Search

Background: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged healthcare providers to adapt their models of care and leverage technology to continue to provide necessary care while reducing the likelihood of exposure. One setting that faced a unique set of challenges and opportunities was free and charitable clinics. In response to the emerging pandemic, The North Carolina Association for Free and Charitable Clinics (NCAFCC) offered their 66 member clinics access to a telehealth platform, free of charge. Objective: This paper explores the varied perspectives of leaders in the NCAFCC member clinics regarding the implementation of telehealth services to facilitate continuity of care for patients during the height of the pandemic. Design: This qualitative study is part of a broader research effort to understand and contextualize the experience of implementing and using telehealth services by North Carolina free and charitable clinics during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The research team conducted 13 key informant interviews and employed thematic analysis and grounded theory to explore critical themes and construct a model based on the CFIR to describe the use of telehealth in free and charitable clinics. Results: Twelve clinic managers and executive directors from free and charitable clinics across the state participated in the key informant interviews providing their unique perspective on the experience of implementing telehealth services in a free and charitable clinic environment during the COVID-19 pandemic. When examined within the lens of the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR), 3 key themes emerged from the key informant interviews: mission driven patient centered care, resilience and resourcefulness, and immediate implementation. Conclusions: This study aligns with existing literature regarding telehealth implementation across other safety net provider settings and highlights the key implementation factors, organizational elements, provider perspectives, and patient needs that must collectively be considered when implementing new technologies, especially in a low-resource, high need healthcare setting. The study showcases the implementation climate, resourcefulness, and mission driven approach that allowed many NCAFCC clinics to respond to an emergent situation by adopting and implementing a telehealth platform in a period of 2 weeks or less.

Salivary proteins from mosquitoes have received significant attention lately due to their potential to develop therapeutic treatments or vaccines for mosquito-borne diseases. Here, we report the characterization of LTRIN (lymphotoxin beta receptor inhibitor), a salivary protein known to enhance the pathogenicity of ZIKV by interrupting the LTβR-initiated NF-κB signaling pathway and, therefore, diminish the immune responses. We demonstrated that the truncated C-terminal LTRIN (ΔLTRIN) is a dimeric protein with a stable alpha helix-dominant secondary structure, which possibly aids in withstanding the temperature fluctuations during blood-feeding events. ΔLTRIN possesses two Ca2+ binding EF-hand domains, with the second EF-hand motif playing a more significant role in interacting with LTβR. Additionally, we mapped the primary binding regions of ΔLTRIN on LTβR using hydrogen–deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) and identified that 91QEKAHIAEHMDVPIDTSKMSEQELQFHY118 from the N-terminal of ΔLTRIN is the major interacting region. Together, our studies provide insight into the recognition of LTRIN by LTβR. This finding may aid in a future therapeutic and transmission-blocking vaccine development against ZIKV.

Poor water quality is a widespread issue in urban rivers and streams in London. Localised pollution can have impacts on local communities, from health issues to environmental degradation and restricted recreational use of water. The Salmons and Pymmes Brooks, located in the London Borough of Enfield, flow into the River Lee, and in this paper, the impacts of misconnected sewers, urban runoff and atmospheric pollution have been evaluated. The first step towards finding a sustainable and effective solution to these issues is to identify sources and paths of pollutants and to understand their cycle through catchments and rivers. The INCA water quality model has been applied to the Salmons and Pymmes urban catchments in north-east London, with the aim of providing local communities and community action groups such as Thames21 with a tool they can use to assess the water quality issue. INCA is a process-based, dynamic flow and quality model, and so it can account for daily changes in temperature, flow, water velocity and residence time that all affect reaction kinetics and hence chemical flux. As INCA is process-based, a set of mitigation strategies have been evaluated including constructed wetland across the catchment to assess pollution control. The constructed wetlands can make a significant difference reducing sediment transport and improving nutrient control for nitrogen and phosphorus. The results of this paper show that a substantial reduction in nitrate, ammonium and phosphorus concentrations can be achieved if a proper catchment-scale wetland implementation strategy is put in place. Furthermore, the paper shows how the nutrient reduction efficiency of the wetlands should not be affected by climate change. HIGHLIGHTS Modelling urban flows and water quality in London streams is demonstrated.; Impacts of pollution, deposition and urban runoff are illustrated under future climate change.; The paper uses a dynamic process-based water quality model to assess impacts of wetlands.; Constructed wetlands can make a significant difference improving nutrient control.; Mitigation measures significantly reduce nitrate, ammonium and phosphorus.;

