy in patients with an ARWMC score of 7 or more (HR for any stroke 2·98, 1·29-6·93; p=0·011; HR for non-disabling stroke 6·34, 1·45-27·71; p=0·014), but there was no risk difference in patients with an ARWMC score of less than 7. INTERPRETATION: The presence of white-matter lesions on brain imaging should be taken into account when selecting patients for carotid revascularisation. Carotid artery stenting should be avoided in patients with more extensive white-matter lesions, but might be an acceptable alternative to carotid endarterectomy in patients with less extensive lesions. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, the Stroke Association, Sanofi-Synthélabo, the European Union Research Framework Programme 5.

Temozolomide versus standard 6-week radiotherapy versus hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients older than 60 years with glioblastoma: the Nordic randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with glioblastoma are older than 60 years, but treatment guidelines are based on trials in patients aged only up to 70 years. We did a randomised trial to assess the optimum palliative treatment in patients aged 60 years and older with glioblastoma. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were recruited from Austria, Denmark, France, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey. They were assigned by a computer-generated randomisation schedule, stratified by centre, to receive temozolomide (200 mg/m(2) on days 1-5 of every 28 days for up to six cycles), hypofractionated radiotherapy (34·0 Gy administered in 3·4 Gy fractions over 2 weeks), or standard radiotherapy (60·0 Gy administered in 2·0 Gy fractions over 6 weeks). Patients and study staff were aware of treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN81470623. FINDINGS: 342 patients were enrolled, of whom 291 were randomised across three treatment groups (temozolomide n=93, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=98, standard radiotherapy n=100) and 51 of whom were randomised across only two groups (temozolomide n=26, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=25). In the three-group randomisation, in comparison with standard radiotherapy, median overall survival was significantly longer with temozolomide (8·3 months [95% CI 7·1-9·5; n=93] vs 6·0 months [95% CI 5·1-6·8; n=100], hazard ratio [HR] 0·70; 95% CI 0·52-0·93, p=0·01), but not with hypofractionated radiotherapy (7·5 months [6·5-8·6; n=98], HR 0·85 [0·64-1·12], p=0·24). For all patients who received temozolomide or hypofractionated radiotherapy (n=242) overall survival was similar (8·4 months [7·3-9·4; n=119] vs 7·4 months [6·4-8·4; n=123]; HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·63-1·06; p=0·12). For age older than 70 years, survival was better with temozolomide and with hypofractionated radiotherapy than with standard radiotherapy (HR for temozolomide vs standard radiotherapy 0·35 [0·21-0·56], p<0·0001; HR for hypofractionated vs standard radiotherapy 0·59 [95% CI 0·37-0·93], p=0·02). Patients treated with temozolomide who had tumour MGMT promoter methylation had significantly longer survival than those without MGMT promoter methylation (9·7 months [95% CI 8·0-11·4] vs 6·8 months [5·9-7·7]; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·34-0·93], p=0·02), but no difference was noted between those with methylated and unmethylated MGMT promoter treated with radiotherapy (HR 0·97 [95% CI 0·69-1·38]; p=0·81). As expected, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the temozolomide group were neutropenia (n=12) and thrombocytopenia (n=18). Grade 3-5 infections in all randomisation groups were reported in 18 patients. Two patients had fatal infections (one in the temozolomide group and one in the standard radiotherapy group) and one in the temozolomide group with grade 2 thrombocytopenia died from complications after surgery for a gastrointestinal bleed. INTERPRETATION: Standard radiotherapy was associated with poor outcomes, especially in patients older than 70 years. Both temozolomide and hypofractionated radiotherapy should be considered as standard treatment options in elderly patients with glioblastoma. MGMT promoter methylation status might be a useful predictive marker for benefit from temozolomide. FUNDING: Merck, Lion's Cancer Research Foundation, University of Umeå, and the Swedish Cancer Society.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for treatment of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-finding trial.

