WILL (when to induce labour to limit risk in pregnancy hypertension): a multicentre randomised controlled trial — adaptations to deliver a timing-of-birth trial during the COVID-19 international pandemic

Background: as a pragmatic randomised timing-of-birth trial, WILL adapted its trial procedures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These are reviewed here to inform post-pandemic trial methodology. Methods: the trial (internal pilot) paused in March 2020, re-opened in July 2020, and is currently recruiting in 37 UK NHS consultant-led maternity units. We evaluated pandemic adaptations made to WILL processes and surveyed sites for their views of these changes (20 sites, videoconference). Results: despite 88% of sites favouring an electronic investigator site file (ISF), information technology requirements and clinical trial unit (CTU) operating procedures mandated the ongoing use of paper ISFs; site start-up delays resulted from restricted access to the CTU. Site initiation visits (SIVs) were conducted remotely; 50% of sites preferred remote SIVs and 44% felt that it was trial-dependent, while few preferred SIVs in-person as standard procedure. The Central team felt remote SIVs provided scheduling and attendance flexibility (for sites and trial staff), the option of recording discussions for missing or future staff, improved efficiency by having multiple sites attend, and time and cost savings; the negative impact on rapport-building and interaction was partially mitigated over time with more familiarity with technology and new ways-of-working. Two methods of remote consent were developed and used by 30/37 sites and for 54/156 recruits. Most (86%) sites using remote consenting felt it improved recruitment. For remote data monitoring (5 sites), advantages were primarily for the monitor (e.g. flexibility, no time constraints, reduced cost), and disadvantages primarily for the sites (e.g. document and access preparation, attendance at a follow-up meeting), but 81% of sites desired having the option of remote monitoring post-pandemic. Conclusions: COVID adaptations to WILL trial processes improved the flexibility of trial delivery, for Central and site staff, and participants. Flexibility to use these strategies should be retained post-pandemic. Trial registration: ISRCTN77258279. Registered on 05 December 2018.</p

Effect of self-monitoring of blood pressure on blood pressure control in pregnant individuals with chronic or gestational hypertension: the BUMP 2 randomized clinical trial

Importance: inadequate management of elevated blood pressure is a significant contributing factor to maternal deaths. The role of blood pressure self-monitoring in pregnancy in improving clinical outcomes for the pregnant individual and infant is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of blood pressure self-monitoring, compared with usual care alone, on blood pressure control and other related maternal and infant outcomes, in individuals with pregnancy hypertension. Design, setting, and participants: unblinded, randomized clinical trial that recruited between November 2018 and September 2019 in 15 hospital maternity units in England. Individuals with chronic hypertension (enrolled up to 37 weeks' gestation) or with gestational hypertension (enrolled between 20 and 37 weeks' gestation). Final follow-up was in May 2020. Interventions: Participants were randomized to either blood pressure self-monitoring using a validated monitor and a secure telemonitoring system in addition to usual care (n = 430) or to usual care alone (n = 420). Usual care comprised blood pressure measured by health care professionals at regular antenatal clinics. Main outcomes and measures: the primary maternal outcome was the difference in mean systolic blood pressure recorded by health care professionals between randomization and birth. Results: Among 454 participants with chronic hypertension (mean age, 36 years; mean gestation at entry, 20 weeks) and 396 with gestational hypertension (mean age, 34 years; mean gestation at entry, 33 weeks) who were randomized, primary outcome data were available from 444 (97.8%) and 377 (95.2%), respectively. In the chronic hypertension cohort, there was no statistically significant difference in mean systolic blood pressure for the self-monitoring groups vs the usual care group (133.8 mm Hg vs 133.6 mm Hg, respectively; adjusted mean difference, 0.03 mm Hg [95% CI, -1.73 to 1.79]). In the gestational hypertension cohort, there was also no significant difference in mean systolic blood pressure (137.6 mm Hg compared with 137.2 mm Hg; adjusted mean difference, -0.03 mm Hg [95% CI, -2.29 to 2.24]). There were 8 serious adverse events in the self-monitoring group (4 in each cohort) and 3 in the usual care group (2 in the chronic hypertension cohort and 1 in the gestational hypertension cohort). Conclusions andrelevance: among pregnant individuals with chronic or gestational hypertension, blood pressure self-monitoring with telemonitoring, compared with usual care, did not lead to significantly improved clinic-based blood pressure control. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03334149.</p

