Outcomes following early parenteral nutrition use in preterm neonates: Protocol for an observational study

Introduction Preterm babies are among the highest users of parenteral nutrition (PN) of any patient group, but there is wide variation in commencement, duration, and composition of PN and uncertainty around which groups will benefit from early introduction. Recent studies in critically unwell adults and children suggest that harms, specifically increased rates of nosocomial infection, outweigh the benefits of early administration of PN. In this study, we will describe early PN use in neonatal units in England, Wales and Scotland. We will also evaluate if this is associated with differences in important neonatal outcomes in neonates born between 30+0 and 32+6 weeks+days gestation. Methods and analysis We will use routinely collected data from all neonatal units in England, Wales and Scotland, available in the National Neonatal Research Database (NNRD). We will describe clinical practice in relation to any use of PN during the first 7 postnatal days among neonates admitted to neonatal care between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2017. We will compare outcomes in neonates born between 30+0 and 32+6 weeks+days gestation who did or did not receive PN in the first week after birth using a propensity score-matched approach. The primary outcome will be survival to discharge home. Secondary outcomes will include components of the neonatal core outcome set: outcomes identified as important by former patients, parents, clinicians and researchers. Ethics and dissemination We have obtained UK National Research Ethics Committee approval for this study (Ref: 18/NI/0214). The results of this study will be presented at academic conferences; the UK charity Bliss will aid dissemination to former patients and parents

Outcomes in relation to early parenteral nutrition use in preterm neonates born between 30 and 33 weeks gestation: a propensity score matched observational study

Objective To evaluate whether in preterm neonates parenteral nutrition use in the first seven postnatal days, compared with no parenteral nutrition use, is associated with differences in survival and other important morbidities. Randomised trials in critically ill older children show that harms, such as nosocomial infection, outweigh benefits of early parenteral nutrition administration; there is a paucity of similar data in neonates. Design Retrospective cohort study using propensity matching including 35 maternal, infant and organisational factors to minimise bias and confounding. Setting National, population-level clinical data obtained for all National Health Service neonatal units in England and Wales. Patients Preterm neonates born between 30+0 and 32+6 weeks+days . Interventions The exposure was parenteral nutrition administered in the first seven days of postnatal life; the comparator was no parenteral nutrition. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was survival to discharge from neonatal care. Secondary outcomes comprised the neonatal core outcome set. Results 16,292 neonates were compared in propensity score matched analyses. Compared with matched neonates not given parenteral nutrition in the first postnatal week, neonates who received parenteral nutrition had higher survival at discharge (absolute rate increase 0.91%; 95% CI 0.53% to 1.30%), but higher rates of necrotising enterocolitis (absolute rate increase 4.6%), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (absolute rate increase 3.9%), late-onset sepsis (absolute rate increase 1.5%) and need for surgical procedures (absolute rate increase 0.92%). Conclusions In neonates born between 30+0 and 32+6 weeks gestation, those given parenteral nutrition in the first postnatal week had a higher rate of survival but higher rates of important neonatal morbidities. Clinician equipoise in this area should be resolved by prospective, randomised trials

Epidemiological Interactions between Urogenital and Intestinal Human Schistosomiasis in the Context of Praziquantel Treatment across Three West African Countries

© 2015 Knowles et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. The attached file is the published version of the article

Inconsistent outcome reporting in large neonatal trials: a systematic review

ObjectiveInconsistent outcome selection and reporting in clinical trials are important sources of research waste; it is not known how common this problem is in neonatal trials. Our objective was to determine whether large clinical trials involving infants receiving neonatal care report a consistent set of outcomes, how composite outcomes are used and whether parents or former patients were involved in outcome selection.DesignA literature search of CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE and MEDLINE was conducted; randomised trials published between 1 July 2012 and 1 July 2017 and involving at least 100 infants in each arm were included. Outcomes and outcome measures were extracted and categorised by physiological system; reported former patient and parent involvement in outcome selection was extracted.ResultsSeventy-six trials involving 43 126 infants were identified; 216 different outcomes with 889 different outcome measures were reported. Outcome reporting covered all physiological systems but was variable between individual trials: only 67/76 (88%) of trials reported survival and 639 outcome measures were only reported in a single trial. Thirty-three composite outcomes were used in 41 trials. No trials reported former patient or parent involvement in outcome selection.ConclusionsInconsistent outcome reporting and a lack of parent and former patient involvement in outcome selection in neonatal clinical trials limits the ability of such trials to answer clinically meaningful questions. Developing and implementing a core outcome set for future neonatal trials, with input from all stakeholders, should address these issues.</jats:sec

