Ann Kinmonth

Publications of Ann Kinmonth

• Trial Protocol: Communicating DNA-based risk assessments for Crohn's disease: a randomised controlled trial assessing impact upon stopping smoking

  Authors: Sophia Whitwell, Christopher Mathew, Cathryn Lewis, Alastair Forbes, Sally Watts, Jeremy Sanderson, Gareth Hollands, Prevost A Toby, David Armstrong, Ann Kinmonth, Stephen Sutton, Theresa Marteau

  BMC Public Health. 01/2011;

  Abstract Background Estimates of the risk of developing Crohn's disease (CD) can be made using DNA testing for mutations in the NOD2 (CARD15) gene, family history, and smoking status. SmokingAbstract Background Estimates of the risk of developing Crohn's disease (CD) can be made using DNA testing for mutations in the NOD2 (CARD15) gene, family history, and smoking status. Smoking doubles the risk of CD, a risk that is reduced by stopping. CD therefore serves as a timely and novel paradigm within which to assess the utility of predictive genetic testing to motivate behaviour change to reduce the risk of disease. The aim of the study is to describe the impact upon stopping smoking of communicating a risk of developing CD that incorporates DNA analysis. We will test the following main hypothesis: Smokers who are first degree relatives (FDRs) of CD probands are more likely to make smoking cessation attempts following communication of risk estimates of developing CD that incorporate DNA analysis, compared with an equivalent communication that does not incorporate DNA analysis. Methods/design A parallel groups randomised controlled trial in which smokers who are FDRs of probands with CD are randomly allocated in families to undergo one of two types of assessment of risk for developing CD based on either: i. DNA analysis, family history of CD and smoking status, or ii. Family history of CD and smoking status The primary outcome is stopping smoking for 24 hours or longer in the six months following provision of risk information. The secondary outcomes are seven-day smoking abstinence at one week and six month follow-ups. Randomisation of 470 smoking FDRs of CD probands, with 400 followed up (85%), provides 80% power to detect a difference in the primary outcome of 14% between randomised arms, at the 5% significance level. Discussion This trial provides one of the strongest tests to date of the impact of communicating DNA-based risk assessment on risk-reducing behaviour change. Specific issues regarding the choice of trial design are discussed. Trial Registration ISRCTN: ISRCTN21633644

• Protocol for the MoleMate™ UK Trial: a randomised controlled trial of the MoleMate system in the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care [ISRCTN 79932379]

  Authors: Fiona Walter, Helen Morris, Elka Humphrys, Per Hall, Ann Kinmonth, Prevost A Toby, Edward Wilson, Nigel Burrows, Paul Norris, Margaret Johnson, Jon Emery

  BMC Family Practice. 01/2010;

  Abstract Background Suspicious pigmented lesions are a common presenting problem in general practice consultations; while the majority are benign a small minority are melanomas. DifferentiatingAbstract Background Suspicious pigmented lesions are a common presenting problem in general practice consultations; while the majority are benign a small minority are melanomas. Differentiating melanomas from other pigmented lesions in primary care is challenging: currently, 95% of all lesions referred to a UK specialist are benign. The MoleMate system is a new diagnostic aid, incorporating a hand-held SIAscopy scanner with a primary care diagnostic algorithm. This trial tests the hypothesis that adding the MoleMate system to current best primary care practice will increase the proportion of appropriate referrals of suspicious pigmented lesions to secondary care compared with current best practice alone. Methods/design The MoleMate UK Trial is a primary care based multi-centre randomised controlled trial, with randomisation at patient level using a validated block randomisation method for two age groups (45 years and under; 46 years and over). We aim to recruit adult patients seen in general practice with a pigmented skin lesion that cannot immediately be diagnosed as benign and the patient reassured. The trial has a 'two parallel groups' design, comparing 'best practice' with 'best practice' plus the MoleMate system in the intervention group. The primary outcome is the positive predictive value (PPV) of referral defined as the proportion of referred lesions seen by secondary care experts that are considered 'clinically significant' (i.e. biopsied or monitored). Secondary outcomes include: the sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value (NPV) of the decision not to refer; clinical outcomes (melanoma thickness, 5 year melanoma incidence and mortality); clinician outcomes (Index of Suspicion, confidence, learning effects); patient outcomes (satisfaction, general and cancer-specific worry), and cost-utility. Discussion The MoleMate UK Trial tests a new technology designed to improve the management of suspicious pigmented lesions in primary care. If effective, the MoleMate system could reduce the burden on skin cancer clinics of patients with benign pigmented skin lesions, and improve patient care in general practice.

