Search

Background With an increasing number of people with dementia worldwide and limited advancement in medical treatments, the call for new and cost-effective approaches is crucial. The utility of self-management has been proven in certain chronic conditions. However, very little work has been undertaken regarding self-management in people with dementia. Methods The SHAPE trial will include 372 people with mild to moderate dementia to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an educational programme combining approaches of self-management, health promotion, and e-learning for care partners. The study is a multi-site, single-randomised, controlled, single-blinded trial with parallel arms. The intervention arm is compared with treatment as usual. The intervention comprises a 10-week course delivered as group sessions for the participants with dementia. The sessions are designed to develop self-management skills and to provide information on the nature of the condition and the development of healthy behaviours in a supportive learning environment. An e-learning course will be provided for care partners which covers similar and complementary material to that discussed in the group sessions for the participant with dementia. Discussion This trial will explore the effect of the SHAPE group intervention on people with mild to moderate dementia in terms of self-efficacy and improvement in key health and mental health outcomes and cost-effectiveness, along with carer stress and knowledge of dementia. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04286139, registered prospectively February 26, 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04286139

Background Challenges of recruitment to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and successful strategies to overcome them should be clearly reported to improve recruitment into future trials. REtirement in ACTion (REACT) is a United Kingdom-based multicenter RCT recruiting older adults at high risk of mobility disability to a 12-month group-based exercise and behavior maintenance program or to a minimal Healthy Aging control intervention. Methods The recruitment target was 768 adults, aged 65 years and older scoring 4–9 on the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Recruitment methods include the following: (a) invitations mailed by general practitioners (GPs); (b) invitations distributed via third-sector organizations; and (c) public relations (PR) campaign. Yields, efficiency, and costs were calculated. Results The study recruited 777 (33.9% men) community-dwelling, older adults (mean age 77.55 years (SD 6.79), mean SPPB score 7.37 (SD 1.56)), 95.11% white (n = 739) and broadly representative of UK quintiles of deprivation. Over a 20-month recruitment period, 25,559 invitations were issued. Eighty-eight percent of the participants were recruited via GP invitations, 5.4% via the PR campaign, 3% via word-of-mouth, and 2.5% via third-sector organizations. Mean recruitment cost per participant was £78.47, with an extra £26.54 per recruit paid to GPs to cover research costs. Conclusions REACT successfully recruited to target. Response rates were lower than initially predicted and recruitment timescales required adjustment. Written invitations from GPs were the most efficient method for recruiting older adults at risk of mobility disability. Targeted efforts could achieve more ethnically diverse cohorts. All trials should be required to provide recruitment data to enable evidence-based planning of future trials.

BACKGROUND Strong evidence supports beginning stroke rehabilitation as soon as the patient’s medical status has stabilized and continuing following discharge from acute care. However, adherence to rehabilitation treatments over the rehabilitation phase has been shown to be suboptimal. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to assess the impact of a telerehabilitation platform on stroke patients’ adherence to a rehabilitation plan and on their level of reintegration into normal social activities, in comparison with usual care. The primary outcome is patient adherence to stroke rehabilitation (up to 12 weeks), which is hypothesized to influence reintegration into normal living. Secondary outcomes for patients include functional recovery and independence, depression, adverse events related to telerehabilitation, use of services (up to 6 months), perception of interprofessional shared decision making, and quality of services received. Interprofessional collaboration as well as quality of interprofessional shared decision making will be measured with clinicians. METHODS In this interrupted time series with a convergent qualitative component, rehabilitation teams will be trained to develop rehabilitation treatment plans that engage the patient and family, while taking advantage of a telerehabilitation platform to deliver the treatment. The intervention will be comprised of 220 patients who will take part in stroke telerehabilitation with an interdisciplinary group of clinicians (telerehabilitation group) versus face-to-face standard of care (control group: n=110 patients). RESULTS Our Research Ethics Board approved the study in June 2020. Data collection for the control group is underway, with another year planned before we begin the intervention phase. CONCLUSIONS This study will contribute to the minimization of both knowledge and practice gaps, while producing robust, in-depth data on the factors related to the effectiveness of telerehabilitation in a stroke rehabilitation continuum. Findings will inform best practice guidelines regarding telecare services and the provision of telerehabilitation, including recommendations for effective interdisciplinary collaboration regarding stroke rehabilitation. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04440215; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04440215 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/32134

