Search

Abeer Ahmad,1 M Ruth Mast,1 Giel Nijpels,2 Petra JM Elders,2 Jacqueline M Dekker,3 Jacqueline G Hugtenburg1 1Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, 2Department of General Practice, 3Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Background: Drug-related problems (DRP) following hospital discharge are common among elderly patients using multiple drugs for the treatment of chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate the occurrence of DRP in these patients using a specific tool for the identification of DRP by community pharmacists. Methods: An observational study involving 340 patients aged over 60 years using at least five prescription drugs and discharged from hospital. The occurrence of DRP was assessed by means of an identification tool specifically developed for use by community pharmacists, including a semistructured patient interview and a checklist of common DRP. Results: In total, 992 potential DRP were observed in the 340 patients (mean 2.9 ± 1.7). No drug prescribed but clear indication, an unnecessarily long duration of treatment, dose too low, and incorrect drug selection were the DRP most commonly observed. Ten percent of DRP occurring in 71 patients were drug–drug interactions. The number of DRP was related to the number of drugs prescribed. Frequently occurring DRP found using the patient interview were fear of side effects and no or insufficient knowledge of drug use. Medication of patients discharged from the pulmonary department and of those with type 2 diabetes was particularly associated with occurrence of DRP. Conclusion: Following hospital discharge, DRP occur frequently among elderly patients using five or more drugs for the treatment of chronic disease. The number of DRP increased with the number of drugs used. An important task for community pharmacists is to identify, resolve, and prevent the occurrence of DRP among this patient group. Since DRP are associated with an increased risk of hospital readmissions, morbidity, and mortality, it is very important to develop intervention strategies to resolve and prevent DRP. Keywords: drug-related problems, elderly, discharge from hospital, community pharmacy

Jacqueline G Hugtenburg,1 Lonneke Timmers,1 Petra JM Elders,2 Marcia Vervloet,3 Liset van Dijk31EMGO+ Institute and Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, 2ANH-VUmc, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, 3NIVEL, Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The NetherlandsBackground: Nonadherence with medication is a complex and multidimensional health care problem. The causes may be related to the patient, treatment, and/or health care provider. As a consequence, substantial numbers of patients do not benefit optimally from pharmacotherapy, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality as well as increased societal costs. Several interventions may contribute to improved adherence. However, most interventions have only a modest effect. Thus, despite the many efforts made, there has been little progress made as yet in tackling the problem of nonadherence.Methods: This paper summarizes the definitions and taxonomy of adherence with medication, as well as types and causes of nonadherence. In addition, interventions aimed at improvement of adherence are discussed.Conclusion: There is not just one solution for the nonadherence problem that fits all patients. Most interventions to improve adherence are aimed at all patients regardless of whether they are adherent or not. Recently, a number of tailored interventions have been described in the literature. Modern techniques are useful. Electronic pill boxes combined with Short Message Service reminders are specifically designed to improve unintentional adherence and have resulted in an increase in refill adherence in diabetic patients with suboptimal adherence. Tailored Internet interventions are a possibility for influencing patient drug-taking behavior and show promising results. Tailored counseling interventions targeted at the underlying causes of nonadherence seem an attractive method for supporting patients with their use of drugs. However, despite the plausible theoretical framework, data on long-term health effects of the various interventions are not available. To improve adherence effectively, there is a need for a tailored approach based on the type and cause of nonadherence and the specific needs of the patient.Keywords: adherence, compliance, concordance, tailored intervention

Summary: Background: 1H-NMR metabolomics and DNA methylation in blood are widely known biomarkers predicting age-related physiological decline and mortality yet exert mutually independent mortality and frailty signals. Methods: Leveraging multi-omics data in four Dutch population studies (N = 5238, ∼40% of which male) we investigated whether the mortality signal captured by 1H-NMR metabolomics could guide the construction of DNA methylation-based mortality predictors. Findings: We trained DNA methylation-based surrogates for 64 metabolomic analytes and found that analytes marking inflammation, fluid balance, or HDL/VLDL metabolism could be accurately reconstructed using DNA-methylation assays. Interestingly, a previously reported multi-analyte score indicating mortality risk (MetaboHealth) could also be accurately reconstructed. Sixteen of our derived surrogates, including the MetaboHealth surrogate, showed significant associations with mortality, independent of relevant covariates. Interpretation: The addition of our metabolic analyte-derived surrogates to the well-established epigenetic clock GrimAge demonstrates that our surrogates potentially represent valuable mortality signal. Funding: BBMRI-NL, X-omics, VOILA, Medical Delta, NWO, ERC.

