Search

Introduction: Childbirth-related perineal trauma (CRPT) is the most common complication of childbirth affecting 80% of women overall after vaginal birth. There remains a lack of comprehensive evidence relating to the prevalence of subsequent health problems. Current evidence is related to short-term outcomes, for example, pain, but there is less known about longer-term outcomes such as infection, wound dehiscence, pelvic floor function and psychological outcomes. This is a protocol for a cohort study assessing outcomes of women after CRPT., Methods and Analysis: A multicentre, prospective UK cohort study aiming to include 1000 women. All women who have sustained CRPT will be eligible for inclusion and will be followed-up for 12 months after childbirth. The primary outcome will be perineal infection at 6 weeks post-birth. Secondary outcomes will include antibiotic use for perineal infection, wound breakdown, use of analgesia, the requirement for admission or surgical intervention, urinary and faecal incontinence, anxiety and depressive symptoms, sexual function and impact on daily activities. Outcomes will be measured at 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months post partum, with some outcomes being measured at all time points and others at selected most appropriate time points only. Outcome data will be obtained from a review of clinical notes and from patient questionnaires. Simple descriptive statistics will be used to summarise characteristics and outcomes, with categorical variables expressed as percentages and continuous variables as mean averages, alongside the corresponding standard deviatons., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been granted by the Research Ethics Council with reference 23/WA/0169. Data collected from the Childbirth Acquired Perineal Trauma (CHAPTER) cohort study will highlight the prevalence and type of complications after CRPT and which women are more at risk. After the conclusion of this study, findings will be used to work with governmental organisations and Royal Colleges to target resources and ultimately improve care., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: This study aimed to understand the role of surgical Trainee Research Collaboratives (TRCs) in conducting randomised controlled trials and identify strategies to enhance trainee engagement in trials., Design: This is a mixed methods study. We used observation of TRC meetings, semi-structured interviews and an online survey to explore trainees' motivations for engagement in trials and TRCs, including barriers and facilitators. Interviews were analysed thematically, alongside observation field notes. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive statistics. Strategies to enhance TRCs were developed at a workshop by 13 trial methodologists, surgical trainees, consultants and research nurses., Setting: This study was conducted within a secondary care setting in the UK., Participants: The survey was sent to registered UK surgical trainees. TRC members and linked stakeholders across surgical specialties and UK regions were purposefully sampled for interviews., Results: We observed 5 TRC meetings, conducted 32 semi-structured interviews and analysed 73 survey responses. TRCs can mobilise trainees thus gaining wider access to patients. Trainees engaged with TRCs to improve patient care, surgical evidence and to help progress their careers. Trainees valued the TRC infrastructure, research expertise and mentoring. Challenges for trainees included clinical and other priorities, limited time and confidence, and recognition, especially by authorship. Key TRC strategies were consultant support, initial simple rapid studies, transparency of involvement and recognition for trainees (including authorship policies) and working with Clinical Trials Units and research nurses. A 6 min digital story on YouTube disseminated these strategies., Conclusion: Trainee surgeons are mostly motivated to engage with trials and TRCs. Trainee engagement in TRCs can be enhanced through building relationships with key stakeholders, maximising multi-disciplinary working and offering training and career development opportunities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: NH, TP, JB, NSB, JG, DN have been involved with a TRC; CC, KC, JAC, RB, AA-P, CS, LM, GM, JAL are methodologists who work with a CTU or in trials methodology and ZH and VH are research nurses who work with clinical research networks., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Imbalance of the gut microbiome is key to the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis (UC). Faecal microbiota transplant (FMT) is the transfer of homogenised and filtered faeces from a healthy individual to the gastrointestinal tract of a patient with disease. Published datasets show a positive signal for the use of FMT to treat UC, but the optimal route and dose of FMT remain unanswered., Methods and Analysis: This prospective, multi-centre open-label, randomised pilot study will assess two possible routes of FMT delivery, via the nasogastric (NG) route or by delivery to the COLON, in 30 patients with active UC recruited from three sites in the UK. Stool will be collected from healthy screened donors, processed, frozen and stored under a Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) "specials" manufacturing licence held at the University of Birmingham Microbiome