Speech therapy after stroke: trial shows only that practice varies

Bowen and colleagues’ methods and conclusions raise concerns.1 At best, the trial evaluates the variability in current practice. In no way is it a robust test of treatment. Two communication impairments (aphasia and dysarthria) were included. In the post-acute stage spontaneous recovery is highly unpredictable, and changes in the profile of impairment during this time are common.2 Both impairments manifest in different forms,3 which may be more or less responsive to treatment. A third kind of impairment, apraxia of speech, was not excluded but was not targeted in therapy. All three impairments can and do co-occur. Whether randomised controlled trial designs can effectively cope with such complex disorders has been discussed elsewhere.4 Treatment was defined within terms of current practice but was unconstrained. Therefore, the treatment group would have received a variety of therapeutic approaches and protocols, some of which may indeed be ineffective. Only 53% of the contact time with a speech and language therapist was direct (one to one), the rest was impairment based therapy. In contrast, all of the visitors’ time was direct contact, usually in conversation. In both groups, the frequency and length of contact time varied. We already know that the transfer from impairment based therapy to functional communication can be limited and varies across individuals.5 However, it is not possible to conclude from this trial that one to one impairment based therapy should be replaced. For that, a well defined impairment therapy protocol must be directly compared with a similarly well defined functional communication therapy, with an attention control.

Magnetic resonance imaging of a randomized controlled trial investigating predictors of recovery following psychological treatment in adolescents with moderate to severe unipolar depression: study protocol for Magnetic Resonance - Improving Mood with Psychoanalytic and Cognitive Therapies (MR-IMPACT)

Background Major depressive disorders (MDD) are a debilitating and pervasive group of mental illnesses afflicting many millions of people resulting in the loss of 110 million working days and more than 2,500 suicides per annum. Adolescent MDD patients attending NHS clinics show high rates of recurrence into adult life. A meta-analysis of recent research shows that psychological treatments are not as efficacious as previously thought. Modest treatment outcomes of approximately 65% of cases responding suggest that aetiological and clinical heterogeneity may hamper the better use of existing therapies and discovery of more effective treatments. Information with respect to optimal treatment choice for individuals is lacking, with no validated biomarkers to aid therapeutic decision-making. Methods/Design Magnetic resonance-Improving Mood with Psychoanalytic and Cognitive Therapies, the MR-IMPACT study, plans to identify brain regions implicated in the pathophysiology of depressions and examine whether there are specific behavioural or neural markers predicting remission and/or subsequent relapse in a subsample of depressed adolescents recruited to the IMPACT randomised controlled trial (Registration # ISRCTN83033550). Discussion MR-IMPACT is an investigative biomarker component of the IMPACT pragmatic effectiveness trial. The aim of this investigation is to identify neural markers and regional indicators of the pathophysiology of and treatment response for MDD in adolescents. We anticipate that these data may enable more targeted treatment delivery by identifying those patients who may be optimal candidates for therapeutic response.

The effect of flavanol-rich cocoa on cerebral perfusion in healthy older adults during conscious resting state: a placebo controlled, crossover, acute trial

Rationale: There has recently been increasing interest in the potential of flavanols, plant derived compounds found in foods such as fruit and vegetables, to ameliorate age-related cognitive decline. Research suggests that cocoa flavanols improve memory and learning, possibly as a result of their anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects. These effects may be mediated by increased cerebral blood flow (CBF), thus stimulating neuronal function. Objectives: The present study employed arterial spin labelling (ASL) functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) to explore the effect of a single acute dose of cocoa flavanols on regional CBF. Methods: CBF was measured pre and post consumption of low (23mg) or high (494mg) 330ml equicaloric flavanol drinks matched for caffeine, theobromine, taste and appearance according to a randomised counterbalanced crossover double-blind design in eight males and ten females, aged 50-65 years. Changes in perfusion from pre to post consumption were calculated as a function of each drink. Results: Significant increases in regional perfusion across the brain were observed following consumption of the high flavanol drink relative to the low flavanol drink, particularly in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the central opercular cortex of the parietal lobe. Conclusions: Consumption of cocoa flavanol improves regional cerebral perfusion in older adults. This provides evidence for a possible acute mechanism by which cocoa flavanols are associated with benefits for cognitive performance.