BACKGROUND: Three small trials suggest that intravenous immunoglobulin can affect biomarkers and symptoms of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. We tested the safety, effective dose, and infusion interval of intravenous immunoglobulin in such patients. METHODS: We did a multicentre, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial at seven sites in the USA and five in Germany. Participants with probable Alzheimer's disease aged 50-85 years were randomly assigned (by a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with block sizes of eight) to infusions every 4 weeks (0·2, 0·5, or 0·8 g intravenous immunoglobulin per kg bodyweight, or placebo) or infusions every 2 weeks (0·1, 0·25, or 0·4 g/kg, or placebo). Patients, caregivers, investigators assessing outcomes, and staff at imaging facilities and the clinical research organisation were masked to treatment allocation, but dispensing pharmacists, the statistician, and the person responsible for final PET analyses were not. Treatment was masked with opaque pouches and infusion lines. The primary endpoint was median area under the curve (AUC) of plasma amyloid β (Aβ)(1-40) between the last infusion and the final visit (2 weeks or 4 weeks depending on infusion interval) in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00812565) and controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN64846759). FINDINGS: 89 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 58 were enrolled and 55 included in the primary analysis. Median AUC of plasma Aβ(1-40) was not significantly different for intravenous immunoglobulin compared with placebo for five of the six intervention groups (-18·0 [range -1347·0 to 1068·5] for 0·2 g/kg, -364·3 [-5834·5 to 1953·5] for 0·5 g/kg, and -351·8 [-1084·0 to 936·5] for 0·8 g/kg every 4 weeks vs -116·3 [-1379·0 to 5266·0] for placebo; and -13·8 [-1729·0 to 307·0] for 0·1 g/kg, and -32·5 [-1102·5 to 451·5] for 0·25 g/kg every 2 weeks vs 159·5 [51·5 to 303·0] for placebo; p>0·05 for all). The difference in median AUC of plasma Aβ(1-40) between the 0·4 g/kg every 2 weeks group (47·0 [range -341·0 to 72·5]) and the placebo group was significant (p=0·0216). 25 of 42 (60%) patients in the intervention group versus nine of 14 (64%) receiving placebo had an adverse event. Four of 42 (10%) patients in the intravenous immunoglobulin group versus four of 14 (29%) receiving placebo had a serious adverse event, including one stroke in the intervention group. INTERPRETATION: Intravenous immunoglobulin may have an acceptable safety profile. Our results did not accord with those from previous studies. Longer trials with greater power are needed to assess the cognitive and functional effects of intravenous immunoglobulin in patients with Alzheimer's disease.

Optimisation of energy provision with supplemental parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients: a randomised controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Enteral nutrition (EN) is recommended for patients in the intensive-care unit (ICU), but it does not consistently achieve nutritional goals. We assessed whether delivery of 100% of the energy target from days 4 to 8 in the ICU with EN plus supplemental parenteral nutrition (SPN) could optimise clinical outcome. METHODS: This randomised controlled trial was undertaken in two centres in Switzerland. We enrolled patients on day 3 of admission to the ICU who had received less than 60% of their energy target from EN, were expected to stay for longer than 5 days, and to survive for longer than 7 days. We calculated energy targets with indirect calorimetry on day 3, or if not possible, set targets as 25 and 30 kcal per kg of ideal bodyweight a day for women and men, respectively. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive EN or SPN. The primary outcome was occurrence of nosocomial infection after cessation of intervention (day 8), measured until end of follow-up (day 28), analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00802503. FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 153 patients to SPN and 152 to EN. 30 patients discontinued before the study end. Mean energy delivery between day 4 and 8 was 28 kcal/kg per day (SD 5) for the SPN group (103% [SD 18%] of energy target), compared with 20 kcal/kg per day (7) for the EN group (77% [27%]). Between days 9 and 28, 41 (27%) of 153 patients in the SPN group had a nosocomial infection compared with 58 (38%) of 152 patients in the EN group (hazard ratio 0·65, 95% CI 0·43-0·97; p=0·0338), and the SPN group had a lower mean number of nosocomial infections per patient (-0·42 [-0·79 to -0·05]; p=0·0248). INTERPRETATION: Individually optimised energy supplementation with SPN starting 4 days after ICU admission could reduce nosocomial infections and should be considered as a strategy to improve clinical outcome in patients in the ICU for whom EN is insufficient. FUNDING: Foundation Nutrition 2000Plus, ICU Quality Funds, Baxter, and Fresenius Kabi.

Case management for emergency department frequent users : a randomized controlled trial

Background: Emergency department frequent users (EDFUs) account for a disproportionally high number of emergency department (ED) visits, contributing to overcrowding and high health-care costs. At the Lausanne University Hospital, EDFUs account for only 4.4% of ED patients, but 12.1% of all ED visits. Our study tested the hypothesis that an interdisciplinary case management intervention red. Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, we allocated adult EDFUs (5 or more visits in the previous 12 months) who visited the ED of the University Hospital of Lausanne, Switzerland between May 2012 and July 2013 either to an intervention (N=125) or a standard emergency care (N=125) group and monitored them for 12 months. Randomization was computer generated and concealed, and patients and research staff were blinded to the allocation. Participants in the intervention group, in addition to standard emergency care, received case management from an interdisciplinary team at baseline, and at 1, 3, and 5 months, in the hospital, in the ambulatory care setting, or at their homes. A generalized, linear, mixed-effects model for count data (Poisson distribution) was applied to compare participants' numbers of visits to the ED during the 12 months (Period 1, P1) preceding recruitment to the numbers of visits during the 12 months monitored (Period 2, P2).