Estimation of changes in the force of infection for intestinal and urogenital schistosomiasis in countries with Schistosomiasis Control Initiative-assisted programmes

The last decade has seen an expansion of national schistosomiasis control programmes in Africa based on large-scale preventative chemotherapy. In many areas this has resulted in considerable reductions in infection and morbidity levels in treated individuals. In this paper, we quantify changes in the force of infection (FOI), defined here as the per (human) host parasite establishment rate, to ascertain the impact on transmission of some of these programmes under the umbrella of the Schistosomiasis Control Initiative (SCI)

Study protocol: developing, disseminating, and implementing a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies.

BACKGROUND: Selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies is associated with an increased risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity and represents a clinical dilemma. Interventions include expectant management with early preterm delivery if there are signs of fetal compromise, selective termination of the compromised twin, fetoscopic laser coagulation of the communicating placental vessels or termination of the whole pregnancy. Previous studies evaluating interventions have reported many different outcomes and outcome measures. Such variation makes comparing, contrasting, and combining results challenging, limiting ongoing research on this uncommon condition to inform clinical practice. We aim to produce, disseminate, and implement a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction research in monochorionic twin pregnancies. METHODS: An international steering group, including professionals, researchers, and lay experts, has been established to oversee the development of this core outcome set. The methods have been guided by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative Handbook. Potential core outcomes will be developed by undertaking a systematic review of studies evaluating interventions for selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies. Potential core outcomes will be entered into a three-round Delphi survey and key stakeholders including clinical professionals, researchers, and lay experts will be invited to participate. Repeated reflection and rescoring of individual outcomes should encourage group and individual stakeholder convergence towards consensus outcomes which will be entered into a modified Nominal Group Technique to finalize the core outcome set. Once core outcomes have been agreed, we will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for each outcome. DISCUSSION: The development, dissemination, and implementation of a core outcome set for selective fetal growth restriction should ensure that future research protocols select, collect, and report outcomes and outcome measures in a standardized manner. Data synthesis will be possible on a broad level and rigorous implementation should advance the quality of research studies and their effective use in order to guide clinical practice, improve patient care, maternal, short-term perinatal outcomes, and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) registration number: 998. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration number: CRD42018092697 . 18th April 2018

Core outcomes in neonatology: development of a core outcome set for neonatal research

Background Neonatal research evaluates many different outcomes using multiple measures. This can prevent synthesis of trial results in meta-analyses, and selected outcomes may not be relevant to former patients, parents and health professionals. Objective To define a core outcome set (COS) for research involving infants receiving neonatal care in a high-income setting. Design Outcomes reported in neonatal trials and qualitative studies were systematically reviewed. Stakeholders were recruited for a three-round international Delphi survey. A consensus meeting was held to confirm the final COS, based on the survey results. Participants Four hundred and fourteen former patients, parents, healthcare professionals and researchers took part in the eDelphi survey; 173 completed all three rounds. Sixteen stakeholders participated in the consensus meeting. Results The literature reviews identified 104 outcomes; these were included in round 1. Participants proposed 10 additional outcomes; 114 outcomes were scored in rounds 2 and 3. Round 1 scores showed different stakeholder groups prioritised contrasting outcomes. Twelve outcomes were included in the final COS: survival, sepsis, necrotising enterocolitis, brain injury on imaging, general gross motor ability, general cognitive ability, quality of life, adverse events, visual impairment/blindness, hearing impairment/deafness, retinopathy of prematurity and chronic lung disease/bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Conclusions and relevance A COS for clinical trials and other research studies involving infants receiving neonatal care in a high-income setting has been identified. This COS for neonatology will help standardise outcome selection in clinical trials and ensure these are relevant to those most affected by neonatal care

Parent, patient and clinician perceptions of outcomes during and following neonatal care: a systematic review of qualitative research

ObjectiveMultiple outcomes can be measured in infants that receive neonatal care. It is unknown whether outcomes of importance to parents and patients differ from those of health professionals. Our objective was to systematically map neonatal care outcomes discussed in qualitative research by patients, parents and healthcare professionals and test whether the frequency with which outcomes are discussed differs between groups.DesignSystematic review of qualitative literature. The following databases were searched: Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO and ASSIA from 1997 to 2017. Publications describing qualitative data relating to neonatal care outcomes, reported by former patients, parents or healthcare professionals, were included. Narrative text was analysed and outcomes grouped thematically by organ system. Permutation testing was applied to assess an association between the outcomes identified and stakeholder group.ResultsSixty-two papers containing the views of over 4100 stakeholders were identified; 146 discrete outcomes were discussed; 58 outcomes related to organ systems and 88 to other more global domains. Permutation testing provides evidence that parents, former patients and health professionals reported outcomes with different frequencies (p=0.037).ConclusionsParents, patients and health professionals focus on different outcomes when discussing their experience of neonatal care. A wide range of neonatal care outcomes are reported in qualitative research; many are global outcomes relating to the overall status of the infant. The views of former patients and parents should be taken into consideration when designing research; the development of a core outcomes set for neonatal research will facilitate this.</jats:sec

Survey on the clinical trial results achieved in Brazil comparing praziquantel and oxamniquine in the treatment of mansoni schistosomiasis

A random, double-blind, parallel group clinical trial program was carried out to compare praziquantel, a recently developed anti-helmintic drug, and oxamniquine, an already established agent for treating mansoni schistosomiasis. Both drugs were administered orally as a single dose, on the average, praziquantel 55 mg/kg and oxamniquine 16 mg/kg BWT. The diagnosis and the parasitological follow-up lasting for a minimum of six months, were based on stool examinations according to Kato/Katz technique. A patient was considered cured if all results were negative and if he had performed at least three post-treatment controls, each one comprising three stool examinations. The finding of a single S. mansoni egg in any stool examination indicated, a therapeutical failure. A total of 267, cases were treated with praziquantel and 272 with oxamniquine. The two groups were homogeneous in regard to patients, age, clinical form of the disease, risk of reinfection and worm burden, relevant factors in the therapeutical response. The incidence and severity of untoward, effects were similar in both groups but abdominal distress and diarrhoea were more frequently reported under praziquantel and dizzines under oxamniquine (p 0.05). Amongst the noncured aptients a reduction of 88.6% and 74.6% in the mean number of eggs/g of feces Was seen following the treatment with praziquantel and oxamniquine, respectively (p < 0.05). In conclusion, in spite of their different chemical, pharmacological and toxicological profiles as well as mechanisms-of-action, inclusively praziquantel already had proved to be 100% active against S. mansoni strains resistant to oxamniquine, both drugs showed comparable tolerance and therapeutical efficacy

Combined effects of a third-generation bisphosphonate, zoledronic acid with other anticancer agents against murine osteosarcoma

Bisphosphonates (BPs) are widely used to treat bone diseases and also appear to possess direct antitumour activity. We have previously reported that third-generation BPs such as zoledronic acid (ZOL) and minodronic acid (YM529) synergistically augment the effects of anticancer agents in various cancer cells. Recently, we have also reported the antitumour effects of YM529 on murine osteosarcoma cells. As YM529 has not been clinically available, we herein focused on the anti-osteosarcoma effects of ZOL which is clinically available. In addition to ZOL alone, we evaluated the concurrent or sequential combined effects of ZOL with other anticancer agents against murine osteosarcoma cell lines. ZOL showed almost same anti-osteosarcoma activity compared with YM529 and more sensitive growth inhibitory effects against osteosarcoma cells than normal cells. Moreover, ZOL acted synergistically in vitro when administered concurrently with paclitaxel (PAC) or gemcitabine (GEM), not only in wild-type osteosarcoma cells but also in P-glycoprotein (P-gp)-overexpressing osteosarcoma cells, which were much less sensitive against each anticancer agent. Furthermore, 24 h of ZOL pretreatment significantly augmented the sensitivity of doxorubicin (DOX), PAC or GEM against osteosarcoma cells. These findings suggest that combined administration of ZOL with other anticancer agents may improve the osteosarcoma treatment