A randomised, double- blind, cross-over study investigating the prebiotic effect of agave fructans in healthy human subjects

This placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind, cross-over human feeding study aimed to determine the prebiotic effect of agave fructans. A total of thirty-eight volunteers completed this trial. The treatment consisted of 3 weeks' supplementation with 5 g/d of prebiotic agave fructan (Predilife) or equivalent placebo (maltodextrin), followed by a 2-week washout period following which subjects were crossed over to alternate the treatment arm for 3 weeks followed by a 2-week washout. Faecal samples were collected at baseline, on the last day of treatment (days 22 and 58) and washout (days 36 and 72), respectively. Changes in faecal bacterial populations, SCFA and secretory IgA were assessed using fluorescent in situ hybridisation, GC and ELISA, respectively. Bowel movements, stool consistencies, abdominal comfort and mood changes were evaluated by a recorded daily questionnaire. In parallel, the effect of agave fructans on different regions of the colon using a three-stage continuous culture simulator was studied. Predilife significantly increased faecal bifidobacteria (log10 9·6 (sd 0·4)) and lactobacilli (log10 7·7 (sd 0·8)) compared with placebo (log10 9·2 (sd 0·4); P = 0·00) (log10 7·4 (sd 0·7); P = 0·000), respectively. No change was observed for other bacterial groups tested, SCFA, secretory IgA, and PGE2 concentrations between the treatment and placebo. Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis indicated that bacterial communities were randomly dispersed and no significant differences were observed between Predilife and placebo treatments. The in vitro models showed similar increases in bifidobacterial and lactobacilli populations to that observed with the in vivo trial. To conclude, agave fructans are well tolerated in healthy human subjects and increased bifidobacteria and lactobacilli numbers in vitro and in vivo but did not influence other products of fermentation

An investigation of the shortcomings of the CONSORT 2010 statement for the reporting of group sequential randomised controlled trials: a methodological systematic review

Background It can be argued that adaptive designs are underused in clinical research. We have explored concerns related to inadequate reporting of such trials, which may influence their uptake. Through a careful examination of the literature, we evaluated the standards of reporting of group sequential (GS) randomised controlled trials, one form of a confirmatory adaptive design. Methods We undertook a systematic review, by searching Ovid MEDLINE from the 1st January 2001 to 23rd September 2014, supplemented with trials from an audit study. We included parallel group, confirmatory, GS trials that were prospectively designed using a Frequentist approach. Eligible trials were examined for compliance in their reporting against the CONSORT 2010 checklist. In addition, as part of our evaluation, we developed a supplementary checklist to explicitly capture group sequential specific reporting aspects, and investigated how these are currently being reported. Results Of the 284 screened trials, 68(24%) were eligible. Most trials were published in “high impact” peer-reviewed journals. Examination of trials established that 46(68%) were stopped early, predominantly either for futility or efficacy. Suboptimal reporting compliance was found in general items relating to: access to full trials protocols; methods to generate randomisation list(s); details of randomisation concealment, and its implementation. Benchmarking against the supplementary checklist, GS aspects were largely inadequately reported. Only 3(7%) trials which stopped early reported use of statistical bias correction. Moreover, 52(76%) trials failed to disclose methods used to minimise the risk of operational bias, due to the knowledge or leakage of interim results. Occurrence of changes to trial methods and outcomes could not be determined in most trials, due to inaccessible protocols and amendments. Discussion and Conclusions There are issues with the reporting of GS trials, particularly those specific to the conduct of interim analyses. Suboptimal reporting of bias correction methods could potentially imply most GS trials stopping early are giving biased results of treatment effects. As a result, research consumers may question credibility of findings to change practice when trials are stopped early. These issues could be alleviated through a CONSORT extension. Assurance of scientific rigour through transparent adequate reporting is paramount to the credibility of findings from adaptive trials. Our systematic literature search was restricted to one database due to resource constraints.

Acceptability of home-assessment post medical abortion and medical abortion in a low-resource setting in Rajasthan, India : Secondary outcome analysis of a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

Background: Studies evaluating acceptability of simplified follow-up after medical abortion have focused on high-resource or urban settings where telephones, road connections, and modes of transport are available and where women have formal education. Objective: To investigate women's acceptability of home-assessment of abortion and whether acceptability of medical abortion differs by in-clinic or home-assessment of abortion outcome in a low-resource setting in India. Design: Secondary outcome of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Setting Outpatient primary health care clinics in rural and urban Rajasthan, India. Population: Women were eligible if they sought abortion with a gestation up to 9 weeks, lived within defined study area and agreed to follow-up. Women were ineligible if they had known contraindications to medical abortion, haemoglobin < 85mg/l and were below 18 years. Methods: Abortion outcome assessment through routine clinic follow-up by a doctor was compared with home-assessment using a low-sensitivity pregnancy test and a pictorial instruction sheet. A computerized random number generator generated the randomisation sequence (1: 1) in blocks of six. Research assistants randomly allocated eligible women who opted for medical abortion (mifepristone and misoprostol), using opaque sealed envelopes. Blinding during outcome assessment was not possible. Main outcome measures: Women's acceptability of home-assessment was measured as future preference of follow-up. Overall satisfaction, expectations, and comparison with previous abortion experiences were compared between study groups. Results: 731 women were randomized to the clinic follow-up group (n = 353) or home-assessment group (n = 378). 623 (85%) women were successfully followed up, of those 597 (96%) were satisfied and 592 (95%) found the abortion better or as expected, with no difference between study groups. The majority, 355 (57%) women, preferred home-assessment in the event of a future abortion. Significantly more women, 284 (82%), in the home-assessment group preferred home-assessment in the future, as compared with 188 (70%) of women in the clinic follow-up group, who preferred clinic follow-up in the future (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Home-assessment is highly acceptable among women in low-resource, and rural, settings. The choice to follow-up an early medical abortion according to women's preference should be offered to foster women's reproductive autonomy.

