The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a wide variety of unprecedented challenges, many of which appear to be disproportionately affecting the mental health and well-being of young adults. While there is evidence to suggest university students experience high rates of mental health disorders, less is known about the specific impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on student mental health and how they are coping with this stress. To address this gap, we conducted an online study among undergraduate students (n = 366) to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on academics, social isolation, and mental health, as well as the extent to which they have been implementing a variety of coping strategies. The pandemic had a more pronounced negative effect on female students' academics, social isolation, stress and mental health compared to male counterparts. Moreover, for females, frequent use of social media as a coping mechanism was associated with greater perceived negative impacts on their academic performance and stress levels, compared to males. However, frequent social media use related to similar negative mental health effects for both males and females. While male and female students both reported using substances to cope, for males the use of cannabis was associated with greater negative impacts on academic outcomes, stress and mental health compared to females. These findings highlight the need for adequate student support services across the post-secondary sector, and point to the importance of gender informed interventions to address the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BackgroundSmoking cessation following lung cancer diagnosis has been found to improve several patient outcomes. Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use is now prevalent within Great Britain, however, use and practice among patients with lung cancer has not as yet been explored. The current study aims to explore e-cigarette use among patients and examine current practice among clinicians. The results have important implications for future policy and practice.MethodsMembers of The British Thoracic Oncology Group (BTOG) were contacted via several e-circulations (N = 2,009), requesting them to complete an online survey. Of these, 7.7 % (N = 154) completed the survey, which explored participant demographics and smoking history, perceptions of patient e-cigarette use, practitioner knowledge regarding sources of guidance pertaining to e-cigarettes, and practitioner advice.ResultsPractitioners frequently observed e-cigarette use among patients with lung cancer. The majority of practitioners (81.4 %) reported responding to patient queries pertaining to e-cigarettes within the past year; however, far fewer (21.0 %) felt confident providing patients with e-cigarette advice. Practitioner confidence was found to differentiate by gender (p = 0.012) and employment speciality (p = 0.030), with nurses reporting particularly low levels of confidence in advising. The results also demonstrate extensive variability regarding the practitioner advice content.ConclusionsThe results demonstrate that patients refer to practitioners as a source of e-cigarette guidance, yet few practitioners feel confident advising. The absence of evidence-based guidance may have contributed towards the exhibited inconsistencies in practitioner advice. The findings highlight that training should be delivered to equip practitioners with the knowledge and confidence to advise patients effectively; this could subsequently improve smoking cessation rates and patient outcomes.

Background Research studies to inform clinical practice and policy in children and young people with appendicitis are hampered by inconsistent selection and reporting of outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set for reporting all studies of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children and young people. Methods Systematic literature reviews, qualitative interviews with parents and patients treated for uncomplicated acute appendicitis, and a Study‐Specific Advisory Group informed a long list of outcomes. Outcomes were then prioritized by stakeholders based in the UK (patients, parents, and paediatric and general surgeons) in an online three‐round Delphi consensus process, followed by face‐to‐face consensus meetings. Results A long list of 40 items was scored by 147 key stakeholders in the first Delphi round, of whom 90 completed the two subsequent Delphi rounds. The final core outcome set comprises 14 outcomes: intra‐abdominal abscess, reoperation (including interventional radiology procedure), readmission to hospital, bowel obstruction, wound infection, antibiotic failure, wound complication, negative appendicectomy, recurrent appendicitis, death, patient stress/psychological distress, length of hospital stay, time away from full activity and child's quality of life. Conclusion A core outcome set comprising 14 outcomes across five key domains has been developed for reporting studies in children and young people with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Further work is required to determine how and when to measure these outcomes.

