Explore the vast range of titles available.

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of death in the UK. Clinical guidelines recommend cardiac rehabilitation (CR), including health education, cardiovascular risk reduction advice, physical activity and stress management components. However, uptake of standard in-person, group-based CR is only around 50%. Hybrid cardiac rehabilitation (CR), combining in-person and remote service delivery, may improve CR uptake and reduce inequalities in service access. This study used focus groups and semi-structured interviews to explore staff and patient experiences of using the Active + me REMOTE hybrid CR app, a cloud-based platform providing access to education modules, behaviour change support, live exercise classes, physical activity and health monitoring across three sites in the East of England. Twelve staff and six patients participated. Topic guides explored participants’ experiences of delivering or receiving hybrid CR, barriers and facilitators associated with the hybrid CR pathway, and implications for future implementation of Active + me REMOTE. Qualitative data were collected remotely, audio-recorded and independently transcribed. Staff data were analysed deductively, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Patient data were analysed inductively using thematic analysis. Despite some technical issues and governance delays, Active + me REMOTE was perceived as acceptable, convenient and allowed tailoring of support to meet patients’ needs and circumstances. Data upload from wearable devices (blood pressure monitors) allowed staff to monitor patients’ progress and empowered patients to direct their recovery. Staff initially felt they should screen patients to ensure that hybrid CR was offered to digitally literate, physically active individuals, although screening became less common as staff familiarity with the app increased. Findings suggest that effective implementation of hybrid CR requires system-level resource to facilitate governance approvals and embed hybrid CR delivery as standard care. Sufficient time must be allowed for staff training and to support patient enrolment to hybrid services. The study was registered on 3/7/2023 (ISRCTN320764).

Child behavioural and mental health problems have become a public health crisis. The consequences of poor mental health in childhood have large economic costs and consequences for the individual, their families, and for society. Early intervention through parenting programmes can reduce the onset of poor mental health in childhood, hence evaluating the effectiveness of parenting programmes is critical. The ‘Incredible Years Toddler’ parent programme is an education and training intervention designed to enhance the social and emotional wellbeing of children aged 1–3 years. Whilst previous studies show Incredible Years Toddler to provide promising effects on child outcomes in the short term, the research samples have lacked ethnic diversity and representation from socioeconomically deprived families. This quasi-experimental study is registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN49991769). We will investigate the effectiveness of Incredible Years Toddler being delivered in three neighbourhoods in inner city Bradford, England. These neighbourhoods contain a socially and ethnically diverse population with 84% living in the poorest decile for England and Wales. Parents with a child aged 1–3 years old who are enrolled in Born in Bradford’s Better Start interventional family cohort study are eligible for this study. Intervention participants will be matched to a demographically comparable control group using propensity score matching. This study will use retrospective and prospective data from participants who attended Incredible Years groups between September 2018 and April 2024. The required minimum sample is n = 1336 (ratio 1:3) to detect a small effect (odds = 1.5, d = .20) on the Early Years Foundation Stage profile total score at age 5; a measure of early child development that is routinely collected by teachers. We will also establish whether these effects are moderated by child age at entry to intervention, programme delivery mode, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity. We will also estimate the cost of the intervention and conduct a cost-consequence analysis.

IntroductionLung cancer is the world’s leading cause of cancer death. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening reduced lung cancer mortality by 20% in the US National Lung Screening Trial. Here, we present the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial (YLST), which will address key questions of relevance for screening implementation.Methods and analysisUsing a single-consent Zelen’s design, ever-smokers aged 55–80 years registered with a general practice in Leeds will be randomised (1:1) to invitation to a telephone-based risk-assessment for a Lung Health Check or to usual care. The anticipated number randomised by household is 62 980 individuals. Responders at high risk will be invited for LDCT scanning for lung cancer on a mobile van in the community. There will be two rounds of screening at an interval of 2 years. Primary objectives are (1) measure participation rates, (2) compare the performance of PLCOM2012 (threshold ≥1.51%), Liverpool Lung Project (V.2) (threshold ≥5%) and US Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for screening population selection and (3) assess lung cancer outcomes in the intervention and usual care arms. Secondary evaluations include health economics, quality of life, smoking rates according to intervention arm, screening programme performance with ancillary biomarker and smoking cessation studies.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Greater Manchester West research ethics committee (18-NW-0012) and the Health Research Authority following review by the Confidentiality Advisory Group. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals, presentation at conferences and on the YLST website.Trial registration numbersISRCTN42704678 and NCT03750110.

NHS vanguards, under-pressure to perform, required better contracting and data management arrangements with evaluation teams, to ensure that integrated service outcomes could be reported effectively. This communication reflects the experience of evaluating an NHS vanguard and suggests how academic teams can improve capacity for complex programme evaluation of rapid improvements in integrated services. This should be based on a shared commitment to data collection and management. Also, robust knowledge exchange processes can enable systems change and sustainability. The identifying features of the particular site have been withheld.