Modified radical mastectomy: A pilot clinical trial comparing the use of conventional electric scalpel and harmonic scalpel

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the rates of local postoperative complications among women undergoing modified radical mastectomy with an electric scalpel (ES) or a harmonic scalpel (HS). It is thought that HS use has less postoperative complications, mainly seroma formation. Methods: This study was a prospective non-randomised clinical trial (NCT01391988) among consecutive patients, performed in parallel. Patients underwent modified radical mastectomy using an HS or ES. We analysed the following operative variables: time, blood loss and seroma volume drainage. Postoperative complications, including seroma, flap necrosis, haematoma and infection were evaluated on the 7th and 14th days. Results: Forty-six patients underwent a MRM with ES and 49 with HS; no differences were observed between the groups. The rate of local complications was 29% in the HS group and 52% in the ES group (p=0.024). The rates of seroma (16.3% versus 28.3%; p=0.161), necrosis (4.1% vs. 21.7%; p=0.013; OR=0.15), haematoma (2.0% vs. 8.7%; p=0.195) and infection (2.0% vs. 6.5%; p=0.351) were lower in the HS group. Adding the findings of all comparative studies using HSs in MRM to the seroma rates in the current study, the seroma rate, expressed as a categorical variable, did not decrease with HS. Seroma was present in 60/219 cases using an HS and in 69/239 cases utilising an ES (p=0.72). Based on a multivariate analysis, HS decreased the risk of skin necrosis (p=0.015). Conclusions: HSs do not decrease the seroma rate. However, this method may be useful in skin sparing mastectomy because it decreases skin flap necrosis. © 2013 Surgical Associates Ltd.

Surrogate endpoints for prostate cancer-specific mortality after radiotherapy and androgen suppression therapy in men with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer: an analysis of two randomised trials

Background Androgen suppression therapy and radiotherapy are used to treat locally advanced prostate cancer. 3 years of androgen suppression confers a small survival benefit compared with 6 months of therapy in this setting, but is associated with more toxic effects. Early identification of men in whom radiotherapy and 6 months of androgen suppression is insufficient for cure is important. Thus, we assessed whether prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values can act as an early surrogate for prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Methods We systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials that showed improved overall and prostate cancer-specific survival with radiotherapy and 6 months of androgen suppression compared with radio therapy alone and measured lowest PSA concentrations (PSA nadir) and those immediately after treatment (PSA end). We assessed a cohort of 734 men with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer from two eligible trials in the USA and Australasia that randomly allocated participants between Feb 2, 1996, and Dec 27, 2001. We used Prentice criteria to assess whether reported PSA nadir or PSA end concentrations of more than 0.5 ng/mL were surrogates for PCSM. Findings Men treated with radiotherapy and 6 months of androgen suppression in both trials were significantly less likely to have PSA end and PSA nadir values of more than 0.5 ng/mL than were those treated with radiotherapy alone (p<0.0001). Presence of candidate surrogates (ie, PSA end and PSA nadir values >0.5 ng/mL) alone and when assessed in conjunction with the randomised treatment group increased risk of PCSM in the US trial (PSA nadir p=0.0016; PSA end p=0.017) and Australasian trial (PSA nadir p<0.0001; PSA end p=0.0012). In both trials, the randomised treatment group was no longer associated with PCSM (p >= 0.20) when the candidate surrogates were included in the model. Therefore, both PSA metrics satisfied Prentice criteria for surrogacy. Interpretation After radiotherapy and 6 months of androgen suppression, men with PSA end values exceeding 0.5 ng/mL should be considered for long-term androgen suppression and those with localised or locally advanced prostate cancer with PSA nadir values exceeding 0.5 ng/mL should be considered for inclusion in randomised trials investigating the use of drugs that have extended survival in castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer.