Abstract Background Older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) have an increased risk of hypoglycaemic episodes when using sulphonylureas or insulin. In the Netherlands, guidelines exist for reducing glucose-lowering medication in older patients. However, evidence is lacking that a medication reduction in older patients can be safely pursued. Here, we will examine if promoting the deprescribing of insulin/sulphonylureas with a deprescribing programme (DPP) in general practice affects T2D-complications in older overtreated patients. Methods We will perform a 1:1 cluster randomised controlled trial in 86 general practices in the Netherlands. The DPP will consist of education sessions with general practitioners and practice nurses about reducing glucose-lowering medication in older patients (≥ 70 years). Topics of the sessions include the necessity of deprescribing, tools to initiate deprescribing and strategies to discuss deprescribing with patients (shared decision making). The DPP further includes a support programme with practice visits. The study will employ a selection tool to identify possibly overtreated older patients from the electronic medical records of the general practitioner. Eligibility for enrolment in the study will be based on HbA1c targets indicated by the Dutch guidelines, which depend on age, diabetes duration, presence of frailty, and life expectancy. The control group will provide usual care. We aim to include 406 patients. The follow-up period will be 2 years. For the primary outcome, the effect of the DPP on T2D-complications will be assessed by counting the cumulative incidence of events related to under- and overtreatment in T2D as registered in the electronic medical records. We shall perform an intention-to-treat analysis and an analysis including only patients for whom deprescribing was initiated. The implementation of the DPP in general practice will be evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively using the Extended Normalisation Process Theory (ENPT) and the Reach, Efficacy – Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) model. Other secondary outcomes include quality of life, cognitive functioning, events related to overtreatment or undertreatment, biomarkers of health, amount of blood glucose-lowering medication prescriptions, and cost-effectiveness. Discussion This study will provide insight into the safety and feasibility of a programme aimed at deprescribing sulphonylureas/insulin in older people with T2D who are treated in general practice. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN50008265 , registered 09 March, 2023.

Abstract Background Social jetlag is a chronic disruption of sleep timing that is characterized by different sleep timing during workdays and free days. Social jetlag has been associated with disturbed glucose metabolism, insulin resistance, and increased risk of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes. In this study, we aim to investigate whether a combination of bright light therapy in the morning, bright light reduction in the evening and sleep advance instructions for 3 weeks reduces social jetlag and if this results in improvement of glycemic and metabolic control, sleep, mood and quality of life after 3 and 12 weeks in people with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes and to assess possible mediators, compared to regular sleep habits. Methods In this randomized controlled trial, 60 people with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes with > 1 h social jetlag will be recruited. The intervention consists of bright light therapy (5000 lx) emitted by Vitamine-L (Lumie, UK) for 30 min each morning, combined with the advice to follow sleep advance instructions and to wear bright light-dimming goggles every evening for a period of 3 weeks. The control group adheres to their regular sleep habits and conditions. The primary outcome is glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) after 12 weeks comparing the intervention and control in an intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes at 3 and 12 weeks are (1) social jetlag; (2) insulin sensitivity, fasting blood glucose, glucose-lowering medication use, and frequency of perceived hypoglycemia; (3) metabolic outcomes, including body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, body fat percentage, and blood pressure; (4) mood, including depression, fatigue and anxiety (measured with questionnaires); and (5) quality of life measured using EQ5D questionnaire. To assess other factors that might play a role as possible mediators, we will measure (para)sympathetic nervous system activity assessed with ECGs and electrochemical skin conductance tests, sleep quality and sleep phase distribution assessed with a sleep measuring headband (ZMax), the Dim Light Melatonin Onset in saliva samples (in a subgroup) at 3 and 12 weeks, the feeling of satiety and satiation with a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), diet using a food frequency questionnaire, and physical activity using an accelerometer (ActiGraph). Discussion Social jetlag can contribute to poorer glycemic control and metabolic control in those with type 2 diabetes. With this intervention, we aim to reduce social jetlag and thereby improve glycemic and metabolic control. This could offer a way to improve overall population health and to reduce the disease burden of type 2 diabetes. Trial registration ISRCTN registry ISRCTN11967109 . Registered on 9 May 2024.

