Search

Background: This paper presents insight into the scale of mental health concerns for families who have a child or young person with a diagnosis of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) living in any of the four nations of the United Kingdom (UK). The study's objective is to share the current experiences of those that responded to a charity survey and consider future work to improve mental health support. Methods: This work was initiated and led by five UK charity partner organisations working with families affected by JIA. Parents/carers of a child or young person with JIA, and young people with JIA, submitted self-completion online questionnaires. The questionnaire asked 19 core questions, with a focus on the mental health impact of having and living with a JIA diagnosis. Questionnaires were delivered via charity partner UK-wide mailing lists and social media. Results: Questionnaire were completed by 291 participants over a 3-week period in February 2022. The majority of respondents were parents (229, 79%), 103 children had been diagnosed for over six years (35%), and 131 (45%) received shared care between paediatric rheumatology centres. In total, 168 (59%) children and young people with JIA had received, were currently receiving or were waiting for mental health support. Parents reported that their child's diagnosis impacted their own mental health (218, 82%). Children and young people reported never being offered mental health support during appointments for JIA (157, 54%), and 71 (50%) of these had never received support. Conclusion: Children and young people with JIA have significant mental health sequelae from their diagnosis. Our findings found that nearly 60% of our respondents have had or are requiring mental health support, with significant numbers of parents/carers reporting difficulties in accessing care for their child's mental health or their own mental health, due to their child's diagnosis. This unique collaborative charity-led study, illustrates the importance of timely and accessible mental health support. Further work is needed to understand why best practice guidance for mental health support is not being met consistently and to identify how to embed it into standard rheumatology care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physical activity has been associated with many benefits throughout the life course. As levels of physical activity appear to be insufficient in large populations, the development of effective interventions to promote or maintain activity levels in young people are therefore of key public health concern. Physical activity intervention research in young people is challenging, but this should not be a reason to continue conducting inferior quality evaluations. This paper highlights some of the key issues that require more careful and consistent consideration to enable future research to achieve meaningful impact. Discussion: This paper critically evaluates, amongst others, current research practice regarding intervention development, targeting, active involvement of the target population, challenge of recruitment and retention, measurement and evaluation protocols, long-term follow-up, economic evaluation, process evaluation, and publication. It argues that funders and researchers should collaborate to ensure high quality long-term evaluations are prioritised and that a trial's success should be defined by its quality, not its achieved effect. Summary: The conduct and publication of well-designed evaluations of well-defined interventions is crucial to advance the field of youth physical activity promotion and make us better understand which intervention strategies may or may not work, why, and for whom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Childhood bullying is a major risk factor for health, education and social relationships, with effects persisting into adulthood. It affects half of all children at some point, with 10-14 % experiencing bullying that lasts for years. With the advent of cyberbullying, it can happen at all times and places. There have been calls for GPs to take a more active role in identifying and supporting young people who are being bullied. This paper explores young people's and parents' opinions about whether general practice should be involved in identifying and supporting young people who are being bullied. Methods: Two hundred six young people (85.9 % female, mean ± sd age 16.2 ± 3.2 years) and 44 parents were recruited through established bullying charity websites and their social media channels to complete an online questionnaire comprising multiple-choice questions and unlimited narrative responses. Questionnaire responses were analysed by age and gender using descriptive statistics. A descriptive analysis of the narrative responses was undertaken and key themes identified. Results: Young people (90.8 %) and parents (88.7 %) thought it was important for GPs to be better able to recognise and help young people who are being bullied. Most recognised the link between bullying and health. The doctor's independence was seen as advantageous. Young people preferred completing a screening questionnaire to disclose experience of being bullied than being asked directly. They expressed concerns about how questions would be asked and whether information would be shared with parents/guardians. Parents were supportive of the use of a screening questionnaire, and most expected their child's disclosure to be shared with them. Conclusion: Young people and parents recruited through anti-bullying websites and social media would welcome greater GP involvement in identifying and supporting young people who are being bullied and their families, provided it is offered in a caring, compassionate and confidential manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Electronic administrative data exist in several domains which, if linked, are potentially useful for research. However, benefits from data linkage should be considered alongside risks such as the threat to privacy. Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a birth cohort study. The Project to Enhance ALSPAC through Record Linkage (PEARL) was established to enrich the ALSPAC resource through linkage between ALSPAC participants and routine sources of health and social data. Qualitative research was incorporated in the PEARL study to examine participants' views about data linkage and inform approaches to information sharing. This paper focusses on issues of consent.Methods: Digitally recorded interviews were conducted with 55 participants aged 17-19 years. Terms and processes relating to consent, anonymization and data linkage were explained to interviewees. Scenarios were used to prompt consideration of linking different sources of data, and whether consent should be requested. Interview recordings were fully transcribed. Thematic analysis was undertaken using the Framework approach.Results: Participant views on data linkage appeared to be most influenced by: considerations around the social sensitivity of the research question, and; the possibility of tangible health benefits in the public interest. Some participants appeared unsure about the effectiveness of anonymization, or did not always view effective anonymization as making consent unnecessary. This was related to notions of ownership of personal information and etiquette around asking permission for secondary use. Despite different consent procedures being explained, participants tended to equate consent with 'opt-in' consent through which participants are 'asked' if their data can be used for a specific study. Participants raising similar concerns came to differing conclusions about whether consent was needed. Views changed when presented with different scenarios, and were sometimes inconsistent.Conclusions: Findings from this study question the validity of 'informed consent' as a cornerstone of good governance, and the extent to which potential research participants understand different types of consent and what they are consenting, or not consenting, to. Pragmatic, imaginative and flexible approaches are needed if research using data linkage is to successfully realise its potential for public good without undermining public trust in the research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a global need to expand palliative care services to reach the increasing number requiring end of life care. In developing countries where the incidences of cancer are rising there is an urgent need to develop the palliative care workforce. This paper reports on a UK Department for international development (DFID) initiative funded through the Tropical Health Education Trust (THET) where palliative care staff, both clinical and academic, volunteered to help to develop, support and deliver a degree in palliative care in sub-Saharan Africa. The objective of the study was to explore the personal impact on the health care professionals of being part of this initiative.Methods: An evaluation approach using a confidential electronic survey containing quantitative and qualitative questions was distributed to all 17 volunteers on the programme, three months after completion of the first cohort. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and content thematic analysis. Ethical review deemed the study to be service evaluation.Results: 82 % (14) responded and several themes emerged from the data including the positive impact on teaching and educational skills; clinical practice and finally personal development. Using a score of 1-10 (1-no impact, 10 maximum impact) 'Lifestyle choices - life work balance' (rating 7.83) had the most impact.Conclusions: This approach to supporting the development of palliative care in Sub-Saharan Africa through skill sharing in supporting the delivery of a degree programme in palliative care was successful in terms of delivery of the degree programme, material development and mentorship of local staff. Additionally, this study shows it provided a range of positive impacts on the volunteer health care professionals from the UK. Professional impacts including increased management skills, and being better prepared to undertake a senior role. However it is the personal impact including lifestyle choices which the volunteers reported as the highest impact. Interestingly, several of the faculty have joined other volunteer programmes to continue to support the international development of palliative care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A common complication after stroke is development of cognitive impairment and dementia. However, effective strategies for reducing the risk of developing these problems remain undefined. Potential strategies include intensive lowering of blood pressure (BP) and/or lipids. This paper summarises the baseline characteristics, statistical analysis plan and feasibility of a randomised control trial of blood pressure and lipid lowering in patients post-stroke with the primary objective of reducing cognitive impairment and dementia.Methods: The Prevention Of Decline in Cognition After Stroke Trial (PODCAST) was a multi-centre prospective randomised open-label blinded-endpoint controlled partial-factorial internal pilot trial running in secondary and primary care. Participants without dementia were enrolled 3-7 months post ischaemic stroke or spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage, and randomised to intensive versus guideline BP lowering (target systolic