Background: Asylum seekers and refugees (ASRs) often experience poor health in host countries. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) requires hosts to ensure these sanctuary seekers have access to basic health care. Aim: To identify barriers and facilitators that affect access to health care by ASRs in Wales. Design & setting: Participatory research approach using qualitative focus groups across Wales, which hosts 10 000 refugees. Method: Eight focus groups were undertaken with ASRs, support workers, and volunteers (n = 57). Results: Specialist NHS-funded services and grant-aided non-governmental organisations (NGOs) facilitated access to health care, including primary care. Most ASRs understood the role of general practice in providing and coordinating care, but were unaware of out-of-hours services. Reported barriers included: language difficulties, health literacy, unrecognised needs, and the cost of travel to appointments. Participants recognised the importance of mental health, but were disappointed by the state of mental health care. Some feared seeking support for mental health from their GP, and few were aware they had the right to move practice if they were unhappy. Written information about health care was not as accessible to refugees as to asylum seekers (ASs). While some participants read such material before consulting, others struggled to access information when in need. Few participants were aware of health prevention services. Even when they knew about services, such as smoking cessation, these services’ difficulty in accommodating ASRs was a barrier. Conclusion: The main barriers identified were: availability of interpreters; knowledge about entitlements; and access to specialist services.

Background: Over half of people with dementia live at home. We know little about what home support could be clinically effective or cost-effective in enabling them to live well. Objectives: We aimed to (1) review evidence for components of home support, identify their presence in the literature and in services in England, and develop an appropriate economic model; (2) develop and test a practical memory support package in early-stage dementia, test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of routine home support in later-stage dementia and design a toolkit based on this evidence; and (3) elicit the preferences of staff, carers and people with dementia for home support inputs and packages, and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these approaches in early- and later-stage dementia. Design: We undertook (1) an evidence synthesis, national surveys on the NHS and social care and an economic review; (2) a multicentre pragmatic randomised trial [Dementia Early Stage Cognitive Aids New Trial (DESCANT)] to estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of providing memory aids and guidance to people with early-stage dementia (the DESCANT intervention), alongside process evaluation and qualitative analysis, an observational study of existing care packages in later-stage dementia along with qualitative analysis, and toolkit development to summarise this evidence; and (3) consultation with experts, staff and carers to explore the balance between informal and paid home support using case vignettes, discrete choice experiments to explore the preferences of people with dementia and carers between home support packages in early- and later-stage dementia, and cost–utility analysis building on trial and observational study. Setting: The national surveys described Community Mental Health Teams, memory clinics and social care services across England. Recruitment to the trial was through memory services in nine NHS trusts in England and one health board in Wales. Recruitment to the observational study was through social services in 17 local authorities in England. Recruitment for the vignette and preference studies was through memory services, community centres and carers’ organisations. Participants: People aged > 50 years with dementia within 1 year of first attendance at a memory clinic were eligible for the trial. People aged > 60 years with later-stage dementia within 3 months of a review of care needs were eligible for the observational study. We recruited staff, carers and people with dementia for the vignette and preference studies. All participants had to give written informed consent. Main outcome measures: The trial and observational study used the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale as the primary outcome and also measured quality of life, capability, cognition, general psychological health and carers’ sense of competence. Methods: Owing to the heterogeneity of interventions, methods and outcome measures, our evidence and economic reviews both used narrative synthesis. The main source of economic studies was the NHS Economic Evaluation Database. We analysed the trial and observational study by linear mixed models. We analysed the trial by ‘treatment allocated’ and used propensity scores to minimise confounding in the observational study. Results: Our reviews and surveys identified several home support approaches of potential benefit. In early-stage dementia, the DESCANT trial had 468 randomised participants (234 intervention participants and 234 control participants), with 347 participants analysed. We found no significant effect at the primary end point of 6 months of the DESCANT intervention on any of several participant outcome measures. The primary outcome was the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale, for which scores range from 0 to 60, with higher scores showing greater dependence. After adjustment for differences at baseline, the mean difference was 0.38, slightly but not significantly favouring the comparator group receiving treatment as usual. The 95% confidence interval ran from –0.89 to 1.65 (p = 0.56). There was no evidence that more intensive care packages in later-stage dementia were more effective than basic care. However, formal home care appeared to help keep people at home. Staff recommended informal care that cost 88% of formal care, but for informal carers this ratio was only 62%. People with dementia preferred social and recreational activities, and carers preferred respite care and regular home care. The DESCANT intervention is probably not cost-effective in early-stage dementia, and intensive care packages are probably not cost-effective in later-stage dementia. From the perspective of the third sector, intermediate intensity packages were cheaper but less effective. Certain elements may be driving these results, notably reduced use of carers’ groups. Limitations: Our chosen outcome measures may not reflect subtle outcomes valued by people with dementia. Conclusions: Several approaches preferred by people with dementia and their carers have potential. However, memory aids aiming to affect daily living activities in early-stage dementia or intensive packages compared with basic care in later-stage dementia were not clinically effective or cost-effective. Future work: Further work needs to identify what people with dementia and their carers prefer and develop more sensitive outcome measures. Study registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12591717. The evidence synthesis is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014008890. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BackgroundWe aimed to estimate the clinical effectiveness of Community Occupational Therapy for people with dementia and family carers-UK version (Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia-UK version [COTiD-UK]) relative to treatment as usual (TAU). We hypothesised that COTiD-UK would improve the ability of people with dementia to perform activities of daily living (ADL), and family carers' sense of competence, compared with TAU.Methods and findingsThe study design was a multicentre, 2-arm, parallel-group, assessor-masked, individually randomised controlled trial (RCT) with internal pilot. It was conducted in 15 sites across England from September 2014 to January 2018. People with a diagnosis of mild to moderate dementia living in their own home were recruited in pairs with a family carer who provided domestic or personal support for at least 4 hours per week. Pairs were randomised to either receive COTiD-UK, which comprised 10 hours of occupational therapy delivered over 10 weeks in the person with dementia's home or TAU, which comprised the usual local service provision that may or may not include standard occupational therapy. The primary outcome was the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) score at 26 weeks. Secondary outcomes for the person with dementia included the following: the BADLS scores at 52 and 78 weeks, cognition, quality of life, and mood; and for the family carer: sense of competence and mood; plus the number of social contacts and leisure activities for both partners. Participants were analysed by treatment allocated. A total of 468 pairs were recruited: people with dementia ranged from 55 to 97 years with a mean age of 78.6 and family carers ranged from 29 to 94 with a mean of 69.1 years. Of the people with dementia, 74.8% were married and 19.2% lived alone. Of the family carers, 72.6% were spouses, and 22.2% were adult children. On randomisation, 249 pairs were assigned to COTiD-UK (62% people with dementia and 23% carers were male) and 219 to TAU (52% people with dementia and 32% carers were male). At the 26 weeks follow-up, data were available for 364 pairs (77.8%). The BADLS score at 26 weeks did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted mean difference estimate 0.35, 95% CI -0.81 to 1.51; p = 0.55). Secondary outcomes did not differ between the groups. In total, 91% of the activity-based goals set by the pairs taking part in the COTiD-UK intervention were fully or partially achieved by the final COTiD-UK session. Study limitations include the following: Intervention fidelity was moderate but varied across and within sites, and the reliance on primarily proxy data focused on measuring the level of functional or cognitive impairment which may not truly reflect the actual performance and views of the person living with dementia.ConclusionsProviding community occupational therapy as delivered in this study did not improve ADL performance, cognition, quality of life, or mood in people with dementia nor sense of competence or mood in family carers. Future research should consider measuring person-centred outcomes that are more meaningful and closely aligned to participants' priorities, such as goal achievement or the quantity and quality of activity engagement and participation.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN10748953.