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has a large impact worldwide and is known to particularly affect the older population. This paper outlines the protocol for external validation of prognostic models predicting mortality risk after presentation with COVID-19 in the older population. These prognostic models were originally developed in an adult population and will be validated in an older population (≥ 70 years of age) in three healthcare settings: the hospital setting, the primary care setting, and the nursing home setting. Methods Based on a living systematic review of COVID-19 prediction models, we identified eight prognostic models predicting the risk of mortality in adults with a COVID-19 infection (five COVID-19 specific models: GAL-COVID-19 mortality, 4C Mortality Score, NEWS2 + model, Xie model, and Wang clinical model and three pre-existing prognostic scores: APACHE-II, CURB65, SOFA). These eight models will be validated in six different cohorts of the Dutch older population (three hospital cohorts, two primary care cohorts, and a nursing home cohort). All prognostic models will be validated in a hospital setting while the GAL-COVID-19 mortality model will be validated in hospital, primary care, and nursing home settings. The study will include individuals ≥ 70 years of age with a highly suspected or PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection from March 2020 to December 2020 (and up to December 2021 in a sensitivity analysis). The predictive performance will be evaluated in terms of discrimination, calibration, and decision curves for each of the prognostic models in each cohort individually. For prognostic models with indications of miscalibration, an intercept update will be performed after which predictive performance will be re-evaluated. Discussion Insight into the performance of existing prognostic models in one of the most vulnerable populations clarifies the extent to which tailoring of COVID-19 prognostic models is needed when models are applied to the older population. Such insight will be important for possible future waves of the COVID-19 pandemic or future pandemics.

Summary: Background: Prolapse affects 30–40% of women. Those using a pessary for prolapse usually receive care as an outpatient. This trial determined effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pessary self-management (SM) vs clinic-based care (CBC) in relation to condition-specific quality of life (QoL). Methods: Parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial, recruiting from 16 May 2018 to 7 February 2020, with follow-up to 17 September 2021. Women attending pessary clinics, ≥18 years, using a pessary (except Shelf, Gellhorn or Cube), with pessary retained ≥2 weeks were eligible. Limited manual dexterity; cognitive deficit; pregnancy; or requirement for non-English teaching were exclusions. SM group received a 30-min teaching session; information leaflet; 2-week follow-up call; and telephone support. CBC group received usual routine appointments. The primary clinical outcome was pelvic floor-specific QoL (PFIQ-7), and incremental net monetary benefit for cost-effectiveness, 18 months post-randomisation. Group allocation was by remote web-based application, minimised on age, user type (new/existing) and centre. Participants, intervention deliverers, researchers and the statistician were not blinded. The primary analysis was intention-to-treat based. Trial registration: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN62510577. Findings: The requisite 340 women were randomised (169 SM, 171 CBC) across 21 centres. There was not a statistically significant difference between groups in PFIQ-7 at 18 months (mean SM 32.3 vs CBC 32.5, adjusted mean difference SM-CBC −0.03, 95% CI −9.32 to 9.25). SM was less costly than CBC. The incremental net benefit of SM was £564 (SE £581, 95% CI −£576 to £1704). A lower percentage of pessary complications was reported in the SM group (mean SM 16.7% vs CBC 22.0%, adjusted mean difference −3.83%, 95% CI –6.86% to −0.81%). There was no meaningful difference in general self-efficacy. Self-managing women were more confident in self-management activities. There were no reported suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions, and 31 unrelated serious adverse events (17 SM, 14 CBC). Interpretation: Pessary self-management is cost-effective, does not improve or worsen QoL compared to CBC, and has a lower complication rate. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research, Health Technology Assessment Programme (16/82/01).