BP <125 mmHg versus <140 mmHg); patients with ischaemic stroke were also randomised to intensive or guideline lipid lowering (target LDL cholesterol <1.4 mmol/L versus <3 mmol/L). The primary outcome was the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised; a key secondary outcome was to assess feasibility of performing a large trial of one or both interventions. Data are number (%) or mean (standard deviation). The trial was planned to last for 8 years with follow-up between 1 and 8 years. The plan for reporting the main results is included as Additional file 2.Results: 83 patients (of a planned 600) were recruited from 19 UK sites between 7 October 2010 and 31 January 2014. Delays, due to difficulties in the provision of excess treatment costs and to complexity of follow-up, led to few centres taking part and a much lower recruitment rate than planned. Patient characteristics at baseline were: age 74 (SD 7) years, male 64 (77 %), index stroke ischaemic 77 (93 %), stroke onset to randomisation 4.5 [SD 1.3] months, Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised 86 (of 100, SD 8), Montreal Cognitive Assessment 24 (of 30, SD 3), BP 147/82 (SD 19/11) mmHg, total cholesterol 4.0 (SD 0.8) mmol/L and LDL cholesterol 2.0 (SD 0.7) mmol/L, modified Rankin Scale 1.1 (SD 0.8).Conclusion: Limited recruitment suggests that a large trial is not feasible using the current protocol. The effects of the interventions on BP, lipids, and cognition will be reported in the main publication.Trial Registration: ISRCTN85562386 registered on 23 September 2009. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is considerable interest today in shared decision-making (SDM), defined as a decision-making process jointly shared by patients and their health care provider. However, the data show that SDM has not been broadly adopted yet. Consequently, the main goal of this proposal is to bring together the resources and the expertise needed to develop an interdisciplinary and international research team on the implementation of SDM in clinical practice using a theory-based dyadic perspective. Methods: Participants include researchers from Canada, US, UK, and Netherlands, representing medicine, nursing, psychology, community health and epidemiology. In order to develop a collaborative research network that takes advantage of the expertise of the team members, the following research activities are planned: 1) establish networking and on-going communication through internet-based forum, conference calls, and a bi-weekly e-bulletin; 2) hold a two-day workshop with two key experts (one in theoretical underpinnings of behavioral change, and a second in dyadic data analysis), and invite all investigators to present their views on the challenges related to the implementation of SDM in clinical practices; 3) conduct a secondary analyses of existing dyadic datasets to ensure that discussion among team members is grounded in empirical data; 4) build capacity with involvement of graduate students in the workshop and online forum; and 5) elaborate a position paper and an international multi-site study protocol. Discussion: This study protocol aims to inform researchers, educators, and clinicians interested in improving their understanding of effective strategies to implement shared decision-making in clinical practice using a theory-based dyadic perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are over 25 million people worldwide living with or beyond cancer and this number is increasing. Cancer survivors face a range of problems following primary treatment. One of the most frequently reported and distressing symptoms experienced by cancer survivors is fatigue. There is growing support for survivors who are experiencing problems after cancer treatment to engage in supported self-management. To date there is some evidence of effective interventions to manage fatigue in this population; however, to our knowledge there are no online resources that draw on this information to support self-management of fatigue. This paper describes the protocol for an exploratory randomized controlled trial of an online intervention to support self-management of cancer-related fatigue after primary cancer treatment.Methods/design: This is a parallel-group two-armed (1:1) exploratory randomized controlled trial including 125 cancer survivors experiencing fatigue (scoring ≥4 on a unidimensional 11-point numeric rating scale for fatigue intensity) within five years of primary treatment completion with curative intent. Participants will be recruited from 13 NHS Trusts across the UK and randomized to either the online intervention (RESTORE), or a leaflet comparator (Macmillan Cancer Backup, Coping with Fatigue). The primary outcome is a change in Perceived Self-Efficacy for Fatigue Self-Management (as measured by the Perceived Self-Efficacy for Fatigue Self-Management Instrument). Secondary outcomes include impact on perception and experience of fatigue (measured by the Brief Fatigue Inventory), and quality of life (measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General and the Personal Wellbeing Index). Outcome measures will be collected at baseline, 6 weeks (completion of intervention), and 3 months. Process evaluation (including telephone interviews with recruiting staff and participants) will determine acceptability of the intervention and trial processes.Discussion: Data from this trial will be used to refine the intervention and contribute to the design of an effectiveness trial. This intervention will be expanded to address other cancer-related problems important to cancer survivors following primary cancer treatment.Trial Registration: ISRCTN67521059. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]