Background Although non-operative treatment is known to be effective for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children, randomised trial data comparing important outcomes of non-operative treatment with those of appendicectomy are lacking. Objectives The objectives were to ascertain the feasibility of conducting a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a non-operative treatment pathway with appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children. Design This was a mixed-methods study, which included a feasibility randomised controlled trial, embedded and parallel qualitative and survey studies, a parallel health economic feasibility study and the development of a core outcome set. Setting This study was set in three specialist NHS paediatric surgical units in England. Participants Children (aged 4–15 years) clinically diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis participated in the feasibility randomised controlled trial. Children, their families, recruiting clinicians and other health-care professionals involved in caring for children with appendicitis took part in the qualitative study. UK specialist paediatric surgeons took part in the survey. Specialist paediatric surgeons, adult general surgeons who treat children, and children and young people who previously had appendicitis, along with their families, took part in the development of the core outcome set. Interventions Participants in the feasibility randomised controlled trial were randomised to a non-operative treatment pathway (broad-spectrum antibiotics and active observation) or appendicectomy. Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was the proportion of eligible patients recruited to the feasibility trial. Data sources Data were sourced from NHS case notes, questionnaire responses, transcribed audio-recordings of recruitment discussions and qualitative interviews. Results Overall, 50% (95% confidence interval 40% to 59%) of 115 eligible patients approached about the trial agreed to participate and were randomised. There was high acceptance of randomisation and good adherence to trial procedures and follow-up (follow-up rates of 89%, 85% and 85% at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months, respectively). More participants had perforated appendicitis than had been anticipated. Qualitative work enabled us to communicate about the trial effectively with patients and families, to design and deliver bespoke training to optimise recruitment and to understand how to optimise the design and delivery of a future trial. The health economic study indicated that the main cost drivers are the ward stay cost and the cost of the operation; it has also informed quality-of-life assessment methods for future work. A core outcome set for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children and young people was developed, containing 14 outcomes. There is adequate surgeon interest to justify proceeding to an effectiveness trial, with 51% of those surveyed expressing a willingness to recruit with an unchanged trial protocol. Limitations Because the feasibility randomised controlled trial was performed in only three centres, successful recruitment across a larger number of sites cannot be guaranteed. However, the qualitative work has informed a bespoke training package to facilitate this. Although survey results suggest adequate clinician interest to make a larger trial possible, actual participation may differ, and equipoise may have changed over time. Conclusions A future effectiveness trial is feasible, following limited additional preparation, to establish appropriate outcome measures and case identification. It is recommended to include a limited package of qualitative work to optimise recruitment, in particular at new centres. Future work Prior to proceeding to an effectiveness trial, there is a need to develop a robust method for distinguishing children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis from those with more advanced appendicitis, and to reach agreement on a primary outcome measure and effect size that is acceptable to all stakeholder groups involved. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15830435. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

ObjectivesThe UK ambulance service is expected to now manage more patients in the community and avoid unnecessary transportations to hospital emergency departments (ED). Most people it attends who have experienced seizures have established epilepsy, have experienced uncomplicated seizures and so do not require the full facilities of an ED. Despite this, most are transported there. To understand why, we explored paramedics’ experiences of managing seizures.Design and settingSemistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of paramedics from the English ambulance service. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed.ParticipantsA diverse sample of 19 professionals was recruited from 5 different ambulance NHS trusts and the College of Paramedics.ResultsParticipants’ confirmed how most seizure patients attended to do not clinically require an ED. They explained, however, that a number of factors influence their care decisions and create a momentum for these patients to still be taken. Of particular importance was the lack of access paramedics have to background medical information on patients. This, and the limited seizure training paramedics receive, meant paramedics often cannot interpret with confidence the normality of a seizure presentation and so transport patients out of precaution. The restricted time paramedics are expected to spend ‘on scene’ due to the way the ambulance services’ performance is measured and that are few alternative care pathways which can be used for seizure patients also made conveyance likely.ConclusionsParamedics are working within a system that does not currently facilitate non-conveyance of seizure patients. Organisational, structural, professional and educational factors impact care decisions and means transportation to ED remains the default option. Improving paramedics access to medical histories, their seizure management training and developing performance measures for the service that incentivise care that is cost-effective for all of the health service might reduce unnecessary conveyances to ED.