Abstract Background Medication non-adherence is a prevalent health problem in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Interventions have previously been developed to improve medication adherence, but inconsistent outcomes have been reported. A potential explanation for this inconsistency is a ‘one size fits all’ approach, with interventions not tailored to the needs and preferences of individuals. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a personalised intervention programme aimed at improving adherence to oral antidiabetic and/or antihypertensive medication in people with T2DM. Methods A parallel-group randomised controlled trial will be conducted in 40–50 community pharmacies in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (UK). A total of 300 participants will be included and followed up for a period of 6 months. Participants will be people with T2DM identified as non-adherent to oral antidiabetic and/or antihypertensive medication, aged 35–75 years and mobile phone users. The intervention group will receive a personalised intervention programme that is based on one or more of the participants’ pre-defined non-adherence profile(s), namely (I) Knowledge and perceptions, (II) Practical problems, (III) Side effects and (IV) Negative mood and beliefs. The intervention comprises of one or more supporting modules, namely (I) Brief messaging, (II) Clinical medication review, (III) Medication schedule, (IV) Reminding messaging, (V) Medication dispensing systems, (VI) Smart messaging, (VII) Referral to general practitioner and (VIII) Unguided web-based Self Help Application for low mood. The control group will receive usual care including access to a publicly available informative diabetes website. The primary study outcome is medication adherence measured with a telephone pill count. Secondary outcomes are systolic blood pressure, HbA1c level, self-reported medication adherence, attitude and beliefs toward medication, satisfaction with diabetes treatment, health status and medical consumption and productivity cost. In addition, a process evaluation will be undertaken to establish the fidelity, reach and the extent to which intervention delivery is normalised in the daily practice of community pharmacy teams. Discussion The study can lead to a personalised intervention programme that improves medication adherence in people with T2DM that are non-adherent to oral antidiabetic and/or antihypertensive medication. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register, Trial NL8747 , registered 02 July, 2020; ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN36009809 , registered 05 February, 2020.

Abstract Background Obesity increases the risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, mobility problems and some cancers, and its prevalence is rising. Men engage less than women in existing weight loss interventions. Game of Stones builds on a successful feasibility study and aims to find out if automated text messages with or without endowment incentives are effective and cost-effective for weight loss at 12 months compared to a waiting list comparator arm in men with obesity. Methods A 3-arm, parallel group, assessor-blind superiority randomised controlled trial with process evaluation will recruit 585 adult men with body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or more living in and around three UK centres (Belfast, Bristol, Glasgow), purposively targeting disadvantaged areas. Intervention groups: (i) automated, theory-informed text messages daily for 12 months plus endowment incentives linked to verified weight loss targets at 3, 6 and 12 months; (ii) the same text messages and weight loss assessment protocol; (iii) comparator group: 12 month waiting list, then text messages for 3 months. The primary outcome is percentage weight change at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes at 12 months are as follows: quality of life, wellbeing, mental health, weight stigma, behaviours, satisfaction and confidence. Follow-up includes weight at 24 months. A health economic evaluation will measure cost-effectiveness over the trial and over modelled lifetime: including health service resource-use and quality-adjusted life years. The cost-utility analysis will report incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years gained. Participant and service provider perspectives will be explored via telephone interviews, and exploratory mixed methods process evaluation analyses will focus on mental health, multiple long-term conditions, health inequalities and implementation strategies. Discussion The trial will report whether text messages (with and without cash incentives) can help men to lose weight over 1 year and maintain this for another year compared to a comparator group; the costs and benefits to the health service; and men’s experiences of the interventions. Process analyses with public involvement and service commissioner input will ensure that this open-source digital self-care intervention could be sustainable and scalable by a range of NHS or public services. Trial registration ISRCTN 91974895 . Registered on 14/04/2021.

Abstract Background Process evaluations have become a valued component, alongside clinical trials, of the wider evaluation of complex health interventions. They support understanding of implementation, and fidelity, related to the intervention and provide valuable insights into what is effective in a practical setting by examining the context in which interventions are implemented. The TOPSY study consists of a large multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of pessary self-management with clinic-based care in improving women’s condition-specific quality of life, and a nested process evaluation. The process evaluation aims to examine and maximise recruitment to the trial, describe intervention fidelity and explore participants’ and healthcare professionals’ experiences. Methods The trial will recruit 330 women from approximately 17 UK centres. The process evaluation uses a mixed-methods approach. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with randomised women (18 per randomised group/n = 36), women who declined trial participation but agreed to interview (non-randomised women) (n = 20) and healthcare professionals recruiting to the trial (n ~ 17) and delivering self-management and clinic-based care (n ~ 17). The six internal pilot centres will be asked to record two to three recruitment discussions each (total n = 12–18). All participating centres will be asked to record one or two self-management teaching appointments (n = 30) and self-management 2-week follow-up telephone calls (n = 30). Process data (quantitative and qualitative) will be gathered in participant completed trial questionnaires. Interviews will be analysed thematically and recordings using an analytic grid to identify fidelity to the intervention. Quantitative analysis will be predefined within the process evaluation analysis plan. Discussion The wide variety of pessary care delivered across the UK for women with pelvic organ prolapse presents specific localised contexts in which the TOPSY interventions will be implemented. Understanding this contextual variance is central to understanding how and in what circumstances pessary self-management can be implemented (should it be effective). The inclusion of non-randomised women provides an innovative way of collecting indispensable information about eligible women who decline trial participation, allowing broader contextualisation and considerations of generalisability of trial findings. Methodological insights from examination of recruitment processes and mechanisms have the potential to inform recruitment mechanisms and future recruitment strategies and study designs. Trial registration ISRCTN62510577 . Registered on 6 October 2017.

