Search

Objective: Independent review boards can provide an objective appraisal of investigators' decisions and may be useful for determining complex primary outcomes, such as bipolar disorder relapse, in cross-national studies. This article describes the use of an independent, blinded relapse monitoring board to assess the primary outcome (relapse) in an international clinical trial of risperidone long-acting therapy adjunctive to standard-care pharmacotherapy for patients with bipolar disorder. Design: The fully autonomous relapse monitoring board was composed of a chair and two additional members-all psychiatrists and experts in the diagnostic, clinical, and therapeutic management of bipolar disorder. The relapse monitoring board met six times during the study to review patient relapse data and was charged with the responsibility of determining if the events described by investigators qualified as relapses. Additionally, the relapse monitoring board reviewed data for all randomized patients to identify any relapse events not recognized by investigators. Results: Primary efficacy results were similar and significant for investigator- and relapse monitoring board-determined relapses. Ten discrepancies were noted: two of the 42 investigator-determined relapses did not meet the intended clinical relapse threshold as determined by the relapse monitoring board; conversely, the relapse monitoring board confirmed eight relapse events not identified by investigators. The relapse monitoring board had no direct interactions with patients and had to rely on the accuracy of investigator assessments. Also, once an investigator determined a relapse and the patients discontinued the study, less information was available to the relapse monitoring board for relapse assessment. Conclusions: Use of the relapse monitoring board supported the validity of the study by incorporating a level of standardization to mitigate the risk that local practice in different cultures and medical systems at the sites would confound study results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: We aimed to explore experiences of South Asian carers of people with dementia receiving health or social care in the United Kingdom, purposively recruited to encompass a range of migration, economic and cultural experiences. While previous work in this area has reported carers' understanding of, and attitudes to dementia, we explored how carers' cultural identities and values influenced their experiences, negotiation of the caring role and relationship with services., Research Design and Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 10 Bangladeshi and Indian family carers of people living with dementia at home. We recruited participants from community settings in London and Bradford, UK. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and thematically analyzed., Results: We identified 4 themes: an expectation and duty to care, expectation and duty as a barrier to accessing formal care (family carer reluctance, care recipient reluctance, and service organization), culturally (in)sensitive care, and the importance of support from informal care networks., Discussion and Implications: Interviewees described tensions between generations with different understandings of familial care obligations. Expectations to manage led to burden and guilt, and the cost of caring, in terms of lost employment and relationships was striking. Unlike in previous studies, interviewees wanted to engage and be supported by services, but were frequently offered care models they could not accept. There was a tension between a state-provided care system obliged to provide care when there are no alternatives, and family carers who feel a duty to always provide alternatives. Informal social networks often provided valued support., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)