• Trial Protocol: Using genotype to tailor prescribing of nicotine replacement therapy: a randomised controlled trial assessing impact of communication upon adherence

  Authors: Theresa Marteau, Marcus Munafò, Paul Aveyard, Chloe Hill, Sophia Whitwell, Thomas Willis, Rachel Crockett, Gareth Hollands, Elaine Johnstone, Alison Wright, Prevost A Toby, David Armstrong, Stephen Sutton, Ann Kinmonth

  BMC Public Health. 01/2010;

  Abstract Background The behavioural impact of pharmacogenomics is untested; informing smokers of genetic test results for responsiveness to smoking cessation medication may increase adherence to thisAbstract Background The behavioural impact of pharmacogenomics is untested; informing smokers of genetic test results for responsiveness to smoking cessation medication may increase adherence to this medication. The objective of this trial is to estimate the impact upon adherence to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) of informing smokers that their oral dose of NRT has been tailored to a DNA analysis. Hypotheses to be tested are as follows: I Adherence to NRT is greater among smokers informed that their oral dose of NRT is tailored to an analysis of DNA (genotype), compared to one tailored to nicotine dependence questionnaire score (phenotype). II Amongst smokers who fail to quit at six months, motivation to make another quit attempt is lower when informed that their oral dose of NRT was tailored to genotype rather than phenotype. Methods/Design An open label, parallel groups randomised trial in which 630 adult smokers (smoking 10 or more cigarettes daily) using National Health Service (NHS) stop smoking services in primary care are randomly allocated to one of two groups: i. NRT oral dose tailored by DNA analysis (OPRM1 gene) (genotype), or ii. NRT oral dose tailored by nicotine dependence questionnaire score (phenotype) The primary outcome is proportion of prescribed NRT consumed in the first 28 days following an initial quit attempt, with the secondary outcome being motivation to make another quit attempt, amongst smokers not abstinent at six months. Other outcomes include adherence to NRT in the first seven days and biochemically validated smoking abstinence at six months. The primary outcome will be collected on 630 smokers allowing sufficient power to detect a 7.5% difference in mean proportion of NRT consumed using a two-tailed test at the 5% level of significance between groups. The proportion of all NRT consumed in the first four weeks of quitting will be compared between arms using an independent samples t-test and by estimating the 95% confidence interval for observed between-arm difference in mean NRT consumption (Hypothesis I). Motivation to make another quit attempt will be compared between arms in those failing to quit by six months (Hypothesis II). Discussion This is the first clinical trial evaluating the behavioural impact on adherence of prescribing medication using genetic rather than phenotypic information. Specific issues regarding the choice of design for trials of interventions of this kind are discussed. Trial details Funder: Medical Research Council (MRC) Grant number: G0500274 ISRCTN: 14352545 Date trial stated: June 2007 Expected end date: December 2009 Expected reporting date: December 2010

• Impact of informed-choice invitations on diabetes screening knowledge, attitude and intentions: an analogue study

  Authors: Eleanor Mann, Ian Kellar, Stephen Sutton, Ann Kinmonth, Matthew Hankins, Simon Griffin, Theresa Marteau

  BMC Public Health. 01/2010;

  Abstract Background Despite concerns that facilitating informed choice would decrease diabetes screening uptake, 'informed choice' invitations that increased knowledge did not affectAbstract Background Despite concerns that facilitating informed choice would decrease diabetes screening uptake, 'informed choice' invitations that increased knowledge did not affect attendance (the DICISION trial). We explored possible reasons using data from an experimental analogue study undertaken to develop the invitations. We tested a model of the impact on knowledge, attitude and intentions of a diabetes screening invitation designed to facilitate informed choices. Methods 417 men and women aged 40-69 recruited from town centres in the UK were randomised to receive either an invitation for diabetes screening designed to facilitate informed choice or a standard type of invitation. Knowledge of the invitation, attitude towards diabetes screening, and intention to attend for diabetes screening were assessed two weeks later. Results Attitude was a strong predictor of screening intentions (β = .64, p = .001). Knowledge added to the model but was a weak predictor of intentions (β = .13, p = .005). However, invitation type did not predict attitudes towards screening but did predict knowledge (β = -.45, p = .001), which mediated a small effect of invitation type on intention (indirect β = -.06, p = .017). Conclusions These findings may explain why information about the benefits and harms of screening did not reduce diabetes screening attendance in the DICISION trial.

