Search

Objectives: to test the hypothesis that older people and their informal carers are not disadvantaged by home-based rehabilitation (HBR) relative to day hospital rehabilitation (DHR).Design: pragmatic randomised controlled trial.Setting: four geriatric day hospitals and four home rehabilitation teams in England.Participants: eighty-nine patients referred for multidisciplinary rehabilitation. The target sample size was 460.Intervention: multidisciplinary rehabilitation either in the home or in the day hospital.Measurements: the primary outcome measure was the Nottingham extended activities of daily living scale (NEADL). Secondary outcome measures included EQ-5D, hospital anxiety and depression scale, therapy outcome measures, hospital admissions and the General Health Questionnaire for carers.Results: at the primary end point of 6 months NEADL scores were not significantly in favour of HBR cf. DHR; mean difference −2.139 (95% confidence interval −6.87 to 2.59, P = 0.37). A post hoc analysis suggested non-inferiority for HBR for NEADL but there was considerable statistical uncertainty.Conclusion: taken together the statistical analyses and lack of power of the trial outcomes do not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that patients in receipt of HBR are disadvantaged compared with those receiving DHR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social skills interventions are commonly recommended to help children and young people with autism spectrum disorder develop social skills, but some struggle to engage in these interventions. LEGO ® (LEGO System A/S, Billund, Denmark) based therapy, a group social skills intervention, aims to be more interesting and engaging., Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of LEGO ® based therapy on the social and emotional skills of children and young people with autism spectrum disorder in school settings compared with usual support. Secondary objectives included evaluations of cost-effectiveness, acceptability and treatment fidelity., Design: A cluster randomised controlled trial randomly allocating participating schools to either LEGO ® based therapy and usual support or usual support only., Setting: Mainstream schools in the north of England., Participants: Children and young people (aged 7-15 years) with autism spectrum disorder, their parent/guardian, an associated teacher/teaching assistant and a facilitator teacher/teaching assistant (intervention schools only)., Intervention: Schools randomised to the intervention arm delivered 12 weekly sessions of LEGO ® based therapy, which promotes collaborative play and encourages social problem-solving in groups of three children and young people with a facilitator (trained teacher or teaching assistant). Participants received usual support from school and community services. Participants in the control arm received usual support only. Research assistants and statisticians were blind to treatment allocation., Main Outcome Measure: The social skills subscale of the Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS), completed by the children and young people's unblinded teacher pre randomisation and 20 weeks post randomisation. The SSIS social skills subscale measures social skills including social communication, co-operation, empathy, assertion, responsibility and self-control. Participants completed a number of other pre- and post-randomisation measures of emotional health, quality of life, loneliness, problem behaviours, academic competence, service resource utilisation and adverse events., Results: A total of 250 children and young people from 98 schools were randomised: 127 to the intervention arm and 123 to the control arm. Intention-to-treat analysis of the main outcome measure showed a modest positive difference of 3.74 points (95% confidence interval -0.16 to 7.63 points, standardised effect size 0.18; p  = 0.06) in favour of the intervention arm. Statistical significance increased in per-protocol analysis, with a modest positive difference (standardised effect size 0.21; p  = 0.036). Cost-effectiveness of the intervention was found in reduced service use costs and a small increase in quality-adjusted life-years. Intervention fidelity and acceptability were positive. No intervention-related adverse events or effects were reported., Conclusions: The primary and pre-planned sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome consistently showed a positive clinical difference, with modest standardised effect sizes of between 0.15 and 0.21. There were positive health economics and qualitative findings, corroborated by the difference between arms for the majority of secondary outcomes, which were not statistically significant but favoured the intervention arm. Post hoc additional analysis was exploratory and was not used in drawing this conclusion. Given the small positive change, LEGO ® based therapy for children and young people with autism spectrum disorder in schools should be considered., Limitations: The primary outcome measure was completed by an unblinded teacher (rather than by the facilitator)., Future Work: The study team recommends future research into LEGO ® based therapy, particularly in school environments., Trial Registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN64852382., Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme (NIHR award ref: 15/49/32) and is published in full in Public Health Research ; Vol. 11, No. 12. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Background: Healthy, active ageing is strongly associated with good mental wellbeing which in turn helps to prevent mental illness. However, more investment has been made into research into interventions to prevent mental illness than into those designed to improve mental wellbeing. This applied research programme will provide high quality evidence for an intervention designed to improve and sustain mental wellbeing in older adults., Methods/design: This study was a multi-centre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial to determine the population benefit of an occupational therapy based intervention for community living people aged 65 years or older. Participants (n = 268) will be identified in one city in the North of England and in North Wales through GP mail-outs, signposting by local authority, primary care staff and voluntary sector organisations and through community engagement. Participants will be randomised to one of two treatment arms: an intervention (Lifestyle Matters programme); or control (routine access to health and social care). All participants will be assessed at baseline, 6 and 24 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome, which is a person reported outcome, is the SF-36 Mental Health dimension at six months post randomisation. Secondary outcome measures have been selected to measure psychosocial, physical and mental health outcomes. They include other dimensions of the SF36, EQ-5D-3L, Brief Resilience Scale, General Perceived Self Efficacy Scale, PHQ-9, de Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale, Health and Social Care Resource Use and the wellbeing question of the Integrated Household Survey 2011. A cost effectiveness analysis will investigate the incremental cost per Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) of the Lifestyle Matters intervention compared with treatment as usual., Discussion: The questions being posed through this research are important given the increasing numbers of older people, pressure on the public purse and the associated need to support good health in the extended lifespan. The proposed trial will determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of the intervention delivered in a UK context. The results will support commissioners and providers with decisions about implementation., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN67209155.

