Objectives To elucidate the experiences and perceptions of people living with primary frozen shoulder and their priorities for treatment. Design Qualitative study design using semistructured interviews. Setting General practitioner (GP) and musculoskeletal clinics in primary and secondary care in one National Health Service Trust in England. Participants 12 patients diagnosed with primary frozen shoulder were purposively recruited from a GP's surgery, community clinics and hospital clinics. Recruitment targeted the phases of frozen shoulder: pain predominant (n=5), stiffness predominant (n=4) and residual stiffness predominant following hospital treatment (n=2). One participant dropped out. Inclusion criteria: adult, male and female patients of any age, attending the clinics, who had been diagnosed with primary frozen shoulder. Results The most important experiential themes identified by participants were: pain which was severe as well as inexplicable; inconvenience/disability arising from increasing restriction of movement (due to pain initially, gradually giving way to stiffness); confusion/anxiety associated with delay in diagnosis and uncertainty about the implications for the future; and treatment-related aspects. Participants not directly referred to a specialist (whether physiotherapist, physician or surgeon) wanted a faster, better-defined care pathway. Specialist consultation brought more definitive diagnosis, relief from anxiety and usually self-rated improvement. The main treatment priority was improved function, though there was recognition that this might be facilitated by relief of pain or stiffness. There was a general lack of information from clinicians about the condition with over-reliance on verbal communication and very little written information. Conclusions Awareness of frozen shoulder should be increased among non-specialists and the best available information made accessible for patients. Our results also highlight the importance of patient participation in frozen shoulder research.

Proximal humeral fractures, which occur mainly in older adults, account for approximately 4 to 5% of all fractures. Approximately 40% of these fractures are displaced fractures involving the surgical neck. Management of this group of fractures is often challenging and the outcome is frequently unsatisfactory. In particular it is not clear whether surgery gives better outcomes than non-surgical management. Currently there is much variation in the use of surgery and a lack of good quality evidence to inform this decision. We aim to undertake a pragmatic UK-based multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical versus standard non-surgical treatment for adults with an acute closed displaced fracture of the proximal humerus with involvement of the surgical neck. The choice of surgical intervention is left to the surgeon, who must use techniques that they are fully experienced with. This will avoid 'learning curve' problems. We will promote good standards of non-surgical care, similarly insisting on care-provider competence, and emphasize the need for comparable provision of rehabilitation for both groups of patients. We aim to recruit 250 patients from a minimum of 18 NHS trauma centres throughout the UK. These patients will be followed-up for 2 years. The primary outcome is the Oxford Shoulder Score, which will be collected via questionnaires completed by the trial participants at 6, 12 and 24 months. This is a 12-item condition-specific questionnaire providing a total score based on the person's subjective assessment of pain and activities of daily living impairment. We will also collect data for other outcomes, including general health measures and complications, and for an economic evaluation. Additionally, we plan a systematic collection of reasons for non-inclusion of eligible patients who were not recruited into the trial, and their baseline characteristics, treatment preferences and intended treatment. This article presents the protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial. It gives extensive details of, and the basis for, the chosen methods, and describes the key measures taken to avoid bias and to ensure validity. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN50850043

Achieving evidence-based practice in health care is integral to the drive for quality improvement in the National Health Service in the UK. Encapsulated within this policy agenda are challenges inherent in leading and managing organisational change. Not least of these is the need to change the behaviours of individuals and groups in order to embed new practices. Such changes are set within a context of organisational culture that can present a number of barriers and facilitators to change. Diagnostic analysis has been recommended as a precursor to the implementation of change to enable such barriers and facilitators to be identified and a targeted implementation strategy developed. Although diagnostic analysis is recommended, there is a paucity of advice on appropriate methods to use. This paper addresses the paucity and builds on previous work by recommending a mixed method approach to diagnostic analysis comprising both quantitative and qualitative data.

Objective. To develop a treatment schedule of physical therapy techniques used to improve movement control and functional use of the paretic lower limb after stroke in U.K. clinical centers to be involved in a subsequent clinical trial of experimental interventions given in addition to routine clinical practice. Methods. Ten physiotherapists experienced in stroke rehabilitation who worked in or near the clinical centers to be involved in a subsequent clinical trial completed an individual semi-structured interview. The verbatim transcripts were condensed independently by 2 researchers into a draft list of interventions. The researchers then resolved disagreement through discussion and produced a preliminary list of interventions. At a focus group meeting, the participating physiotherapists discussed the preliminary list, refined it to produce a final list, and then transformed it into a draft treatment schedule. The draft treatment schedule was piloted in clinical practice. Refinements were made, and the final treatment schedule was produced. Results. The treatment schedule consists of an A4 recording form with instructions and glossary of terms printed on the back. Each treatment record provides information including duration of treatment, treatment aims, and the 45 specific physical therapy interventions provided in the 11 sections (e.g., “splinting techniques” and “function - in sitting towards standing”). Conclusion. A treatment schedule was produced, which can now be used in a subsequent phase II evaluative trial.

Guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommend that every nurse should consult their patients about giving up smoking. This is an important public health role but in order to fulfil it, nurses need to have an understanding of the motivations and barriers that underpin smoking cessation. Furthermore, nurses need to know the options available to support the patient. This review provides an overview of the stages and motivations behind smokers’ intentions. It aims to increase the knowledge of nurses and provide them with a greater understanding of the issues which smokers face. This review identified smoking cessation as a continuum. Nurses play an important role in raising the issue of smoking cessation with patients and they can offer a balanced perspective on the challenges they might face. They can then sign-post patients to the most appropriate smoking cessation options.