Abstract Background Men, particularly those living in disadvantaged areas, are less likely to participate in weight management programmes than women despite similar levels of excess weight. Little is known about how best to recruit men to weight management interventions. This paper describes patient and public involvement in pre-trial decisions relevant to recruitment and aims to report on recruitment to the subsequent men-only weight management feasibility trial, including the: i) acceptability and feasibility of recruitment; and ii) baseline sample characteristics by recruitment strategy. Methods Men with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 and/or waist circumference ≥ 40 in. were recruited to the feasibility trial via two strategies; community outreach (venue information stands and word of mouth) and GP letters, targeting disadvantaged areas. Recruitment activities (e.g. letters sent, researcher venue hours) were recorded systematically, and baseline characteristics questionnaire data collated. Qualitative interviews (n = 50) were conducted three months post-recruitment. Analyses and reporting followed a complementary mixed methods approach. Results 105 men were recruited within four months (community n = 60, GP letter n = 45). Community outreach took 2.3 recruiter hours per participant and GP letters had an opt-in rate of 10.2% (n = 90/879). More men were interested than could be accommodated. Most participants (60%) lived in more disadvantaged areas. Compared to community outreach, men recruited via GP letters were older (mean = 57 vs 48 years); more likely to report an obesity-related co-morbidity (87% vs 44%); and less educated (no formal qualifications, 32% vs 10%, degree educated 11% vs 41%). Recruitment strategies were acceptable, a sensitive approach and trusting relationships with recruiters valued, and the ‘catchy’ study name drew attention. Conclusions Targeted community outreach and GP letters were acceptable strategies that successfully recruited participants to a men-only weight management feasibility trial. Both strategies engaged men from disadvantaged areas, a typically underserved population. Using two recruitment strategies produced samples with different health risk profiles, which could add value to research where either primary or secondary prevention is of interest. Further work is required to examine how these strategies could be implemented and sustained in practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03040518 , 2nd February 2017.

Abstract Background Pelvic organ prolapse (or prolapse) is a common condition in women where the pelvic organs (bladder, bowel or womb) descend into the vagina and cause distressing symptoms that adversely affect quality of life. Many women will use a vaginal pessary to treat their prolapse symptoms. Clinic-based care usually consists of having a pessary fitted in a primary or secondary care setting, and returning approximately every 6 months for healthcare professional review and pessary change. However, it is possible that women could remove, clean and re-insert their pessary themselves; this is called self-management. This trial aims to assess if self-management of a vaginal pessary is associated with better quality of life for women with prolapse when compared to clinic-based care. Methods This is a multicentre randomised controlled trial in at least 17 UK centres. The intervention group will receive pessary self-management teaching, a self-management information leaflet, a follow-up phone call and access to a local telephone number for clinical support. The control group will receive the clinic-based pessary care which is standard at their centre. Demographic and medical history data will be collected from both groups at baseline. The primary outcome is condition-specific quality of life at 18 months’ post-randomisation. Several secondary outcomes will also be assessed using participant-completed questionnaires. Questionnaires will be administered at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months’ post-randomisation. An economic evaluation will be carried out alongside the trial to evaluate cost-effectiveness. A process evaluation will run parallel to the trial, the protocol for which is reported in a companion paper. Discussion The results of the trial will provide robust evidence of the effectiveness of pessary self-management compared to clinic-based care in terms of improving women’s quality of life, and of its cost-effectiveness. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN62510577 . Registered on June 10, 2017.