ObjectivesIn the context of tightening fiscal budgets and increased commissioning responsibility, local decision-makers across the UK healthcare sector have found themselves in charge of the implementation and evaluation of a greater range of healthcare interventions and services. However, there is often little experience, guidance or funding available at a local level to ensure robust evaluations are conducted. In this paper, we evaluate the possible scenarios that could occur when seeking to conduct a quantitative evaluation of a new intervention, specifically with regards to the availability of evidence.DesignWe outline the full set of possible data scenarios that could occur if the decision-maker seeks to explore the impact of the launch of a new intervention on some relevant quantifiable outcomes. In each case we consider the implicit assumptions associated with conducting an evaluation, exploring possible situations where such scenarios may occur. We go on to apply the scenarios to a simulated dataset to explore how each scenario can result in different conclusions as to the effectiveness of the new intervention.ResultsWe demonstrate that, across the full set of scenarios, differences in the scale of the estimated effectiveness of a new intervention and even the direction of effect are possible given different data availability and analytical approaches.ConclusionsWhen conducting quantitative evaluations of new interventions, the availability of data on the outcome of interest and the analytical approach can have profound effects on the conclusions of the evaluation. Although it will not always be possible to obtain a complete set of data and conduct extensive analysis, it is vital to understand the implications of the data used and consider the implicit assumptions made through its use.

Literature reviews underpin the majority of research projects in the health sciences, and yet relatively little analysis has been published as to the most appropriate method to identify relevant literature, outside of specialist information journals. The method of applying keyword search queries to bibliographic databases using Boolean logic dominates literature reviews due to its easy application to the major online databases. However, it is recognised increasingly as being problematic where the research question cannot be clearly defined or requires an element of exploration, due to its reliance on author’s use of titling and keywords and is unable to identify topics other than those defined in the search query. This paper discusses the relative merits of a systematic citation searching approach as both an alternative and a concurrent method to keyword searching. A method of citation searching, both forwards and backwards, which is iterated to form a closed loop solution, is discussed. An illustrative example is presented of both methods, applying them to the topic of the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold. The case study finds the citation searching approach dominates the traditional keyword searching approach, finding 76 papers of relevance, including all 15 found by the alternative approach. Conceptually, and in the example presented, it is demonstrated that the proposed method can represent a dominant strategy to the more traditional approach in some situations, highlighting that, wherever possible, it is preferential to employ multiple methods of searching. However, it is clear that a better understanding is required as to how we can most efficiently search the ever-growing sea of literature.

IntroductionWomen from social disadvantage are at greater risk of poor birth outcomes. The midwife-led continuity of care (MCC) model, which offers flexible and relational care from a small team of midwives, has demonstrated improved birth outcomes. In the general population, the impact of MCC on socially disadvantaged women and on birth outcomes is still unclear. This protocol describes a pragmatic evaluation of the MCC model in a socially disadvantaged population.Methods and analysisAn open-labelled individual prospective randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis, from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2024.Women will be randomly allocated to MCC or standard care as part of usual midwifery practice. Participants and midwives will not be blinded, but researchers will be. An internal pilot will test the feasibility of this process.Participants are those randomised into MCC or standard care, who consent to participate in one of two Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohort studies. Outcomes are taken from routinely linked health data, supplemented by additional data capture. The sample size is fixed by the capacity of MCC teams, commissioning duration and numbers recruited into the cohort. The estimated maximum fixed sample size is 1,410 pregnancies (minimum 734).Intention to treat (ITT) analysis will be undertaken to assess the impact of MCC on two independent primary outcomes. An economic evaluation will explore the impact on health resource use and a process evaluation will explore fidelity to the MCC model, and barriers/facilitators to implementation from midwives’ and women’s perspectives.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained for the randomisation in midwifery practice, use of the cohort data for evaluation and for the process evaluation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and translated into policy briefings.Trial registration number IsRCTNhttps://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN31836167

Background Bereaved parents are at higher risk of poor mental and physical health outcomes than people bereaved under other circumstances. These challenges are exacerbated by the continued effects on parents’ working lives and the financial strain of a child receiving end-of-life care. There has been very little recent research of parents’ experiences of these impacts. Analysis of data from the second workstream of a national research programme on end-of-life care for infants, children and young people (ENHANCE) aimed to understand parents’ experiences of the impact on their finances and working lives while their child received end-of-life care. Methods A multi-site qualitative study using in-depth interviews with bereaved parents, analysed using thematic analysis. Recruited through NHS sites, children’s hospices and via the social media of third sector organisations. Results Forty-two interviews with 55 parents were conducted (Fathers = 16, Mothers = 39), representing 44 children. Four themes were developed: (1) The added cost burden; (2) Pressures of juggling work; (3) Accessing support; and (4) Financial impacts continue after a child dies. Conclusions Financial hardship is a known consequence of having a child with a life-limiting condition, especially at the end of life, and adds considerable stress to an already painful situation, with the aftermaths continuing into bereavement. The impact is exacerbated by parents’ need to reduce work so they can spend time caring for their dying child, leaving families in a financially and emotionally vulnerable position. There needs to be a consistent approach to immediate practical support from healthcare providers; a review of benefit system delays and the abrupt stopping of Disability Living Allowance; and the development of tailored employment support for parents to remain in or rejoin the workforce. Key messages What is already known on this topic • Bereaved parents are at higher risk of poor mental and physical health outcomes than people bereaved under other circumstances. • There has been little recent research on the impacts on a family’s employment or the financial costs of caring for a child at the end of life. What this study adds • The direct financial costs to a family of a child receiving end-of-life care are significant and add considerable stress to an already painful situation. • The impacts of additional costs are compounded by parents needing to balance time working with caring for their dying child, and this leaves families in a financially and emotionally vulnerable position. • Parents lack guidance and support to navigate government financial support and charity funded support for which they may eligible. How this study might affect research , practice or policy • A proactive policy that is consistently applied is required from healthcare providers, to ensure all families with a child receiving end-of-life care are immediately supported practically and financially. • The Government should review delays in processing of benefit applications, the immediate stopping of Disability Living Allowance when a child dies, and consider a transition to bereavement support payments. • There is a need for improved guidance for employers to provide support which is tailored to the specific needs of those parents caring for a dying child and bereaved parents.

