Background Pregnant women with epilepsy on antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) may experience a reduction in serum AED levels. This has the potential to worsen seizure control. Objective To determine if, in pregnant women with epilepsy on AEDs, additional therapeutic drug monitoring reduces seizure deterioration compared with clinical features monitoring after a reduction in serum AED levels. Design A double-blind, randomised trial nested within a cohort study was conducted and a qualitative study of acceptability of the two strategies was undertaken. Stratified block randomisation with a 1 : 1 allocation method was carried out. Setting Fifty obstetric and epilepsy clinics in secondary and tertiary care units in the UK. Participants Pregnant women with epilepsy on one or more of the following AEDs: lamotrigine, carbamazepine, phenytoin or levetiracetam. Women with a ≥ 25% decrease in serum AED level from baseline were randomised to therapeutic drug monitoring or clinical features monitoring strategies. Interventions In the therapeutic drug monitoring group, clinicians had access to clinical findings and monthly serum AED levels to guide AED dosage adjustment for seizure control. In the clinical features monitoring group, AED dosage adjustment was based only on clinical features. Main outcome measures Primary outcome – seizure deterioration, defined as time to first seizure and to all seizures after randomisation per woman until 6 weeks post partum. Secondary outcomes – pregnancy complications in mother and offspring, maternal quality of life, seizure rates in cohorts with stable serum AED level, AED dose exposure and adverse events related to AEDs. Analysis Analysis of time to first and to all seizures after randomisation was performed using a Cox proportional hazards model, and multivariate failure time analysis by the Andersen–Gill model. The effects were reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary outcomes were reported as mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios. Results A total of 130 women were randomised to the therapeutic drug monitoring group and 133 to the clinical features monitoring group; 294 women did not have a reduction in serum AED level. A total of 127 women in the therapeutic drug monitoring group and 130 women in the clinical features monitoring group (98% of complete data) were included in the primary analysis. There were no significant differences in the time to first seizure (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.2) or timing of all seizures after randomisation (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.7 to 2.5) between both trial groups. In comparison with the group with stable serum AED levels, there were no significant increases in seizures in the clinical features monitoring (odds ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.5) or therapeutic drug monitoring group (odds ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.5) associated with a reduction in serum AED levels. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar in both groups, except for higher cord blood levels of lamotrigine (MD 0.55 mg/l, 95% CI 0.11 to 1 mg/l) or levetiracetam (MD 7.8 mg/l, 95% CI 0.86 to 14.8 mg/l) in the therapeutic drug monitoring group than in the clinical features monitoring group. There were no differences between the groups on daily AED exposure or quality of life. An increase in exposure to lamotrigine, levetiracetam and carbamazepine significantly increased the cord blood levels of the AEDs, but not maternal or fetal complications. Women with epilepsy perceived the need for weighing up their increased vulnerability to seizures during pregnancy against the side effects of AEDs. Limitations Fewer women than the original target were recruited. Conclusion There is no evidence to suggest that regular monitoring of serum AED levels in pregnancy improves seizure control or affects maternal or fetal outcomes. Future work recommendations Further evaluation of the risks of seizure deterioration for various threshold levels of reduction in AEDs and the long-term neurodevelopment of infants born to mothers in both randomised groups is needed. An individualised prediction model will help to identify those women who need close monitoring in pregnancy. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN01253916. 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. 22, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the feasibility of a randomised trial of a modified, pre-existing, mindfulness meditation smartphone app for women with chronic pelvic pain.DesignThree arm randomised feasibility trial.SettingWomen were recruited at two gynaecology clinics in the UK. Interventions were delivered via smartphone or computer at a location of participants choosing.ParticipantsWomen were eligible for the study if they were over 18, had been experiencing organic or non-organic chronic pelvic pain for 6 months or more, and had access to a computer or smartphone. 90 women were randomised.InterventionsDaily mindfulness meditation delivered by smartphone app, an active control app which delivered muscle relaxation techniques, and usual care without app. Interventions were delivered over 60 days.Primary and secondary outcome measuresOutcomes included length of recruitment, follow-up rates, adherence to the app interventions, and clinical outcomes measured at baseline, two, three and 6 months.ResultsThe target sample size was recruited in 145 days. Adherence to the app interventions was extremely low (mean app use 1.8 days mindfulness meditation group, 7.0 days active control). Fifty-seven (63%) women completed 6-month follow-up, and 75 (83%) women completed at least one postrandomisation follow-up. The 95% CIs for clinical outcomes were consistent with no benefit from the mindfulness meditation app; for example, mean differences in pain acceptance scores at 60 days (higher scores are better) were −2.3 (mindfulness meditation vs usual care, 95% CI: −6.6 to 2.0) and −4.0 (mindfulness meditation vs active control, 95% CI: −8.1 to 0.1).ConclusionsDespite high recruitment and adequate follow-up rates, demonstrating feasibility, the extremely low adherence suggests a definitive randomised trial of the mindfulness meditation app used in this study is not warranted. Future research should focus on improving patient engagement.Trial registration numbersNCT02721108;ISRCTN10925965; Results.