Responding to Young People's Health Risks in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomised Trial of Training Clinicians in Screening and Motivational Interviewing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention implementing best practice guidelines recommending clinicians screen and counsel young people across multiple psychosocial risk factors, on clinicians' detection of health risks and patients' risk taking behaviour, compared to a didactic seminar on young people's health. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomised trial where volunteer general practices were stratified by postcode advantage or disadvantage score and billing type (private, free national health, community health centre), then randomised into either intervention or comparison arms using a computer generated random sequence. Three months post-intervention, patients were recruited from all practices post-consultation for a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview and followed up three and 12 months later. Researchers recruiting, consenting and interviewing patients and patients themselves were masked to allocation status; clinicians were not. SETTING: General practices in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: General practices with at least one interested clinician (general practitioner or nurse) and their 14-24 year old patients. INTERVENTION: This complex intervention was designed using evidence based practice in learning and change in clinician behaviour and general practice systems, and included best practice approaches to motivating change in adolescent risk taking behaviours. The intervention involved training clinicians (nine hours) in health risk screening, use of a screening tool and motivational interviewing; training all practice staff (receptionists and clinicians) in engaging youth; provision of feedback to clinicians of patients' risk data; and two practice visits to support new screening and referral resources. Comparison clinicians received one didactic educational seminar (three hours) on engaging youth and health risk screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were patient report of (1) clinician detection of at least one of six health risk behaviours (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, risks for sexually transmitted infection, STI, unplanned pregnancy, and road risks); and (2) change in one or more of the six health risk behaviours, at three months or at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of future visits, trust in the clinician after exit interview, clinician detection of emotional distress and fear and abuse in relationships, and emotional distress at three and 12 months. Patient acceptability of the screening tool was also described for the intervention arm. Analyses were adjusted for practice location and billing type, patients' sex, age, and recruitment method, and past health risks, where appropriate. An intention to treat analysis approach was used, which included multilevel multiple imputation for missing outcome data. RESULTS: 42 practices were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison arms. Two intervention practices withdrew post allocation, prior to training, leaving 19 intervention (53 clinicians, 377 patients) and 21 comparison (79 clinicians, 524 patients) practices. 69% of patients in both intervention (260) and comparison (360) arms completed the 12 month follow-up. Intervention clinicians discussed more health risks per patient (59.7%) than comparison clinicians (52.7%) and thus were more likely to detect a higher proportion of young people with at least one of the six health risk behaviours (38.4% vs 26.7%, risk difference [RD] 11.6%, Confidence Interval [CI] 2.93% to 20.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 1.1 to 2.5). Patients reported less illicit drug use (RD -6.0, CI -11 to -1.2; OR 0·52, CI 0·28 to 0·96), and less risk for STI (RD -5.4, CI -11 to 0.2; OR 0·66, CI 0·46 to 0·96) at three months in the intervention relative to the comparison arm, and for unplanned pregnancy at 12 months (RD -4.4; CI -8.7 to -0.1; OR 0·40, CI 0·20 to 0·80). No differences were detected between arms on other health risks. There were no differences on secondary outcomes, apart from a greater detection of abuse (OR 13.8, CI 1.71 to 111). There were no reports of harmful events and intervention arm youth had high acceptance of the screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: A complex intervention, compared to a simple educational seminar for practices, improved detection of health risk behaviours in young people. Impact on health outcomes was inconclusive. Technology enabling more efficient, systematic health-risk screening may allow providers to target counselling toward higher risk individuals. Further trials require more power to confirm health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16059206.

Switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide in antiretroviral regimens for virologically suppressed adults with HIV-1 infection: a randomised, active-controlled, multicentre, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral regimens containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate have been associated with renal toxicity and reduced bone mineral density. Tenofovir alafenamide is a novel tenofovir prodrug that reduces tenofovir plasma concentrations by 90%, thereby decreasing off-target side-effects. We aimed to assess whether efficacy, safety, and tolerability were non-inferior in patients switched to a regimen containing tenofovir alafenamide versus in those remaining on one containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. METHODS: In this randomised, actively controlled, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority trial, we recruited HIV-1-infected adults from Gilead clinical studies at 168 sites in 19 countries. Patients were virologically suppressed (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL per min or greater, and were taking one of four tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-containing regimens for at least 96 weeks before enrolment. With use of a third-party computer-generated sequence, patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive a once-a-day single-tablet containing elvitegravir 150 mg, cobicistat 150 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 10 mg (tenofovir alafenamide group) or to carry on taking one of four previous tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-containing regimens (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group) for 96 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by previous treatment regimen in blocks of six. Patients and treating physicians were not masked to the assigned study regimen; outcome assessors were masked until database lock. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who received at least one dose of study drug who had undetectable viral load (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL) at week 48. The non-inferiority margin was 12%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01815736. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2013 and April 3, 2014, we enrolled 1443 patients. 959 patients were randomly assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide group and 477 to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. Viral suppression at week 48 was noted in 932 (97%) patients assigned to the tenofovir alafenamide group and in 444 (93%) assigned to the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (adjusted difference 4·1%, 95% CI 1·6-6·7), with virological failure noted in ten and six patients, respectively. The number of adverse events was similar between the two groups, but study drug-related adverse events were more common in the tenofovir alafenamide group (204 patients [21%] vs 76 [16%]). Hip and spine bone mineral density and glomerular filtration were each significantly improved in patients in the tenofovir alafenamide group compared with those in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. INTERPRETATION: Switching to a tenofovir alafenamide-containing regimen from one containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was non-inferior for maintenance of viral suppression and led to improved bone mineral density and renal function. Longer term follow-up is needed to better understand the clinical impact of these changes. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Safety and immunogenicity of a chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored Ebola vaccine in healthy adults: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-finding, phase 1/2a study.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing Ebola outbreak led to accelerated efforts to test vaccine candidates. On the basis of a request by WHO, we aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the monovalent, recombinant, chimpanzee adenovirus type-3 vector-based Ebola Zaire vaccine (ChAd3-EBO-Z). METHODS: We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-finding, phase 1/2a trial at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland. Participants (aged 18-65 years) were randomly assigned (2:2:1), via two computer-generated randomisation lists for individuals potentially deployed in endemic areas and those not deployed, to receive a single intramuscular dose of high-dose vaccine (5 × 10(10) viral particles), low-dose vaccine (2·5 × 10(10) viral particles), or placebo. Deployed participants were allocated to only the vaccine groups. Group allocation was concealed from non-deployed participants, investigators, and outcome assessors. The safety evaluation was not masked for potentially deployed participants, who were therefore not included in the safety analysis for comparison between the vaccine doses and placebo, but were pooled with the non-deployed group to compare immunogenicity. The main objectives were safety and immunogenicity of ChAd3-EBO-Z. We did analysis by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02289027. FINDINGS: Between Oct 24, 2014, and June 22, 2015, we randomly assigned 120 participants, of whom 18 (15%) were potentially deployed and 102 (85%) were non-deployed, to receive high-dose vaccine (n=49), low-dose vaccine (n=51), or placebo (n=20). Participants were followed up for 6 months. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. We recorded local adverse events in 30 (75%) of 40 participants in the high-dose group, 33 (79%) of 42 participants in the low-dose group, and five (25%) of 20 participants in the placebo group. Fatigue or malaise was the most common systemic adverse event, reported in 25 (62%) participants in the high-dose group, 25 (60%) participants in the low-dose group, and five (25%) participants in the placebo group, followed by headache, reported in 23 (57%), 25 (60%), and three (15%) participants, respectively. Fever occurred 24 h after injection in 12 (30%) participants in the high-dose group and 11 (26%) participants in the low-dose group versus one (5%) participant in the placebo group. Geometric mean concentrations of IgG antibodies against Ebola glycoprotein peaked on day 28 at 51 μg/mL (95% CI 41·1-63·3) in the high-dose group, 44·9 μg/mL (25·8-56·3) in the low-dose group, and 5·2 μg/mL (3·5-7·6) in the placebo group, with respective response rates of 96% (95% CI 85·7-99·5), 96% (86·5-99·5), and 5% (0·1-24·9). Geometric mean concentrations decreased by day 180 to 25·5 μg/mL (95% CI 20·6-31·5) in the high-dose group, 22·1 μg/mL (19·3-28·6) in the low-dose group, and 3·2 μg/mL (2·4-4·9) in the placebo group. 28 (57%) participants given high-dose vaccine and 31 (61%) participants given low-dose vaccine developed glycoprotein-specific CD4 cell responses, and 33 (67%) and 35 (69%), respectively, developed CD8 responses. INTERPRETATION: ChAd3-EBO-Z was safe and well tolerated, although mild to moderate systemic adverse events were common. A single dose was immunogenic in almost all vaccine recipients. Antibody responses were still significantly present at 6 months. There was no significant difference between doses for safety and immunogenicity outcomes. This acceptable safety profile provides a reliable basis to proceed with phase 2 and phase 3 efficacy trials in Africa. FUNDING: Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), through the EU Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme.