Invited editorial presents an accurate summary of the results of two randomised placebo-controlled trials of vertebroplasty

Our recent editorial in the Journal presents an accurate summary of our two randomised trials of vertebroplasty, which found no benefit of vertebroplasty over placebo.

Participants in both trials are representative of patients seen in clinical practice and who would qualify for government-subsidised funding of vertebroplasty in Australia.

Clinical experience and previous published literature are likely to have overestimated the treatment benefit of vertebroplasty for many reasons.

This is why randomised placebo-controlled trials are required to determine the efficacy of treatment interventions, particularly when the condition being treated is self-limiting and the primary end point is improvement of symptoms.

Based on the best evidence currently available, the routine use of vertebroplasty outside of the research setting for painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures appears unjustified.

A cluster randomised controlled trial of vascular risk factor management in general practice

Letter to the editor: Harris and colleagues report failure to obtain reduction in several important risk factor-based intermediate outcomes for vascular disease from their lifestyle intervention in the Health Improvement and Prevention Study (HIPS).1 Using intention-to-treat analysis, if only 117 of 384 participants completed at least two of six group sessions, a positive result could not be expected. We know that interventions for prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes can be run successfully in Australian primary care, which raises questions about the design of Harris et al’s intervention.

Improving communication when seeking informed consent: a randomised controlled study of a computer-based method for providing information to prospective clinical trial participants

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, with respect to participant understanding of information, of a computer-based approach to communication about complex, technical issues that commonly arise when seeking informed consent for clinical research trials. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: An open, randomised controlled study of 60 patients with diabetes mellitus, aged 27-70 years, recruited between August 2006 and October 2007 from the Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology at the Alfred Hospital and Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne. INTERVENTION: Participants were asked to read information about a mock study via a computer-based presentation (n = 30) or a conventional paper-based information statement (n = 30). The computer-based presentation contained visual aids, including diagrams, video, hyperlinks and quiz pages. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Understanding of information as assessed by quantitative and qualitative means. RESULTS: Assessment scores used to measure level of understanding were significantly higher in the group that completed the computer-based task than the group that completed the paper-based task (82% v 73%; P = 0.005). More participants in the group that completed the computer-based task expressed interest in taking part in the mock study (23 v 17 participants; P = 0.01). Most participants from both groups preferred the idea of a computer-based presentation to the paper-based statement (21 in the computer-based task group, 18 in the paper-based task group). CONCLUSIONS: A computer-based method of providing information may help overcome existing deficiencies in communication about clinical research, and may reduce costs and improve efficiency in recruiting participants for clinical trials.

Contact & connect-an intervention to reduce depression stigma and symptoms in construction workers: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Males employed in the construction industry have high rates of suicide. Although reasons underpinning this risk are multifaceted, poor help-seeking and stigma are represent major contributors. Males in the construction industry are also exposed to other risk factors for mental ill health and suicide, including unemployment. Sigma-reducing interventions that are accessible and attractive to recently unemployed males in the construction industry could therefore improve help-seeking, and address depression and suicidal behaviour in this population. METHODS/DESIGN: Contact&Connect will use a parallel individual randomized design to evaluate the effectiveness of a multimedia-based intervention aimed at reducing stigma. The intervention consists of a package of 12 brief contact interventions (BCIs) delivered over a six month period. BCIs will direct participants to informational programs and microsites. Content will address three major themes: debunking depression myths and stereotypes, normalisation, and empowerment. Target enrolment is 630 (315 in each arm), each to be followed for 12 months. Eligible participants will be males, between 30 and 64 years, unemployed at the time of recruitment, registered with Incolink (a social welfare trustee company for unemployed members of the construction industry), and own a smart phone with enabled internet connectivity. DISCUSSION: At present, there are no programs that have been shown to be effective in reducing stigma in the blue-collar male population. Contact&Connect promises to provide a tailored, efficient, and scalable approach to reducing stigma, depressive symptoms and suicidality among unemployed males. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register ACTRN12615000792527  (date of registration: 30 July, 2015).

A cluster randomised controlled trial of vascular risk factor management in general practice

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a lifestyle intervention in Australian general practice to reduce the risk of vascular disease.

Design, setting and participants: Stratified cluster randomised controlled trial among 30 general practices in New South Wales from July 2008 to January 2010. Patients aged 40–64 years were invited to participate. The subgroup who were 40–55 years of age were included only if they had either hypertension or dyslipidaemia.

Intervention: A general practice-based health-check with brief lifestyle counselling and referral of high-risk patients to a program consisting of one to two individual visits with an exercise physiologist or dietitian, and six group sessions.

Main outcome measures: Outcomes at baseline, 6 and 12 months included the behavioural and physiological risk factors for vascular disease — self-reported diet and physical activity, and measured weight, body mass index, waist circumference, blood lipid and blood sugar levels, and blood pressure.

Results: Of the 3128 patients who were invited, 958 patients (30.6%) responded and 814 were eligible to participate. Of these, 699 commenced the study, and 655 remained in the study at 12 months. Physical activity levels increased to a greater extent in the intervention group than the control group at 6 and 12 months (P = 0.005). There were no other changes in behavioural or physiological outcomes or in estimated absolute risk of cardiovascular disease at 12 months. Of the 384 enrolled in the intervention group, 117 patients (30.5%) attended the minimum number of group program sessions and lost more weight (mean weight loss, 1.06 kg) than those who did not attend the minimum number of sessions (mean weight gain, 0.73 kg).

Conclusion: While patients who received counselling by their general practitioner increased self-reported physical activity, only those who attended the group sessions sustained an improvement in weight. However, more research is needed to determine whether group programs offer significant benefits over individual counselling in general practice.

Putting the spoils of litigation into the shareholders’ pockets: when can shareholders bring a personal action against the directors of their company?

company is legally incorporated it must be treated like any other independent person with its rightsand liabilities appropriate to itself”.2 A consequence of this is the “proper plaintiff” principleestablished in Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461; 67 ER 189: the proper plaintiff in an action inrespect of a wrong done to a corporation is the corporation itself.3 It is also a “hallowed rule” thatdirectors owe their duties to the company, not the shareholders,4 and so any loss accruing to thecompany as a result of the directors’ breach of their duties is recoverable only by the company.5An obvious problem with this state of affairs is that a company will be unlikely to initiateproceedings against its directors when the company is controlled by those directors.6 While there aregood economic reasons for this division of management and ownership,7 shareholders are left with acritical question: under what circumstances can they initiate proceedings to recover loss suffered as aresult of company directors’ breach of their duties? Although one writer has referred to the“expansive statutory and common law arsenals” available to aggrieved shareholders,8 it seems ratherthe case that there are few effective remedies. For shareholders have no contractual relationship withdirectors,9 and the personal rights conferred on shareholders by statute or general law are largelyprocedural10 and seem a rather ineffective basis for “scrutinising directorial performance”.