Background: Pelvic organ prolapse is estimated to affect 41–50% of women aged > 40 years. A multicentre randomised controlled trial of individualised pelvic floor muscle training found that pelvic floor muscle training was effective in reducing symptoms of prolapse, improved quality of life and showed clear potential to be cost-effective. Provision of pelvic floor muscle training for prolapse has continued to vary across the UK, with limited availability of specialist physiotherapists to deliver it. Objectives: This project aimed to study the implementation and outcomes of different models of delivery to increase the service provision of pelvic floor muscle training, and to follow up treatment outcomes for the original trial participants. Design: A realist evaluation of pelvic floor muscle training implementation conducted within three full case study sites and two partial case study sites; an observational prospective cohort study comparing patient-reported outcomes pre and post intervention in all five sites; and a long-term follow-up study linking previous trial participants to routine NHS hospital data. Setting: The setting for the realist evaluation was pelvic floor muscle training service delivery models in three NHS sites. The setting for the patient-reported outcome measures study was pelvic floor muscle training services in five NHS sites. Methods: Realist evaluation qualitative data were collected at four time points in three case study sites to understand the implementation models, uptake, adherence and impact. Interviews involved service managers/leads, consultants, staff delivering pelvic floor muscle training and women receiving pelvic floor muscle training. Main outcomes measures: Patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline and at 6 and 12 months across five sites, including the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score, health-related quality of life (measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, questionnaire), prolapse severity (measured using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System), urinary incontinence (measured using International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Urinary Incontinence Short Form) and need for further treatment. Results: A total of 102 women were recruited to the patient-reported outcome measures cohort study (target, n = 120), and 65 women had matched baseline and 6-month Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Scores. The mean Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score was 10.18 (standard deviation 5.63) at baseline and 6.98 (standard deviation 5.23) at 6 months, representing a statistically significant and clinically meaningful difference. There was no statistically significant difference between the outcomes obtained from delivery by specialist physiotherapists and the outcomes obtained from delivery by other health-care professionals (mean change in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score: –3.95 vs. –2.81, respectively). Services delivered using higher-band physiotherapists only were more costly than services delivered using other staff mixes. The effect of the original pelvic floor muscle training intervention, over a post-intervention period of > 10 years, was a reduction in the odds of any treatment during follow-up (odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.99). The realist evaluation revealed stark differences in implementation. The site with a specialist physiotherapy service resisted change because of perceived threats to the specialist role and concerns about care quality. Pelvic floor muscle training delivery by other health-care staff was easier when there was a lack of any existing specialist service; staff had prior training and interest in pelvic health; staff had support, autonomy, time and resources to deliver pelvic floor muscle training as part of their core role; and surrounding services supported a flow of pelvic floor muscle training referrals. Limitations: The number of available matched pre and post outcomes for women and the lack of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System examinations were limitations of this study. Conclusions: It is possible to train different staff to effectively deliver pelvic floor muscle training to women. Women’s self-reported outcomes significantly improved across all service models. Training should be adequately tailored to differential skill mix needs. Future work: Future work should include further implementation of pelvic floor muscle training and should include pre- and post-outcome data collection using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score. Study registration: This study is registered as Research Registry 4919. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 47. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Abstract Background Adherence to osteoporosis treatment is crucial for good treatment effects. However, adherence has been shown to be poor and a substantial part of the patients don’t even initiate treatment. This study aimed to gain insight into the considerations of both osteoporosis patients and general practitioners (GP) concerning intentional non-initiation of bisphosphonate treatment. Methods Osteoporosis patients and GPs were recruited from the SALT Osteoporosis Study and a transmural fracture liaison service, both carried out in the Netherlands. Using questionnaires, we identified non-starters and starters of bisphosphonate treatment. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gain a detailed overview of all considerations until saturation of the data was reached. Starters were asked to reflect on the considerations that were brought forward by the non-starters. Interviews were open coded and the codes were classified into main themes and subthemes using an inductive approach. Results 16 non-starters, 10 starters, and 13 GPs were interviewed. We identified three main themes: insufficient medical advice, attitudes towards medication use including concerns about side effects, and disease awareness. From patients’ as well as GPs’ perspective, insufficient or ambiguous information from the GP influenced the decision of the non-starters to not start bisphosphonates. In contrast, starters were either properly informed, or they collected information themselves. Patients’ aversion towards medication, fear of side effects, and a low risk perception also contributed to not starting the medication, whereas starters were aware of their fracture risk and were confident of the outcome of the treatment. Concerns about osteoporosis treatment and its side effects were also expressed by several GPs. Some GPs appeared to have a limited understanding of the current osteoporosis guidelines and the indications for treatment. Conclusions Many reasons we found for not starting bisphosphonate treatment were related to the patients or the GPs themselves being insufficiently informed. Attitudes of the GPs were shown to play a role in the decision of patients not to start treatment. Interventions need to be developed that are aimed at GPs, and at education of patients.