NanosecondPulsed Perovskite LightEmitting Diodes in Large Present Occurrence

INTRODUCTION In the UK, 150 000 people every year experience mid-substance Achilles tendinopathy. Typically patients are offered a range of treatment options such as exercise, electrotherapy, injections and surgery. With large variations in current practice, there is a pressing need to establish which treatments are effective and which are not. This is the protocol for a multi-centre randomised trial of platelet rich plasma (PRP) versus placebo injection for patients with Achilles tendinopathy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Adult patients with mid-substance Achilles tendinopathy for longer than 3 months will be screened. Randomisation will be on a 11 basis, stratified by centre and bilateral presentation. Participants will be allocated to either a single PRP injection or placebo injection. A minimum of 240 patients will be recruited into the study; this number will provide 90% power to detect a difference of 12 points in Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles score at 6 months. Quality of life, pain and complications data will be collected at baseline, 2-week, 3-month and 6-month post-randomisation. The differences between treatment groups will be assessed on an intention-to-treat basis. ETHICS, REGISTRATION AND DISSEMINATION This trial was funded by Versus Arthritis and commenced on 1 September 2015 (Versus Arthritis 20831). National Research Ethic Committee approved this study on 30 October 2015 (15/WM/0359). It was registered on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry with reference number ISRCTN 13254422 on 28 October 2015. The first site opened to recruitment on 27 April 2016 and the trial was in active recruitment at the point of submitting the protocol paper. The results of this trial will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and will inform clinical practice with regard to the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.OBJECTIVES Compared with sighted individuals, people with visual impairment have a higher prevalence of chronic conditions and lower levels of physical activity. This review aims to systematically review physical activity interventions for those with a visual impairment and to assess their effectiveness. DESIGN A systematic review of articles reporting physical activity interventions in visually impaired individuals was conducted. IACS13909 Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SPORTDiscus and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database were searched in August 2018. Meta-analyses were conducted on randomised controlled trials with the same outcome measure. SETTING Most interventions were conducted in a group setting, with some including an at-home, self-directed component. PARTICIPANTS Following identification of a recent systematic review of physical activity interventions in children, our review focused on adults aged 18 years and older with a visual impairment. PRIMce can have positive results, particularly in physical measures such as mobility and balance. However, when performing a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, the evidence for effectiveness is less clear. More studies with larger sample sizes, stronger designs and longer follow-up periods are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42018103638. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.INTRODUCTION Throughout the world, indigenous peoples share traumatic colonial experiences that have caused gross inequalities for them and continue to impact every aspect of their lives. The effect of intergenerational trauma and other health disparities have been remarkable for Indigenous children and adolescents, who are at a greater risk of adverse mental health and addiction outcomes compared with non-indigenous people of the same age. Most indigenous children are exposed to addictive substances at an early age, which often leads to early initiation of substance use and is associated with subsequent physical and mental health issues, poor social and relational functioning, and occupational and legal problems. The aim of this paper is to report the protocol for the scoping review of school-based interventions for substance use prevention in Indigenous children ages 7-13 living in Canada, the USA, Australia and New Zealand. This scoping review seeks to answer the following questions (1) What is known about indigenous school-based interventions for preventing substance use and (2) What are the characteristics and outcomes of school-based interventions for preventing substance use? METHODS AND ANALYSIS This scoping review will use steps described by Arksey and O'Malley and Levac (1) identifying the research question(s); (2) identifying relevant studies; (3) selecting the studies; (4) charting the data; (5) collating, summarising and reporting the results and (6) consulting with experts. Our findings will be reported according to the guidelines set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethics review approval is not required for this project. Findings from this study will be presented to lay public, at scientific conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.OBJECTIVES To identify studies that have investigated the health outcome and treatment priorities of patients with multimorbidity, clinicians or both, in order to assess whether the priorities of the two groups are in alignment, or whether a disparity exists between the priorities of patients with multimorbidity and clinicians. DESIGN Systematic review. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and Cochrane databases from inception to May 2019 using a predefined search strategy, as well as reference lists containing any relevant articles, as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane guidelines. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA We included studies reporting health outcome and treatment priorities of adult patients with multimorbidity, defined as suffering from two or more chronic conditions, or of clinicians in the context of multimorbidity or both. There was no restriction by study design, and studies using quantitative and/or qualitative methodologies were included. DATA SYNTHESIS We used a narrative synthesis approach to synthesise the quantitative findings, and a meta-ethnography approach to synthesise the qualitative findings.