Background Provision of and access to paediatric end-of-life care is inequitable, but previous research on this area has focused on perspectives of health professionals in specific settings or children with specific conditions. This qualitative study aimed to explore regional perspectives of the successes, and challenges to the equitable coordination and delivery of end-of-life care for children in the UK. The study provides an overarching perspective on the challenges of delivering and coordinating end-of-life care for children in the UK, and the impact of these on health professionals and organisations. Previous research has not highlighted the successes in the sector, such as the formal and informal coordination of care between different services and sectors. Methods Semi-structured interviews with Chairs of the regional Palliative Care Networks across the UK. Chairs or co-Chairs ( n  = 19) of 15/16 Networks were interviewed between October-December 2021. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results Three main themes were identified: one standalone theme (“Communication during end-of-life care”); and two overarching themes (“Getting end-of-life services and staff in the right place”, with two themes: “Access to, and staffing of end-of-life care” and “Inconsistent and insufficient funding for end-of-life care services”; and “Linking up healthcare provision”, with three sub-themes: “Coordination successes”, “Role of the networks”, and “Coordination challenges”). Good end-of-life care was facilitated through collaborative and network approaches to service provision, and effective communication with families. The implementation of 24/7 advice lines and the formalisation of joint-working arrangements were highlighted as a way to address the current challenges in the specialism. Conclusions Findings demonstrate how informal and formal relationships between organisations and individuals, enabled early communication with families, and collaborative working with specialist services. Formalising these could increase knowledge and awareness of end of life care, improve staff confidence, and overall improve professionals’ experiences of delivering care, and families’ experiences of receiving it. There are considerable positives that come from collaborative working between different organisations and sectors, and care could be improved if these approaches are funded and formalised. There needs to be consistent funding for paediatric palliative care and there is a clear need for education and training to improve staff knowledge and confidence.

Objective To determine the acceptability and feasibility of delivering early outpatient review following cardiac surgery and early cardiac rehabilitation (CR), compared to standard practice to establish if a future large-scale trial is achievable. Methods A randomised controlled, feasibility trial with embedded health economic evaluation and qualitative interviews, recruited patients aged 18–80 years from two UK cardiac centres who had undergone elective or urgent cardiac surgery via a median sternotomy. Eligible, consenting participants were randomised 1:1 by a remote, centralised randomisation service to postoperative outpatient review 6 weeks after hospital discharge, followed by CR commencement from 8 weeks (control), or postoperative outpatient review 3 weeks after hospital discharge, followed by commencement of CR from 4 weeks (intervention). The primary outcome measures related to trial feasibility including recruitment, retention, CR adherence, and acceptability to participants/staff. Secondary outcome measures included health-rated quality of life using EQ-5D-5L, NHS resource-use, Incremental Shuttle Walk Test (ISWT) distance, 30- and 90-day mortality, surgical site complications and hospital readmission rates. Results Fifty participants were randomised (25 per group) and 92% declared fit for CR. Participant retention at final follow-up was 74%; completion rates for outcome data time points ranged from 28 to 92% for ISWT and 68 to 94% for follow-up questionnaires. At each time point, the mean ISWT distance walked was greater in the intervention group compared to the control. Mean utility scores increased from baseline to final follow-up by 0.202 for the intervention (0.188 control). Total costs were £1519 for the intervention (£2043 control). Fifteen participants and a research nurse were interviewed. Many control participants felt their outpatient review and CR could have happened sooner; intervention participants felt the timing was right. The research nurse found obtaining consent for willing patients challenging due to discharge timings. Conclusion Recruitment and retention rates showed that it would be feasible to undertake a full-scale trial subject to some modifications to maximise recruitment. Lower than expected recruitment and issues with one of the clinical tests were limitations of the study. Most study procedures proved feasible and acceptable to participants, and professionals delivering early CR. Trial registration ISRCTN80441309 (prospectively registered on 24/01/2019).