Perceptions towards electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation among Stop Smoking Service usershttp://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/3531/ Article LJMU has developed LJMU Research Online for users to access the research output of the University more effectively. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LJMU Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain.The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of the record. Please see the repository URL above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. What does this study add? Service users interviewed in the current study felt uncertain regarding e-cigarette efficacy and safety. E-cigarette ever users viewed e-cigarettes as effective and safe, more often than never users. Accurate and up-to-date education will enable service users to make informed treatment decisions. Services. LJMU Research Online PERCEPTIONS OF E-CIGARETTES FOR SMOKING CESSATION PERCEPTIONS OF E-CIGARETTES FOR SMOKING CESSATION MethodsSemi-structured telephone interviews were undertaken with twenty participants engaged in Stop Smoking Services in the Northwest of England. Participants comprised of both individuals who had tried e-cigarettes (n = 6) and those who had not (n = 14). Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were subject to thematic analysis, which explored participant beliefs and experiences of e-cigarettes. ResultsA thematic analysis of transcripts suggested that the following three superordinate themes were prominent: (1) self-efficacy and beliefs in e-cigarettes; (2) e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid; (3) cues for e-cigarette use. Participants, particularly never users, were especially concerned regarding e-cigarette efficacy and safety. Overall, participants largely expressed uncertainty regarding e-cigarette safety and efficacy, with some evidence of misunderstanding. ConclusionsEvidence of uncertainty and misunderstanding regarding information on e-cigarettes highlights the importance of providing smokers with concise, up-to-date information regarding e-cigarettes, enabling smokers to make informed treatment decisions. Furthermore, 2014). Moreover, the randomised controlled trials included in the review reported no serious adverse events associated with e-cigarette use; however, the authors acknowledged that the review was based on a small number of trials, low event rates, and wide confidence intervals around the estimated effect sizes. A more recent meta-analysis (Allehebi, Khan, & Stanbrook, 2015) suggested that at one month, e-cigarettes significantly improve the prevalence of smoking abstinence among quitters, although this effect was not obs...

BackgroundCurrently, the routine treatment for acute appendicitis in the United Kingdom is an appendicectomy. However, there is increasing scientific interest and research into non-operative treatment of appendicitis in adults and children. While a number of studies have investigated non-operative treatment of appendicitis in adults, this research cannot be applied to the paediatric population. Ultimately, we aim to perform a UK-based multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost effectiveness of non-operative treatment of acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children, as compared with appendicectomy. First, we will undertake a feasibility study to assess the feasibility of performing such a trial.Methods/designThe study involves a feasibility RCT with a nested qualitative research to optimise recruitment as well as a health economic substudy. Children (aged 4–15 years inclusive) diagnosed with acute uncomplicated appendicitis that would normally be treated with an appendicectomy are eligible for the RCT. Exclusion criteria include clinical/radiological suspicion of perforated appendicitis, appendix mass or previous non-operative treatment of appendicitis. Participants will be randomised into one of two arms. Participants in the intervention arm are treated with antibiotics and regular clinical assessment to ensure clinical improvement. Participants in the control arm will receive appendicectomy. Randomisation will be minimised by age, sex, duration of symptoms and centre. Children and families who are approached for the RCT will be invited to participate in the embedded qualitative substudy, which includes recording of recruitment consultants and subsequent interviews with participants and non-participants and their families and recruiters. Analyses of these will inform interventions to optimise recruitment. The main study outcomes include recruitment rate (primary outcome), identification of strategies to optimise recruitment, performance of trial treatment pathways, clinical outcomes and safety of non-operative treatment. We have involved children, young people and parents in study design and delivery.DiscussionIn this study we will explore the feasibility of performing a full efficacy RCT comparing non-operative treatment with appendicectomy in children with acute uncomplicated appendicitis. Factors determining success of the present study include recruitment rate, safety of non-operative treatment and adequate interest in the future RCT. Ultimately this feasibility study will form the foundation of the main RCT and reinforce its design.Trial registrationISRCTN15830435. Registered on 8 February 2017.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2520-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract