Search

Introduction: Successful adoption of POCTs (Point-of-Care tests) for COVID-19 in care homes requires the identification of ideal use cases and a full understanding of the contextual and usability factors that affect test results and minimise biosafety risks. This paper presents a scoping-usability and test performance study of a microfluidic immunofluorescence assay for COVID-19 in care homes. Methods: A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted in four UK care homes to scope usability and to assess the agreement with qRT-PCR. A dry run with luminescent dye was conducted to explore biosafety issues. Results: The agreement analysis was conducted on 227 asymptomatic participants (159 staff and 68 residents) and 14 symptomatic participants (5 staff and 9 residents). Asymptomatic specimens showed 50% (95% CI:1.3%−98.7%) positive agreement and 96% (95% CI: 92.5%−98.1%) negative agreement with overall prevalence and bias-adjusted Kappa (PABAK) of 0.911 (95% CI: 0.857−0.965). Symptomatic specimens showed 83.3% (95% CI: 35.9%−99.6%) positive agreement and 100% (95% CI: 63.1%−100%) negative agreement with overall prevalence and bias-adjusted Kappa (PABAK) of 0.857 (95% CI: 0.549−1). The dry run highlighted four main sources of contamination that led to the modification of the standard operating procedures. Simulation post-modification showed no further evidence of contamination. Conclusion: Careful consideration of biosafety issues and contextual factors associated with care home are mandatory for safe use the POCT. Whilst POCT may have some utility for ruling out COVID-19, further diagnostic accuracy evaluations are needed to promote effective adoption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine the feasibility of a trial to evaluate web-based physiotherapy compared to a standard home exercise programme in people with multiple sclerosis. Design: Multi-centre, randomized controlled, feasibility study. Setting: Three multiple sclerosis out-patient centres. Participants: A total of 90 people with multiple sclerosis (Expanded Disability Status Scale 4–6.5). Interventions: Participants were randomized to a six-month individualized, home exercise programme delivered via web-based physiotherapy (n = 45; intervention) or a sheet of exercises (n = 45; active comparator). Outcome measures: Outcome measures (0, three, six and nine months) included adherence, two-minute walk test, 25 foot walk, Berg Balance Scale, physical activity and healthcare resource use. Interviews were undertaken with 24 participants and 3 physiotherapists. Results: Almost 25% of people approached agreed to take part. No intervention-related adverse events were recorded. Adherence was 40%–63% and 53%–71% in the intervention and comparator groups. There was no difference in the two-minute walk test between groups at baseline (Intervention-80.4(33.91)m, Comparator-70.6(31.20)m) and no change over time (at six-month Intervention-81.6(32.75)m, Comparator-74.8(36.16)m. There were no significant changes over time in other outcome measures except the EuroQol-5 Dimension at six months which decreased in the active comparator group. For a difference of 8(17.4)m in two-minute walk test between groups, 76 participants/group would be required (80% power, P > 0.05) for a future randomized controlled trial. Conclusion: No changes were found in the majority of outcome measures over time. This study was acceptable and feasible by participants and physiotherapists. An adequately powered study needs 160 participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Corneal transplantation can lead to sight restoration, but globally there is a donor shortage. Many palliative care patients can donate their corneas but think they are ineligible due to comorbidities. Healthcare professionals are reluctant to broach the topic, but studies have shown that relatives would be upset if they were not offered this chance. There is no existing research involving patients. Aim: To understand the views and feelings of patients in palliative care settings towards corneal donation and explore their opinions regarding the timing of its discussion. Design: This is an exploratory study based at one UK palliative care unit. A census sampling method was used. Nine participants took part in semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis was undertaken. Results: Themes found included altruistic motivation and the value of sight. Family views were important, but the influence on final decisions varied. The timing of discussion relative to the illness trajectory was important; patients want to be able to engage fully in conversations and had concerns about not being able to think clearly when closer to death. Participants also associated discussion of donation as an indication of a poor prognosis. Patients prefer face-to-face discussions with someone whom they had a close rapport. Many had misconceptions about eligibility. Conclusion: This is the first study to engage directly with palliative care patients and to establish their views on the timing of corneal donation discussions. Patients are willing to discuss donation, and further exploration of patient views in this area should be undertaken. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]