Acute otitis externa: Consensus definition, diagnostic criteria and core outcome set development

OBJECTIVE

Evidence for the management of acute otitis externa (AOE) is limited, with unclear diagnostic criteria and variably reported outcome measures that may not reflect key stakeholder priorities. We aimed to develop 1) a definition, 2) diagnostic criteria and 3) a core outcome set (COS) for AOE.

STUDY DESIGN

COS development according to Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) methodology and parallel consensus selection of diagnostic criteria/definition.

SETTING

Stakeholders from the United Kingdom.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Comprehensive literature review identified candidate items for the COS, definition and diagnostic criteria. Nine individuals with past AOE generated further patient-centred candidate items. Candidate items were rated for importance by patient and professional (ENT doctors, general practitioners, microbiologists, nurses, audiologists) stakeholders in a three-round online Delphi exercise. Consensus items were grouped to form the COS, diagnostic criteria, and definition.

RESULTS

Candidate COS items from patients (n = 28) and literature (n = 25) were deduplicated and amalgamated to a final candidate list (n = 46). Patients emphasised quality-of-life and the impact on daily activities/work. Via the Delphi process, stakeholders agreed on 31 candidate items. The final COS covered six outcomes: pain; disease severity; impact on quality-of-life and daily activities; patient satisfaction; treatment-related outcome; and microbiology. 14 candidate diagnostic criteria were identified, 8 reaching inclusion consensus. The final definition for AOE was 'diffuse inflammation of the ear canal skin of less than 6 weeks duration'.

CONCLUSION

The development and adoption of a consensus definition, diagnostic criteria and a COS will help to standardise future research in AOE, facilitating meta-analysis. Consulting former patients throughout development highlighted deficiencies in the outcomes adopted previously, in particular concerning the impact of AOE on daily life.

Diurnal variability of fine-particulate pollution concentrations: data from 14 low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND: Scientific understanding of indoor air pollution is predominately based on research carried out in cities in high-income countries (HICs). Less is known about how pollutant concentrations change over the course of a typical day in cities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).OBJECTIVE: To understand how concentrations of fine particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM_2.5) change over the course of the day outdoors (across a range of countries) and indoors (using measurements from Dhaka, Bangladesh).DESIGN: Data on PM_2.5 concentrations were gathered from 779 households in Dhaka as part of the MCLASS II (Muslim Communities Learning About Second-hand Smoke in Bangladesh) project, and compared to outdoor PM_2.5 concentrations to determine the temporal variation in exposure to air pollution. Hourly PM_2.5 data from 23 cities in 14 LMICs, as well as London (UK), Paris (France) and New York (NY, USA), were extracted from publicly available sources for comparison.RESULTS: PM_2.5 in homes in Dhaka demonstrated a similar temporal pattern to outdoor measurements, with greater concentrations at night than in the afternoon. This pattern was also evident in 19 of 23 LMIC cities.CONCLUSION: PM_2.5 concentrations are greater at night than during the afternoon in homes in Dhaka. Diurnal variations in PM_2.5 in LMICs is substantial and greater than in London, Paris or New York. This has implications for public health community approaches to health effects of air pollution in LMICs.

Prognostic factors for outcomes of idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss: protocol for the SeaSHeL national prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The mainstay of treatment for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) includes oral steroids, intratympanic steroid injections or a combination of both. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, in their recent hearing loss guidelines, highlighted the paucity of evidence assessing the comparative effectiveness of these treatments; and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme has since released a commissioned call for a trial to identify the most effective route of administration of steroids as a first-line treatment for idiopathic SSNHL. For such trials to be run effectively, reliable information is needed on patients with SSNHL: where they present, numbers, demographics, treatment pathways, as well as outcomes. This study will collect these data in a nationwide cohort study of patients presenting with SSNHL across 97 National Health Service (NHS) trusts. The study will be delivered through ear, nose and throat (ENT) trainee networks, the NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) Audiology Champions and the NIHR CRN. Importantly, this study will also provide a dataset to develop a prognostic model to predict recovery for patients with idiopathic SSNHL. The study objectives are to: (1) map the patient pathway and identify the characteristics of adult patients presenting to NHS ENT and hearing services with SSNHL, (2) develop a prognostic model to predict recovery for patients with idiopathic SSNHL and (3) establish the impact of idiopathic SSNHL on patients' quality of life (QoL).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Study design: national multicentre prospective cohort study across 97 NHS trusts.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

adult patients presenting to NHS ENT and hearing services with SSNHL.

OUTCOMES

change in auditory function; change in QoL score.

ANALYSIS

multivariable prognostic model, using prespecified candidate predictors. Mean change in QoL scores will be calculated from initial presentation to follow-up.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Health Research Authority and NHS Research Ethics Committee approved the study. Publication will be on behalf of study sites and collaborators.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04108598).

Community engagement interventions for communicable disease control in low- and lower- middle-income countries: evidence from a review of systematic reviews

Background

Community engagement (CE) interventions include a range of approaches to involve communities in the improvement of their health and wellbeing. Working with communities defined by location or some other shared interest, these interventions may be important in assisting equity and reach of communicable disease control (CDC) in low and lower-middle income countries (LLMIC). We conducted an umbrella review to identify approaches to CE in communicable disease control, effectiveness of these approaches, mechanisms and factors influencing success.

Methods

We included systematic reviews that: i) focussed on CE interventions; ii) involved adult community members; iii) included outcomes relevant to communicable diseases in LLMIC; iv) were written in English. Quantitative results were extracted and synthesised narratively. A qualitative synthesis process enabled identification of mechanisms of effect and influencing factors. We followed guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute, assessed quality with the DARE tool and reported according to standard systematic review methodology.

Results

Thirteen systematic reviews of medium-to-high quality were identified between June and July 2017. Reviews covered the following outcomes: HIV and STIs (6); malaria (2); TB (1); child and maternal health (3) and mixed (1). Approaches included: CE through peer education and community health workers, community empowerment interventions and more general community participation or mobilisation. Techniques included sensitisation with the community and involvement in the identification of resources, intervention development and delivery. Evidence of effectiveness of CE on health outcomes was mixed and quality of primary studies variable. We found: i) significantly reduced neonatal mortality following women’s participatory learning and action groups; ii) significant reductions in HIV and other STIs with empowerment and mobilisation interventions with marginalised groups; iii) significant reductions in malaria incidence or prevalence in a small number of primary studies; iv) significant reductions in infant diarrhoea following community health worker interventions. Mechanisms of impact commonly occurred through social and behavioural processes, particularly: changing social norms, increasing social cohesion and social capacity. Factors influencing effectiveness of CE interventions included extent of population coverage, shared leadership and community control over outcomes.

Conclusion

Community engagement interventions may be effective in supporting CDC in LLMIC. Careful design of CE interventions appropriate to context, disease and community is vital.