Effects of a combined strengthening, stretching and functional training program versus usual-care on gait biomechanics and foot function for diabetic neuropathy: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Polyneuropathy is a complication of diabetes mellitus that has been very challenging for clinicians. It results in high public health costs and has a huge impact on patients' quality of life. Preventive interventions are still the most important approach to avoid plantar ulceration and amputation, which is the most devastating endpoint of the disease. Some therapeutic interventions improve gait quality, confidence, and quality of life; however, there is no evidence yet of an effective physical therapy treatment for recovering musculoskeletal function and foot rollover during gait that could potentially redistribute plantar pressure and reduce the risk of ulcer formation. Methods/Design: A randomised, controlled trial, with blind assessment, was designed to study the effect of a physiotherapy intervention on foot rollover during gait, range of motion, muscle strength and function of the foot and ankle, and balance confidence. The main outcome is plantar pressure during foot rollover, and the secondary outcomes are kinetic and kinematic parameters of gait, neuropathy signs and symptoms, foot and ankle range of motion and function, muscle strength, and balance confidence. The intervention is carried out for 12 weeks, twice a week, for 40-60 min each session. The follow-up period is 24 weeks from the baseline condition. Discussion: Herein, we present a more comprehensive and specific physiotherapy approach for foot and ankle function, by choosing simple tasks, focusing on recovering range of motion, strength, and functionality of the joints most impaired by diabetic polyneuropathy. In addition, this intervention aims to transfer these peripheral gains to the functional and more complex task of foot rollover during gait, in order to reduce risk of ulceration. If it shows any benefit, this protocol can be used in clinical practice and can be indicated as complementary treatment for this disease.

[CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

Multiplicity of data in trial reports and the reliability of meta-analyses: empirical study

Objectives To examine the extent of multiplicity of data in trial reports and to assess the impact of multiplicity on meta-analysis results. Design Empirical study on a cohort of Cochrane systematic reviews. Data sources All Cochrane systematic reviews published from issue 3 in 2006 to issue 2 in 2007 that presented a result as a standardised mean difference (SMD). We retrieved trial reports contributing to the first SMD result in each review, and downloaded review protocols. We used these SMDs to identify a specific outcome for each meta-analysis from its protocol. Review methods Reviews were eligible if SMD results were based on two to ten randomised trials and if protocols described the outcome. We excluded reviews if they only presented results of subgroup analyses. Based on review protocols and index outcomes, two observers independently extracted the data necessary to calculate SMDs from the original trial reports for any intervention group, time point, or outcome measure compatible with the protocol. From the extracted data, we used Monte Carlo simulations to calculate all possible SMDs for every meta-analysis. Results We identified 19 eligible meta-analyses (including 83 trials). Published review protocols often lacked information about which data to choose. Twenty-four (29%) trials reported data for multiple intervention groups, 30 (36%) reported data for multiple time points, and 29 (35%) reported the index outcome measured on multiple scales. In 18 meta-analyses, we found multiplicity of data in at least one trial report; the median difference between the smallest and largest SMD results within a meta-analysis was 0.40 standard deviation units (range 0.04 to 0.91). Conclusions Multiplicity of data can affect the findings of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. To reduce the risk of bias, reviews and meta-analyses should comply with prespecified protocols that clearly identify time points, intervention groups, and scales of interest.

Can we improve partner notification rates through expedited partner therapy in the UK? Findings from an exploratory trial of Accelerated Partner Therapy (APT)

To develop two new models of expedited partner therapy for the UK, and evaluate them for feasibility, acceptability and preliminary outcome estimates to inform the design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT).

Hyaluronic Acid as an Adjunct After Scaling and Root Planing - A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

Aim: The study was designed to determine the effect on clinical variables, subgingival bacteria and local immune response brought about by additional application of hyaluronan-containing gels in early wound healing after scaling and root planing (SRP). Material and Methods: In this randomised clinical study, data from 34 individuals with chronic periodontitis was evaluated after full-mouth SRP. In the test group (n = 17), hyaluronan gels in two molecular weights were additionally applied during the first two weeks after SRP. The control group (n = 17) was treated with SRP only. Probing depth (PD) and attachment level (AL) were recorded at baseline and after 3 and 6 months, and subgingival plaque and sulcus fluid samples were taken for microbiological and biochemical analysis. Results: In both groups, PD and AL were significantly reduced (p < 0.001). The changes in PD and the reduction of the numbers of pockets with PD ≥ 5mm were significantly higher in the test group after 3 (p = 0.014; p = 0.021) and 6 months (p = 0.046; p = 0.045). Six months after SRP, the counts of Treponema denticola were significantly reduced in both groups (both p = 0.043), those of Campylobacter rectus in the test group only (p = 0.028). Prevotella intermedia and Porphyromonas gingivalis increased in the control group. Conclusions: The adjunctive application of hyaluronan may have positive effects on probing depth reduction and may prevent recolonization by periodontopathogens.