Background Strong evidence supports beginning stroke rehabilitation as soon as the patient’s medical status has stabilized and continuing following discharge from acute care. However, adherence to rehabilitation treatments over the rehabilitation phase has been shown to be suboptimal. Objective The aim of this study is to assess the impact of a telerehabilitation platform on stroke patients’ adherence to a rehabilitation plan and on their level of reintegration into normal social activities, in comparison with usual care. The primary outcome is patient adherence to stroke rehabilitation (up to 12 weeks), which is hypothesized to influence reintegration into normal living. Secondary outcomes for patients include functional recovery and independence, depression, adverse events related to telerehabilitation, use of services (up to 6 months), perception of interprofessional shared decision making, and quality of services received. Interprofessional collaboration as well as quality of interprofessional shared decision making will be measured with clinicians. Methods In this interrupted time series with a convergent qualitative component, rehabilitation teams will be trained to develop rehabilitation treatment plans that engage the patient and family, while taking advantage of a telerehabilitation platform to deliver the treatment. The intervention will be comprised of 220 patients who will take part in stroke telerehabilitation with an interdisciplinary group of clinicians (telerehabilitation group) versus face-to-face standard of care (control group: n=110 patients). Results Our Research Ethics Board approved the study in June 2020. Data collection for the control group is underway, with another year planned before we begin the intervention phase. Conclusions This study will contribute to the minimization of both knowledge and practice gaps, while producing robust, in-depth data on the factors related to the effectiveness of telerehabilitation in a stroke rehabilitation continuum. Findings will inform best practice guidelines regarding telecare services and the provision of telerehabilitation, including recommendations for effective interdisciplinary collaboration regarding stroke rehabilitation. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04440215; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04440215 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/32134

IntroductionPatient experience of nursing care is correlated with safety, clinical effectiveness, care quality, treatment outcomes and service use. Effective nursing care includes actions to develop nurse–patient relationships and deliver physical and psychosocial care to patients. The high risk of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus compromises nursing care. No evidence-based nursing guidelines exist for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, leading to potential variations in patient experience, outcomes, quality and costs.Methods and analysiswe aim to recruit 840 in-patient participants treated for infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus from 14 UK hospitals, to a cluster randomised controlled trial, with embedded process and economic evaluations, of care as usual and a fundamental nursing care protocol addressing specific areas of physical, relational and psychosocial nursing care where potential variation may occur, compared with care as usual. Our coprimary outcomes are patient-reported experience (Quality from the Patients’ Perspective; Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire); secondary outcomes include care quality (pressure injuries, falls, medication errors); functional ability (Barthell Index); treatment outcomes (WHO Clinical Progression Scale); depression Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), anxiety General Anxiety Disorder-2 (GAD-2), health utility (EQ5D) and nurse-reported outcomes (Measure of Moral Distress for Health Care Professionals). For our primary analysis, we will use a standard generalised linear mixed-effect model adjusting for ethnicity of the patient sample and research intensity at cluster level. We will also undertake a planned subgroup analysis to compare the impact of patient-level ethnicity on our primary and secondary outcomes and will undertake process and economic evaluations.Ethics and disseminationResearch governance and ethical approvals are from the UK National Health Service Health Research Authority Research Ethics Service. Dissemination will be open access through peer-reviewed scientific journals, study website, press and online media, including free online training materials on the Open University’s FutureLearn web platform.Trial registration numberISRCTN13177364; Pre-results.