Abstract Background There is a growing need for an evidence-based approach to home support for people with dementia and their carers following diagnosis but research on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different approaches is sparse. The Dementia Early Stage Cognitive Aids New Trial (DESCANT) will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a range of memory aids, training and support to people with mild to moderate dementia and their carers at home and compares that intervention with treatment as usual. Methods/design This is a multi-site, pragmatic randomised trial preceded by a feasibility study and internal pilot. We aim to allocate at random 360 pairs comprising a person with mild to moderate dementia and an identified carer between the DESCANT intervention and treatment as usual. We assess participants at baseline, 13 and 26 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale; other participant outcomes include cognition, quality of life, activities of daily living and social networking; carer outcomes include quality of life, sense of competence and mental health. To enhance this quantitative evaluation we are conducting a qualitative component and a process evaluation to assess the implementation process and identify contextual factors associated with variation. Discussion The DESCANT intervention reflects current policy to enhance the capabilities of people with dementia after diagnosis and their carers. If it is clinically and cost-effective, its modest nature and cost will enhance the likelihood of it being incorporated into mainstream practice. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN12591717. Registered on 29 July 2016. Protocol number: 31288: North West - Haydock Research Ethics Committee, 20/06/2016, ref.: 16/NW/0389.

AimsTo explore adolescents' experiences of consenting to, and participating in, alcohol intervention trials when attending for emergency care.MethodsIn-depth semi-structured interviews with 27 adolescents (16 males; aged 14-17 years (Mage = 15.7)) who had taken part in one of two linked brief alcohol intervention trials based in 10 accident and emergency departments in England. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and subject to thematic analysis.ResultsResearch and intervention methods were generally found to be acceptable though confidentiality was important and parental presence could hinder truthful disclosures regarding alcohol use. Participants discussed the importance of being involved in research that was relevant to them and recognised alcohol consumption as a normative part of adolescence, highlighting the importance of having access to appropriate health information. Beyond this, they recognised the benefits and risks of trial participation for themselves and others with the majority showing a degree of altruism in considering longer term implications for others as well as themselves.ConclusionsAlcohol screening and intervention in emergency care is both acceptable and relevant to adolescents but acceptability is reliant on confidentiality being assured and may be inhibited by parental presence.Trial registrationISRCTN Number: 45300218.

Applying qualitative methods, this paper examines the burgeoning of quality assurance databases, processes and networks of actors in the field of higher education in Europe. Our main argument is that there has been a move from the Bologna Process being the near singular focus for European-level coordination and harmonisation of higher education, towards the making of a much more diverse and complex quality assurance and evaluation infrastructure. This infrastructure involves a range of distinct but interdependent actors and processes and contains explicit and implicit interlinkages with the production of wider policy agendas, such as the rise of the European Education Area. The aim of this paper is to analyse the growth and complexity of Quality Assurance (QA) in higher education (HE) in Europe, as a way of understanding the multifaceted and continuously developing process of Europeanisation.

Background: Dementia with challenging behaviour (CB) causes significant distress for caregivers and the person with dementia. It is associated with breakdown of care at home and disruption in care homes. Challenge Demcare aimed to assist care home staff and mental health practitioners who support families at home to respond effectively to CB. Objectives: To study the management of CB in care homes (ResCare) and in family care (FamCare). Following a conceptual overview, two systematic reviews and scrutiny of clinical guidelines, we (1) developed and tested a computerised intervention; (2) conducted a cluster randomised trial (CRT) of the intervention for dementia with CB in care homes; (3) conducted a process evaluation of implementation of the intervention; and (4) conducted a longitudinal observational cohort study of the management of people with dementia with CB living at home, and their carers. Review methods: Cochrane review of randomised controlled trials; systematic meta-ethnographic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. Design: ResCare – survey, CRT, process evaluation and stakeholder consultations. FamCare – survey, longitudinal cohort study, participatory development design process and stakeholder consultations. Comparative examination of baseline levels of CB in the ResCare trial and the FamCare study participants. Settings: ResCare – 63 care homes in Yorkshire. FamCare – 33 community mental health teams for older people (CMHTsOP) in seven NHS organisations across England. Participants: ResCare – 2386 residents and 861 staff screened for eligibility; 555 residents with dementia and CB; 277 ‘other’ residents; 632 care staff; and 92 staff champions. FamCare – every new referral (n = 5360) reviewed for eligibility; 157 patients with dementia and CB, with their carer; and 26 mental health practitioners. Stakeholder consultations – initial workshops with 83 practitioners and managers from participating organisations; and 70 additional stakeholders using eight group discussions and nine individual interviews. Intervention: An online application for case-specific action plans to reduce CB in dementia, consisting of e-learning and bespoke decision support care home and family care e-tools. Main outcome measures: ResCare – survey with the Challenging Behaviour Scale; measurement of CB with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) and medications taken from prescriptions; implementation with thematic views from participants and stakeholders. FamCare – case identification from all referrals to CMHTsOP; measurement of CB with the Revised Memory and Behaviour Problems Checklist and NPI; medications taken from prescriptions; and thematic views from stakeholders. Costs of care calculated for both settings. Comparison of the ResCare trial and FamCare study participants used the NPI, Clinical Dementia Rating and prescribed medications. Results: ResCare – training with group discussion and decision support for individualised interventions did not change practice enough to have an impact on CB in dementia. Worksite e-learning opportunities were not readily taken up by care home staff. Smaller homes with a less hierarchical management appear more ready than others to engage in innovation. FamCare – home-dwelling people with dementia and CB are referred to specialist NHS services, but treatment over 6 months, averaging nine contacts per family, had no overall impact on CB. Over 60% of people with CB had mild dementia. Families bear the majority of the care costs of dementia with CB. A care gap in the delivery of post-diagnostic help for families supporting relatives with dementia and significant CB at home has emerged. Higher levels of CB were recorded in family settings; and prescribing practices were suboptimal in both care home and family settings. Limitations: Functionality of the software was unreliable, resulting in delays. This compromised the feasibility studies and undermined delivery of the intervention in care homes. A planned FamCare CRT could not proceed because of insufficient referrals. Conclusions: A Cochrane review of individualised functional analysis-based interventions suggests that these show promise, although delivery requires a trained dementia care workforce. Like many staff training interventions, our interactive e-learning course was well received by staff when delivered in groups with facilitated discussion. Our e-learning and decision support e-tool intervention in care homes, in its current form, without ongoing review of implementation of recommended action plans, is not effective at reducing CB when compared with usual care. This may also be true for staff training in general. A shift in priorities from early diagnosis to early recognition of dementia with clinically significant CB could bridge the emerging gap and inequities of care to families. Formalised service improvements in the NHS, to co-ordinate such interventions, may stimulate better opportunities for practice models and pathways. Separate services for care homes and family care may enhance the efficiency of delivery and the quality of research on implementation into routine care. Future work: There is scope for extending functional analysis-based interventions with communication and interaction training for carers. Our clinical workbooks, video material of real-life episodes of CB and process evaluation tool resources require further testing. There is an urgent need for evaluation of interventions for home-dwelling people with dementia with clinically significant CB, delivered by trained dementia practitioners. Realist evaluation designs may illuminate how the intervention might work, and for whom, within varying service contexts. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02553381 (the ResCare trial) and ISRCTN58876649 (the FamCare study). Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 5, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BackgroundCognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a well-established group psychosocial intervention for people with dementia. There is evidence that home-based programmes of cognitive stimulation delivered by family caregivers may benefit both the person and the caregiver. However, no previous studies have evaluated caregiver-delivered CST. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based, caregiver-led individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) program in (i) improving cognition and quality of life (QoL) for the person with dementia and (ii) mental and physical health (well-being) for the caregiver.Methods and findingsA single-blind, pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at eight study sites across the United Kingdom. The intervention and blinded assessment of outcomes were conducted in participants' homes. Three hundred fifty-six people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers were recruited from memory services and community mental health teams (CMHTs). Participants were randomly assigned to iCST (75, 30-min sessions) or treatment as usual (TAU) control over 25 wk. iCST sessions consisted of themed activities designed to be mentally stimulating and enjoyable. Caregivers delivering iCST received training and support from an unblind researcher. Primary outcomes were cognition (Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive [ADAS-Cog]) and self-reported QoL (Quality of Life Alzheimer's Disease [QoL-AD]) for the person with dementia and general health status (Short Form-12 health survey [SF-12]) for the caregiver. Secondary outcomes included quality of the caregiving relationship from the perspectives of the person and of the caregiver (Quality of the Carer Patient Relationship Scale) and health-related QoL (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions [EQ-5D]) for the caregiver. Intention to treat (ITT) analyses were conducted. At the post-test (26 wk), there were no differences between the iCST and TAU groups in the outcomes of cognition (mean difference [MD] = -0.55, 95% CI -2.00-0.90; p = 0.45) and self-reported QoL (MD = -0.02, 95% CI -1.22-0.82; p = 0.97) for people with dementia, or caregivers' general health status (MD = 0.13, 95% CI -1.65-1.91; p = 0.89). However, people with dementia receiving iCST rated the relationship with their caregiver more positively (MD = 1.77, 95% CI 0.26-3.28; p = 0.02), and iCST improved QoL for caregivers (EQ-5D, MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.10; p = 0.01). Forty percent (72/180) of dyads allocated to iCST completed at least two sessions per week, with 22% (39/180) completing no sessions at all. Study limitations include low adherence to the intervention.ConclusionsThere was no evidence that iCST has an effect on cognition or QoL for people with dementia. However, participating in iCST appeared to enhance the quality of the caregiving relationship and caregivers' QoL.Trial registrationThe iCST trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (identified ISRCTN 65945963, URL: DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN65945963).