ImportanceOpioid use for chronic nonmalignant pain can be harmful.ObjectiveTo test whether a multicomponent, group-based, self-management intervention reduced opioid use and improved pain-related disability compared with usual care.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsMulticentered, randomized clinical trial of 608 adults taking strong opioids (buprenorphine, dipipanone, morphine, diamorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, oxycodone, papaveretum, pentazocine, pethidine, tapentadol, and tramadol) to treat chronic nonmalignant pain. The study was conducted in 191 primary care centers in England between May 17, 2017, and January 30, 2019. Final follow-up occurred March 18, 2020.InterventionParticipants were randomized 1:1 to either usual care or 3-day–long group sessions that emphasized skill-based learning and education, supplemented by 1-on-1 support delivered by a nurse and lay person for 12 months.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe 2 primary outcomes were Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference Short Form 8a (PROMIS-PI-SF-8a) score (T-score range, 40.7-77; 77 indicates worst pain interference; minimal clinically important difference, 3.5) and the proportion of participants who discontinued opioids at 12 months, measured by self-report.ResultsOf 608 participants randomized (mean age, 61 years; 362 female [60%]; median daily morphine equivalent dose, 46 mg [IQR, 25 to 79]), 440 (72%) completed 12-month follow-up. There was no statistically significant difference in PROMIS-PI-SF-8a scores between the 2 groups at 12-month follow-up (−4.1 in the intervention and −3.17 in the usual care groups; between-group difference: mean difference, −0.52 [95% CI, −1.94 to 0.89]; P = .15). At 12 months, opioid discontinuation occurred in 65 of 225 participants (29%) in the intervention group and 15 of 208 participants (7%) in the usual care group (odds ratio, 5.55 [95% CI, 2.80 to 10.99]; absolute difference, 21.7% [95% CI, 14.8% to 28.6%]; P < .001). Serious adverse events occurred in 8% (25/305) of the participants in the intervention group and 5% (16/303) of the participants in the usual care group. The most common serious adverse events were gastrointestinal (2% in the intervention group and 0% in the usual care group) and locomotor/musculoskeletal (2% in the intervention group and 1% in the usual care group). Four people (1%) in the intervention group received additional medical care for possible or probable symptoms of opioid withdrawal (shortness of breath, hot flushes, fever and pain, small intestinal bleed, and an overdose suicide attempt).Conclusions and RelevanceIn people with chronic pain due to nonmalignant causes, compared with usual care, a group-based educational intervention that included group and individual support and skill-based learning significantly reduced patient-reported use of opioids, but had no effect on perceived pain interference with daily life activities.Trial Registrationisrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN49470934

ObjectivesTo determine whether a pre-existing smartphone app to teach mindfulness meditation is acceptable to women with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) and can be integrated into clinical practice within the National Health Service (NHS) CPP pathways, and to inform the design of a potential randomised clinical trial.DesignA prestudy patient and public involvement (PPI) group to collect feedback on the acceptability of the existing app and study design was followed by a three-arm randomised feasibility trial. In addition, we undertook interviews and focus groups with patients and staff to explore app usability and acceptability. We also obtained participant comments on the research process, such as acceptability of the study questionnaires.SettingTwo gynaecology clinics within Barts Health NHS, London, UK.ParticipantsPatients with CPP lasting ≥6 months with access to smartphone or personal computer and understanding of basic English.InterventionThe intervention was mindfulness meditation content plus additional pain module delivered by a smartphone app. Active controls received muscle relaxation content from the same app. Passive (waiting list) controls received usual care.Main outcome measuresThemes on user feedback, app usability and integration, and reasons for using/not using the app.ResultsThe use of the app was low in both active groups. Patients in the prestudy PPI group, all volunteers, were enthusiastic about the app (convenience, content, portability, flexibility, ease of use). Women contributing to the interview or focus group data (n=14), from a ‘real world’ clinic (some not regular app users), were less positive, citing as barriers lack of opportunities/motivation to use the app and lack of familiarity and capabilities with technology. Staff (n=7) were concerned about the potential need for extra support for them and for the patients, and considered the app needed organisational backing and peer acceptance.ConclusionThe opinions of prestudy PPI volunteers meeting in their private time may not represent those of patients recruited at a routine clinic appointment. It may be more successful to codesign/codevelop an app with typical users than to adapt existing apps for use in real-world clinical populations.Trial registration numberISRCTN10925965.

Background and Objectives:Chronic headache disorders are a major cause of pain and disability. Education and supportive self-management approaches could reduce burden of headache disability. We tested the effectiveness of a group educational and supportive self-management programme for people living with chronic headaches.Methods:A pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Participants were aged ≥18 years with chronic migraine or chronic tension type headache, with or without medication overuse headache.We primarily recruited from general practices. Participants were assigned to either a two-day group education and self-management programme, a one-to-one nurse interview, and telephone support or to usual care plus relaxation material.The primary outcome was headache related quality of life using the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) at 12 months. The primary analysis used intention-to-treat principles for participants with migraine and both baseline and 12-month HIT-6 data.Results:Between April 2017 and March 2019, we randomised 736 participants. Since only nine participants just had tension type headache our main analyses were on the 727 participants with migraine. Of these 376 were allocated to the self-management intervention 351 to usual care. Data from 586 (81%) participants were analysed for primary outcome. There was no between group difference in HIT-6, (adjusted mean difference = -0·3, 95% CI -1·23 to 0·67), or headache days (0·9, 95% CI -0·29, 2·05), at 12 months. The CHESS intervention generated incremental adjusted costs of £268 (95% CI,£176 to £377) [USD383 (95%CI USD252 to USD539)] and incremental adjusted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 0.031 (95% CI -0.005 to .063). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £8,617 (USD12,322) per QALY gained.Discussion:These findings conclusively show a lack of benefit for quality of life or monthly headache days from a brief group education and supportive self-management programme for people living with chronic migraine or chronic tension type headache with episodic migraine.Registered on the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number registry,ISRCTN7970810016th December 2015https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN79708100The first enrolment was 24th April 2017.Classification of evidence:This study provides Class III evidence that a brief group education and self-management program does not increase the probability of improvement in headache related quality of life in people with chronic migraine.