ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of psychosomatic therapy versus care as usual in primary care for patients with persistent somatic symptoms (PSS).MethodsWe conducted a pragmatic, two-armed, randomised controlled trial among primary care patients with PSS in the Netherlands that included 39 general practices and 34 psychosomatic therapists. The intervention, psychosomatic therapy, consisted of 6–12 sessions delivered by specialised exercise- and physiotherapists. Primary outcome measure: patient's level of functioning. Secondary outcomes: severity of physical and psychosocial symptoms, health-related quality of life, health-related anxiety, illness behaviour and number of GP contacts.ResultsCompared to usual care (n = 85), the intervention group (n = 84) showed no improvement in patient's level of functioning (mean difference − 0.50 [95% CI -1.10 to 0.10]; p = .10), and improvement in health-related anxiety (mean difference − 1.93 [95% CI -3.81 to −0.04]; p = .045), over 12 months. At 5-month follow-up, we found improvement in physical functioning, somatisation, and health-related anxiety. The 12-month follow-up revealed no therapy effects. Subgroup analyses showed an overall effect in patient's level of functioning for the group with moderate PSS (mean difference − 0.91 [95% CI -1.78 to −0.03]; p = .042). In the year after the end of therapy, the number of GP contacts did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionWe only found effects on some secondary outcome measures, and on our primary outcome measure especially in patients with moderate PSS, the psychosomatic therapy appears promising for further study.Trial registration: the trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR7356 under ID NTR7356.
Introduction Radical cystectomy (RC) is the standard treatment for patients with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer, as well as for patients with therapy refractory high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. However, 50–65% of patients undergoing RC experience perioperative complications. The risk, severity and impact of these complications is associated with a patient’s preoperative cardiorespiratory fitness, nutritional and smoking status and presence of anxiety and depression. There is emerging evidence supporting multimodal prehabilitation as a strategy to reduce the risk of complications and improve functional recovery after major cancer surgery. However, for bladder cancer the evidence is still limited. The aim of this study is to investigate the superiority of a multimodal prehabilitation programme versus standard-of-care in terms of reducing perioperative complications in patients with bladder cancer undergoing RC.Methods and analysis This multicentre, open label, prospective, randomised controlled trial, will include 154 patients with bladder cancer undergoing RC. Patients are recruited from eight hospitals in The Netherlands and will be randomly (1:1) allocated to the intervention group receiving a structured multimodal prehabilitation programme of approximately 3–6 weeks, or to the control group receiving standard-of-care. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who develop one or more grade ≥2 complications (according to the Clavien-Dindo classification) within 90 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes include cardiorespiratory fitness, length of hospital stay, health-related quality of life, tumour tissue biomarkers of hypoxia, immune cell infiltration and cost-effectiveness. Data collection will take place at baseline, before surgery and 4 and 12 weeks after surgery.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Medical Ethics Committee NedMec (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) under reference number 22–595/NL78792.031.22. Results of the study will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT05480735.
We use a randomised experiment to study the effect of offering half of 556 freshman students a learning analytics dashboard and a weekly email with a link to their dashboard, on student behaviour in the online environment and final exam performance. The dashboard shows their online progress in the learning management systems, their predicted chance of passing, their predicted grade and their online intermediate performance compared with the total cohort. The email with dashboard access, as well as dashboard use, has positive effects on student behaviour in the online environment, but no effects are found on student performance in the final exam of the programming course. However, we do find differential effects by specialisation and student characteristics.