Background: Dementia is a national priority and this research addresses the Prime Minister’s commitment to dementia research as demonstrated by his 2020 challenge and the new UK Dementia Research Institute. In the UK > 800,000 older people have dementia. It has a major impact on the lives of people with dementia themselves, on the lives of their family carers and on services, and costs the nation £26B per year. Pharmacological cures for dementias such as Alzheimer’s disease are not expected before 2025. If no cure can be found, the ageing demographic will result in 2 million people living with dementia by 2050. People with dementia lose much more than just their memory and their daily living skills; they can also lose their independence, their dignity and status, their confidence and morale, and their roles both within the family and beyond. They can be seen as a burden by society, by their families and even by themselves, and may feel unable to contribute to society. This programme of research aims to find useful interventions to improve the quality of life of people with dementia and their carers, and to better understand how people with dementia can be supported at home and avoid being admitted to hospital. Objectives: (1) To develop and evaluate the maintenance cognitive stimulation therapy (MCST) for people with dementia; (2) to develop the Carer Supporter Programme (CSP), and to evaluate the CSP and Remembering Yesterday, Caring Today (RYCT) for people with dementia both separately and together in comparison with usual care; and (3) to develop a home treatment package (HTP) for dementia, to field test the HTP in practice and to conduct an exploratory trial. Methods: (1) The MCST programme was developed for people with dementia based on evidence and qualitative work. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) [with a pilot study of MCST plus acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs)] compared MCST with cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) only. The MCST implementation study conducted a trial of outreach compared with usual care, and assessed implementation in practice. (2) The CSP was developed based on existing evidence and the engagement of carers of people with dementia. The RCT (with internal pilot) compared the CSP and reminiscence (RYCT), both separately and in combination, with usual care. (3) A HTP for dementia, including the most promising interventions and components, was developed by systematically reviewing the literature and qualitative studies including consensus approaches. The HTP for dementia was evaluated in practice by conducting in-depth field testing. Results: (1) Continuing MCST improved quality of life and improved cognition for those taking AChEIs. It was also cost-effective. The CST implementation studies indicated that many staff will run CST groups following a 1-day training course, but that outreach support helps staff go on to run maintenance groups and may also improve staff sense of competence in dementia care. The study of CST in practice found no change in cognition or quality of life at 8-month follow-up. (2) The CSP/RYCT study found no benefits for family carers but improved quality of life for people with dementia. RYCT appeared beneficial for the quality of life of people with dementia but at an excessively high cost. (3) Case management for people with dementia reduces admissions to long-term care and reduces behavioural problems. In terms of managing crises, staff suggested more costly interventions, carers liked education and support, and people with dementia wanted family support, home adaptations and technology. The easy-to-use home treatment manual was feasible in practice to help staff working in crisis teams to prevent hospital admissions for people with dementia. Limitations: Given constraints on time and funding, we were unable to compete the exploratory trial of the HTP package or to conduct an economic evaluation. Future research: To improve the care of people with dementia experiencing crises, a large-scale clinical trial of the home treatment manual is needed. Conclusion: There is an urgent need for effective psychosocial interventions for dementia. MCST improved quality of life and was cost-effective, with benefits to cognition for those on AChEIs. MCST was feasible in practice. Both CSP and RYCT improved the quality of life of people with dementia, but the overall costs may be too high. The HTP was useful in practice but requires evaluation in a full trial. Dementia care research may improve the lives of millions of people across the world. Trial registrations: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN26286067 (MCST), ISRCTN28793457 (MCST implementation) and ISRCTN37956201 (CSP/RYCT). Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 5, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BackgroundJoint reminiscence groups, involving people with dementia and family carers together, are popular, but the evidence-base is limited. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups as compared to usual care.MethodsThis multi-centre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial had two parallel arms: intervention group and usual-care control group. A restricted dynamic method of randomisation was used, with an overall allocation ratio of 1:1, restricted to ensure viable sized intervention groups. Assessments, blind to treatment allocation, were carried out at baseline, three months and ten months (primary end-point), usually in the person's home. Participants were recruited in eight centres, mainly through NHS Memory Clinics and NHS community mental health teams. Included participants were community resident people with mild to moderate dementia (DSM-IV), who had a relative or other care-giver in regular contact, to act as informant and willing and able to participate in intervention. 71% carers were spouses. 488 people with dementia (mean age 77.5)were randomised: 268 intervention, 220 control; 350 dyads completed the study (206 intervention, 144 control). The intervention evaluated was joint reminiscence groups (with up to 12 dyads) weekly for twelve weeks; monthly maintenance sessions for further seven months. Sessions followed a published treatment manual and were held in a variety of community settings. Two trained facilitators in each centre were supported by volunteers. Primary outcome measures were self-reported quality of life for the person with dementia (QoL-AD), psychological distress for the carer (General Health Questionnaire, GHQ-28). Secondary outcome measures included: autobiographical memory and activities of daily living for the person with dementia; carer stress for the carer; mood, relationship quality and service use and costs for both.ResultsThe intention to treat analysis (ANCOVA) identified no differences in outcome between the intervention and control conditions on primary or secondary outcomes (self-reported QoL-AD mean difference 0.07 (-1.21 to 1.35), F = 0.48, p = 0.53). Carers of people with dementia allocated to the reminiscence intervention reported a significant increase in anxiety on a General Health Questionnaire-28 sub-scale at the ten month end-point (mean difference 1.25 (0.25 to 2.26), F = 8.28, p = 0.04). Compliance analyses suggested improved autobiographical memory, quality of life and relationship quality for people with dementia attending more reminiscence sessions, however carers attending more groups showed increased care-giving stress. Economic analyses from a public sector perspective indicated that joint reminiscence groups are unlikely to be cost-effective. There were no significant adverse effects attributed to the intervention. Potential limitations of the study include less than optimal attendance at the group sessions--only 57% of participants attended at least half of the intervention sessions over the 10 month period, and a higher rate of study withdrawal in the control group.ConclusionsThis trial does not support the clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups. Possible beneficial effects for people with dementia who attend sessions as planned are offset by raised anxiety and stress in their carers. The reasons for these discrepant outcomes need to be explored further, and may necessitate reappraisal of the movement towards joint interventions.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN42430123.

Objectives: Limited studies have demonstrated that the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) may be able to help in explaining the variation in physicians′ behavior. We selected the management of asthma as the tracer topic because asthma had nationally known clinical guidelines, and the main medicinal therapies used for asthma had limited applications for the treatment of other diseases, and hence, it was possible to trace the relevant prescribing from routine data. In this study we used the TPB to explain general practitioners (GPs) intentions and prescribing in accordance with asthma clinical guidelines. Methods: We surveyed a stratified random sample of 122 GPs in England. The GPs demographic and prescribing data were obtained from routine sources. The participants completed a TPB questionnaire that was developed based on qualitative interviews and had been tested in a pilot study. Regression methods were utilized for data analysis. Results: Forty-three percent of variance in prescribing intentions was explained by direct TPB measures. Perceived controls were the main predictors of variation in intentions. TPB belief item variables contributed to regression analysis that explained up to 34% of variation in the efficiency prescribing indicators. Effective prescribing indicators were unrelated to TPB variables. Conclusions: Using TPB was helpful in understanding the prescribing intentions of GPs. This could help in promoting the prophylactic usage of inhaler corticosteroids and prevent chronic asthma symptoms and side-effects. However, further empirical and methodological researches are required.