Objective The cognitive neuropsychological model of depression proposes that negative biases in the processing of emotionally salient information have a central role in the development and maintenance of depression. We have conducted a systematic review to determine whether acute experimental inflammation is associated with changes to cognitive and emotional processing that are thought to cause and maintain depression. Methods We identified experimental studies in which healthy individuals were administered an acute inflammatory challenge (bacterial endotoxin/vaccination) and standardised tests of cognitive function were performed. Results Fourteen references were identified, reporting findings from 12 independent studies on 345 participants. Methodological quality was rated strong or moderate for 11 studies. Acute experimental inflammation was triggered using a variety of agents (including endotoxin from E. coli , S. typhi , S. abortus Equi and Hepatitis B vaccine) and cognition was assessed over hours to months, using cognitive tests of i) attention/executive functioning, ii) memory and iii) social/emotional processing. Studies found mixed evidence that acute experimental inflammation caused changes to attention/executive functioning (2 of 6 studies showed improvements in attention executive function compared to control), changes in memory (3 of 5 studies; improved reaction time: reduced memory for object proximity: poorer immediate and delayed memory) and changes to social/emotional processing (4 of 5 studies; reduced perception of emotions, increased avoidance of punishment/loss experiences, and increased social disconnectedness). Conclusions Acute experimental inflammation causes negative biases in social and emotional processing that could explain observed associations between inflammation and depression.

Background The REtirement in ACTion (REACT) study is a multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an internal pilot phase. It aims to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a community, group-based physical activity intervention for reducing, or reversing, the progression of functional limitations in older people who are at high risk of mobility-related disability. Methods/design A sample of 768 sedentary, community-dwelling, older people aged 65 years and over with functional limitations, but who are still ambulatory (scores between 4 and 9 out of 12 in the Short Physical Performance Battery test (SPPB)) will be randomised to receive either the REACT intervention, delivered over a period of 12 months by trained facilitators, or a minimal control intervention. The REACT study incorporates comprehensive process and economic evaluation and a nested sub-study which will test the hypothesis that the REACT intervention will slow the rate of brain atrophy and of decline in cognitive function assessed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Outcome data will be collected at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months for the main study, with MRI sub-study data collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome analysis (SPPB score at 24 months) will be undertaken blinded to group allocation. Primary comparative analyses will be on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis with due emphasis placed on confidence intervals. Discussion REACT represents the first large-scale, pragmatic, community-based trial in the UK to target the non-disabled but high-risk segment of the older population with an intervention to reduce mobility-related disability. A programme that can successfully engage this population in sufficient activity to improve strength, aerobic capacity, coordination and balance would have a major impact on sustaining health and independence. REACT is also the first study of its kind to conduct a full economic and comprehensive process evaluation alongside the RCT. If effective and cost-effective, the REACT intervention has strong potential to be implemented widely in the UK and elsewhere. Trial registration ISRCTN, ID:ISRCTN45627165. Retrospectively registered on 13 June 2016. Trial sponsor: University of Bath. Protocol Version 1.5. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2603-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Adherence is an important factor contributing to the effectiveness of exercise-based rehabilitation. However, there appears to be a lack of reliable, validated measures to assess self-reported adherence to prescribed but unsupervised home-based rehabilitation exercises. Objectives: A systematic review was conducted to establish what measures were available and to evaluate their psychometric properties. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO CINAHL (June 2013) and the Cochrane library were searched (September 2013). Reference lists from articles meeting the inclusion criteria were checked to ensure all relevant papers were included. Study selection: To be included articles had to be available in English; use a self-report measure of adherence in relation to a prescribed but unsupervised home-based exercise or physical rehabilitation programme; involve participants over the age of 18. All health conditions and clinical populations were included. Data extraction: Descriptive data reported were collated on a data extraction sheet. The measures were evaluated in terms of eight psychometric quality criteria. Results: 58 studies were included, reporting 61 different measures including 29 questionnaires, 29 logs, two visual analogue scales and one tally counter. Only two measures scored positively for one psychometric property (content validity). The majority of measures had no reported validity or reliability testing. Conclusions: The results expose a gap in the literature for well-developed measures that capture self-reported adherence to prescribed but unsupervised home-based rehabilitation exercises.