Routine testing for group B streptococcus in pregnancy: protocol for a UK cluster randomised trial (GBS3)

Introduction It is unclear whether routine testing of women for group B streptococcus (GBS) colonisation either in late pregnancy or during labour reduces early-onset neonatal sepsis, compared with a risk factor-based strategy.Methods and analysis Cluster randomised trial.Sites and participants 320 000 women from up to 80 hospital maternity units.Strategies Sites will be randomised 1:1 to a routine testing strategy or the risk factor-based strategy, using a web-based minimisation algorithm. A second-level randomisation allocates routine testing sites to either antenatal enriched culture medium testing or intrapartum rapid testing. Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis will be offered if a test is positive for GBS, or if a maternal risk factor for early-onset GBS infection in her baby is identified before or during labour. Economic and acceptability evaluations will be embedded within the trial design.Outcomes The primary outcome is all-cause early (&lt;7 days of birth) neonatal sepsis, defined as either a positive blood/cerebrospinal fluid culture, early neonatal death from infection or a negative/unknown culture status with ≥3 agreed clinical signs or symptoms, who receive intravenous antibiotics ≥5 days. All women giving birth ≥24 weeks’ gestation, regardless of mode of birth, and all her babies will be included in the dataset. Cost-effectiveness will be expressed in terms of incremental cost per case of early neonatal sepsis avoided and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year associated with each strategy.Ethics and dissemination The trial received a favourable opinion from Derby Research Ethics Committee on 16 September 2019 (19/EM/0253). The allocated testing strategy will be adopted as standard clinical practice by the site. Women in the routine testing sites will give verbal consent for the test. The trial will use routinely collected data retrieved from National Health Service databases, supplemented with limited participant-level collection of process outcomes. Individual written consent will not be sought. The trial results, and parallel economic, qualitative, implementation and methodological results, will be published in the journal Health Technology Assessment.Trial registration number ISRCTN49639731

WILL (When to Induce Labour to Limit risk in pregnancy hypertension): a multicentre randomised controlled trial — adaptations to deliver a timing-of-birth trial during the COVID-19 international pandemic

© 2022 The Authors, published by BMC. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06834-4Background: As a pragmatic randomised timing-of-birth trial, WILL adapted its trial procedures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These are reviewed here to inform post-pandemic trial methodology. Methods: The trial (internal pilot) paused in March 2020, re-opened in July 2020, and is currently recruiting in 37 UK NHS consultant-led maternity units. We evaluated pandemic adaptations made to WILL processes and surveyed sites for their views of these changes (20 sites, videoconference). Results: Despite 88% of sites favouring an electronic investigator site file (ISF), information technology requirements and clinical trial unit (CTU) operating procedures mandated the ongoing use of paper ISFs; site start-up delays resulted from restricted access to the CTU. Site initiation visits (SIVs) were conducted remotely; 50% of sites preferred remote SIVs and 44% felt that it was trial-dependent, while few preferred SIVs in-person as standard procedure. The Central team felt remote SIVs provided scheduling and attendance flexibility (for sites and trial staff), the option of recording discussions for missing or future staff, improved efficiency by having multiple sites attend, and time and cost savings; the negative impact on rapport-building and interaction was partially mitigated over time with more familiarity with technology and new ways-of-working. Two methods of remote consent were developed and used by 30/37 sites and for 54/156 recruits. Most (86%) sites using remote consenting felt it improved recruitment. For remote data monitoring (5 sites), advantages were primarily for the monitor (e.g. flexibility, no time constraints, reduced cost), and disadvantages primarily for the sites (e.g. document and access preparation, attendance at a follow-up meeting), but 81% of sites desired having the option of remote monitoring post-pandemic. Conclusions: COVID adaptations to WILL trial processes improved the flexibility of trial delivery, for Central and site staff, and participants. Flexibility to use these strategies should be retained post-pandemic. Trial registration: ISRCTN77258279. Registered on 05 December 2018.NIHR Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme is funding the WILL trial. HTA Project: 16/167/123 — WILL (When to Induce Labour to Limit risk in pregnancy hypertension) — a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.Published versio