Treatment Centre. Thawed FMT samples will be administered to patients either via eight nasogastric infusions given initially over 4 days starting on the day of randomisation, and then again for 4 days in week 4 for foregut delivery (total of 240 g of stool) or via one colonoscopic infusion followed by seven weekly enemas according to the hindgut protocol (total of 360 g of stool). Patients will be followed up weekly for 8 weeks, and then at 12 weeks. The aims of this pilot study are (1) to determine which FMT administration route (NG or COLON) should be investigated in a randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and (2) to determine if a full randomised controlled trial is feasible. The primary outcome will be a composite assessment of both qualitative and quantitative data based on efficacy (clinical response), acceptability and safety. At the end of the pilot study, decisions will be made regarding the feasibility of a full randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and, if deemed feasible, which route of administration should be used in such a study., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval for this study has been obtained from the East Midlands-Nottingham Research Ethics Committee (REC 17/EM/0274). At the end of the study, findings will be reported at national and international gastroenterology meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN74072945., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the highly effective standard treatment for rectal cancer but is associated with significant morbidity and may be overtreatment for low-risk cancers. This study is designed to determine the feasibility of international recruitment in a study comparing organ-saving approaches versus standard TME surgery., Methods and Analysis: STAR-TREC trial is a multicentre international randomised, three-arm parallel, phase II feasibility study in patients with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the rectum. The trial is coordinated from Birmingham, UK with national hubs in Radboudumc (the Netherlands) and Odense University Hospital Svendborg UMC (Denmark). Patients with rectal cancer, staged by CT and MRI as ≤cT3b (up to 5 mm of extramural spread) N0 M0 can be included. Patients will be randomised to either standard TME surgery (control), organ-saving treatment using long-course concurrent chemoradiation or organ-saving treatment using short-course radiotherapy. For patients treated with an organ-saving strategy, clinical response to (chemo)radiotherapy determines the next treatment step. An active surveillance regime will be performed in the case of a complete clinical regression. In the case of incomplete clinical regression, patients will proceed to local excision using an optimised platform such as transanal endoscopic microsurgery or other transanal techniques (eg, transanal endoscopic operation or transanal minimally invasive surgery). The primary endpoint of this phase II study is to demonstrate sufficient international recruitment in order to sustain a phase III study incorporating pelvic failure as the primary endpoint. Success in phase II is defined as randomisation of at least four cases per month internationally in year 1, rising to at least six cases per month internationally during year 2., Ethics and Dissemination: The medical ethical committees of all the participating countries have approved the study protocol. Results of the primary and secondary endpoints will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN14240288, 20 October 2016. NCT02945566; Pre-results, October 2016., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Objective: To provide a framework that is able to categorise whether patients are able to adapt to and lead a 'normal' life with ulcerative colitis (UC) and to detail the factors that influence this., Design: Qualitative research study using in-depth semi-structured interviews., Setting: Four clinical sites in the West and East Midlands regions of England., Participants: 28 adult patients diagnosed with UC for years between 1 and 22., Results: Medication was rarely sufficient for patients to adapt to UC and live as 'normal' a life as possible. Virtually all patients tested and adopted non-medical adaptation methods to improve physical and psychological well-being, to help them carry on working and to prevent embarrassment. In addition, some patients benefited from outside support providing them with practical, emotional and/or financial help. In conjunction with adaptation strategies and the time to adapt, this meant that some patients with severe clinical disease were able to maintain a sense of normality in life. Patients reported that clinicians were not always receptive to discussion of the broader context of life with UC., Conclusions: Patients' experience of UC and their ability to adapt in order to maintain a sense of normality in life is a complex interplay of symptoms, adaptation strategies and outside support. Over time patients test out a variety of non-medical adaptation strategies. Awareness of this may help clinicians and researchers to understand patients' views on the role of medical and other therapies. Further research around the utility of this framework in clinical practice and research is now required., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN56523019, results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)