The incidence of incisional hernias (IHs) following midline abdominal incisions is difficult to estimate. Furthermore recent analyses have reported inconsistent findings on the superiority of absorbable versus non-absorbable sutures.To estimate the mean IH rate following midline laparotomy from the published literature, to identify variables that predict IH rates and to analyse whether the type of suture (absorbable versus non-absorbable) affects IH rates.We undertook a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We sought randomised trials and observational studies including patients undergoing midline incisions with standard suture closure. Papers describing two or more arms suitable for inclusion had data abstracted independently for each arm.Fifty-six papers, describing 83 separate groups comprising 14,618 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of IHs after midline incision was 12.8% (range: 0 to 35.6%) at a weighted mean of 23.7 months. The estimated risk of undergoing IH repair after midline laparotomy was 5.2%. Two meta-regression analyses (A and B) each identified seven characteristics associated with increased IH rate: one patient variable (higher age), two surgical variables (surgery for AAA and either surgery for obesity surgery (model A) or using an upper midline incision (model B)), two inclusion criteria (including patients with previous laparotomies and those with previous IHs), and two circumstantial variables (later year of publication and specifying an exact significance level). There was no significant difference in IH rate between absorbable and non-absorbable sutures either alone or in conjunction with either regression analysis.The IH rate estimated by pooling the published literature is 12.8% after about two years. Seven factors account for the large variation in IH rates across groups. However there is no evidence that suture type has an intrinsic effect on IH rates.

Background: Folate deficiency is associated with depression. Despite the biological plausibility of a causal link, the evidence that adding folate enhances antidepressant treatment is weak. Objectives: (1) Estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of folic acid as adjunct to antidepressant medication (ADM). (2) Explore whether baseline folate and homocysteine predict response to treatment. (3) Investigate whether response to treatment depends on genetic polymorphisms related to folate metabolism. Design: FolATED (Folate Augmentation of Treatment – Evaluation for Depression) was a double-blind and placebo-controlled, but otherwise pragmatic, randomised trial including cost–utility analysis. To yield 80% power of detecting standardised difference on the Beck Depression Inventory version 2 (BDI-II) of 0.3 between groups (a ‘small’ effect), FolATED trialists sought to analyse 358 participants. To allow for an estimated loss of 21% of participants over three time points, we planned to randomise 453. Settings: Clinical – Three centres in Wales – North East Wales, North West Wales and Swansea. Trial management – North Wales Organisation for Randomised Trials in Health in Bangor University. Biochemical analysis – University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff. Genetic analysis – University of Liverpool. Participants: Four hundred and seventy-five adult patients presenting to primary or secondary care with confirmed moderate to severe depression for which they were taking or about to start ADM, and able to consent and complete assessments, but not (1) folate deficient, vitamin B12 deficient, or taking folic acid or anticonvulsants; (2) misusing drugs or alcohol, or suffering from psychosis, bipolar disorder, malignancy or other unstable or terminal illness; (3) (planning to become) pregnant; or (4) participating in other clinical research. Interventions: Once a day for 12 weeks experimental participants added 5 mg of folic acid to their ADM, and control participants added an indistinguishable placebo. All participants followed pragmatic management plans initiated by a trial psychiatrist and maintained by their general medical practitioners. Main outcome measures: Assessed at baseline, and 4, 12 and 25 weeks thereafter, and analysed by ‘area under curve’ (main); by analysis of covariance at each time point (secondary); and by multi-level repeated measures (sensitivity analysis): Mental health – BDI-II (primary), Clinical Global Impression (CGI), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), UKU side effects scale, and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) suicidality subscale; General health – UK 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), European Quality of Life scale – 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D); Biochemistry – serum folate, B12, homocysteine; Adherence – Morisky Questionnaire; Economics – resource use. Results: Folic acid did not significantly improve any of these measures. For example it gained a mean of just 2.9 quality-adjusted life-days [95% confidence interval (CI) from –12.7 to 7.0 days] and saved a mean of just £48 (95% CI from –£292 to £389). In contrast it significantly reduced mental health scores on the SF-12 by 3.0% (95% CI from –5.2% to –0.8%). Conclusions: The FolATED trial generated no evidence that folic acid was clinically effective or cost-effective in augmenting ADM. This negative finding is consistent with improving understanding of the one-carbon folate pathway suggesting that methylfolate is a better candidate for augmenting ADM. Hence the findings of FolATED undermine treatment guidelines that advocate folic acid for treating depression, and suggest future trials of methylfolate to augment ADM. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN37558856. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 48. See the HTA programme website for further project information.