  Download

• Impact of an informed choice invitation on uptake of screening for diabetes in primary care (DICISION): trial protocol

  Authors: Eleanor Mann, Prevost A Toby, Simon Griffin, Ian Kellar, Stephen Sutton, Michael Parker, Simon Sanderson, Ann Kinmonth, Theresa Marteau

  BMC Public Health. 01/2009;

  Abstract Background Screening invitations have traditionally been brief, providing information only about population benefits. Presenting information about the limited individual benefits andAbstract Background Screening invitations have traditionally been brief, providing information only about population benefits. Presenting information about the limited individual benefits and potential harms of screening to inform choice may reduce attendance, particularly in the more socially deprived. At the same time, amongst those who attend, it might increase motivation to change behavior to reduce risks. This trial assesses the impact on attendance and motivation to change behavior of an invitation that facilitates informed choices about participating in diabetes screening in general practice. Three hypotheses are tested: 1. Attendance at screening for diabetes is lower following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation. 2. There is an interaction between the type of invitation and social deprivation: attendance following an informed choice compared with a standard invitation is lower in those who are more rather than less socially deprived. 3. Amongst those who attend for screening, intentions to change behavior to reduce risks of complications in those subsequently diagnosed with diabetes are stronger following an informed choice invitation compared with a standard invitation. Method/Design 1500 people aged 40–69 years without known diabetes but at high risk are identified from four general practice registers in the east of England. 1200 participants are randomized by households to receive one of two invitations to attend for diabetes screening at their general practices. The intervention invitation is designed to facilitate informed choices, and comprises detailed information and a decision aid. A comparison invitation is based on those currently in use. Screening involves a finger-prick blood glucose test. The primary outcome is attendance for diabetes screening. The secondary outcome is intention to change health related behaviors in those attenders diagnosed with diabetes. A sample size of 1200 ensures 90% power to detect a 10% difference in attendance between arms, and in an estimated 780 attenders, 80% power to detect a 0.2 sd difference in intention between arms. Discussion The DICISION trial is a rigorous pragmatic denominator based clinical trial of an informed choice invitation to diabetes screening, which addresses some key limitations of previous trials. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73125647

• The DiGEM trial protocol – a randomised controlled trial to determine the effect on glycaemic control of different strategies of blood glucose self-monitoring in people with type 2 diabetes [ISRCTN47464659]

  Authors: Andrew Farmer, Alisha Wade, David French, Elizabeth Goyder, Ann Kinmonth, Andrew Neil

  BMC Family Practice. 01/2005;

  Abstract Background We do not yet know how to use blood glucose self-monitoring (BGSM) most effectively in the self-management of type 2 diabetes treated with oral medication. Training inAbstract Background We do not yet know how to use blood glucose self-monitoring (BGSM) most effectively in the self-management of type 2 diabetes treated with oral medication. Training in monitoring may be most effective in improving glycaemic control and well being when results are linked to behavioural change. Methods/design DiGEM is a three arm randomised parallel group trial set in UK general practices. A total of 450 patients with type 2 diabetes managed with lifestyle or oral glucose lowering medication are included. The trial compares effectiveness of three strategies for monitoring glycaemic control over 12 months (1) a control group with three monthly HbA1c measurements; interpreted with nurse-practitioner; (2) A self-testing of blood glucose group; interpreted with nurse- practitioner to inform adjustment of medication in addition to 1; (3) A self-monitoring of blood glucose group with personal use of results to interpret results in relation to lifestyle changes in addition to 1 and 2. The trial has an 80% power at a 5% level of significance to detect a difference in change in the primary outcome, HbA1c of 0.5% between groups, allowing for an attrition rate of 10%. Secondary outcome measures include health service costs, well-being, and the intervention effect in sub-groups defined by duration of diabetes, current management, health status at baseline and co-morbidity. A mediation analysis will explore the extent to which changes in beliefs about self-management of diabetes between experimental groups leads to changes in outcomes in accordance with the Common Sense Model of illness. The study is open and has recruited more than half the target sample. The trial is expected to report in 2007. Discussion The DiGEM intervention and trial design address weaknesses of previous research by use of a sample size with power to detect a clinically significant change in HbA1c, recruitment from a well-characterised primary care population, definition of feasible monitoring and behaviour change strategies based on psychological theory and evidence, and measures along the hypothesised causal path from cognitions to behaviours and disease and well being related outcomes. The trial will provide evidence to support, focus or discourage use of specific BGSM strategies.