Background: Growing levels of both obesity and chronic disease in the general population pose a major public health problem. In the UK, an innovative 'health and weight' cohort trials facility, the 'South Yorkshire Cohort', is being built in order to provide robust evidence to inform policy, commissioning and clinical decisions in this field. This protocol reports the design of the facility and outlines the recruitment phase methods., Method/design: The South Yorkshire Cohort health and weight study uses the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial design. This design recruits a large observational cohort of patients with the condition(s) of interest which then provides a facility for multiple randomised controlled trials (with large representative samples of participants, long term outcomes as standard, increased comparability between each trial conducted within the cohort and increased efficiency particularly for trials of expensive interventions) as well as ongoing information as to the natural history of the condition and treatment as usual.This study aims to recruit 20,000 participants to the population based South Yorkshire Cohort health and weight research trials facility. Participants are recruited by invitation letters from their General Practitioners. Data is collected using postal and/or online patient self completed Health Questionnaires. NHS numbers will be used to facilitate record linkage and access to routine data. Participants are eligible if they are: aged 16 - 85 years, registered with one of 40 practices in South Yorkshire, provide consent for further contact from the researchers and to have their information used to look at the benefit of health treatments. The first wave of data is being collected during 2010/12 and further waves are planned at 2 - 5 year intervals for the planned 20 year duration of the facility., Discussion: The South Yorkshire Cohort combines the strengths of the standard observational, longitudinal cohort study design with a population based cohort facility for multiple randomised controlled trials in a range of long term health and weight related conditions (including obesity). This infrastructure will allow the rapid and cheap identification and recruitment of patients, and facilitate the provision of robust evidence to inform the management and self-management of health and weight.

Objectives: To test the hypotheses that older people and their informal carers are not disadvantaged by home-based rehabilitation (HBR) relative to day hospital rehabilitation (DHR) and that HBR is less costly., Design: Two-arm randomised controlled trial., Setting: Four trusts in England providing both HBR and DHR., Participants: Clinical staff reviewed consecutive referrals to identify subjects who were potentially suitable for randomisation according to the defined inclusion criteria., Interventions: Patients were randomised to receive either HBR or DHR., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale. Secondary outcome measures included the EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Therapy Outcome Measures (TOMs), hospital admissions and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-30) for carers., Results: Overall, 89 subjects were randomised and 42 received rehabilitation in each arm of the trial. At the primary end point of 6 months there were 32 and 33 patients in the HBR and DHR arms respectively. Estimated mean scores on the NEADL scale at 6 months, after adjustment for baseline, were not significantly in favour of either HBR or DHR [DHR 30.78 (SD 15.01), HBR 32.11 (SD 16.89), p = 0.37; mean difference -2.139 (95% CI -6.870 to 2.592)]. Analysis of the non-inferiority of HBR over DHR using a 'non-inferiority' limit (10%) applied to the confidence interval estimates for the different outcome measures at 6 months' follow-up demonstrated non-inferiority for the NEADL scale, EQ-5D and HADS anxiety scale and some advantage for HBR on the HADS depression scale, of borderline statistical significance. Similar results were seen at 3 and 12 months' follow-up, with a statistically significant difference in the mean EQ-5D(index) score in favour of DHR at 3 months (p = 0.047). At the end of rehabilitation, a greater proportion of the DHR group showed a positive direction of change from their initial assessment with respect to therapist-rated clinical outcomes; however, a lower proportion of HBR patients showed a negative direction of change and, overall, median scores on the TOMs scales did not differ between the two groups. Fewer patients in the HBR group were admitted to hospital on any occasion over the 12-month observation period [18 (43%) versus 22 (52%)]; however, this difference was not statistically significant. The psychological well-being of patients' carers, measured at 3, 6 and 12 months, was unaffected by whether rehabilitation took place at day hospital or at home. As the primary outcome measure and EQ-5D(index) scores at 6 months showed no significant differences between the two arms of the trial, a cost-minimisation analysis was undertaken. Neither the public costs nor the total costs at the 6-month follow-up point (an average of 213 days' total follow-up) or the 12-month follow-up point (an average of 395 days' total follow-up) were significantly different between the groups., Conclusions: Compared with DHR, providing rehabilitation in patients' own homes confers no particular disadvantage for patients and carers. The cost of providing HBR does not appear to be significantly different from that of providing DHR. Rehabilitation providers and purchasers need to consider the place of care in the light of local needs, to provide the benefits of both kinds of services. Caution is required when interpreting the results of the RCT because a large proportion of potentially eligible subjects were not recruited to the trial, the required sample size was not achieved and there was a relatively large loss to follow-up., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71801032.

Objective: The purpose of this work was to investigate the incidence rate for admission and mortality of children receiving paediatric intensive care in relation to socioeconomic status and ethnicity in England and Wales., Design: National cohort of sequential hospital admissions., Setting: Twenty nine paediatric intensive care units in England and Wales., Participants: All children aged under 16 years admitted to paediatric intensive care in the 4 years 2004-2007., Main Outcome Measures: Incidence rates for admission and odds ratios (OR) for risk-adjusted mortality by an area based measure of deprivation (Townsend score) and ethnic group (south Asian vs non-south Asian determined using two-name analysis algorithms)., Results: The incidence for south Asian children was higher than that of non-south Asian children (138 vs 95/100,000, incidence rate ratio 1.36, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.40). The age-sex standardised incidence for children admitted to paediatric intensive care ranged from 69/100,000 in the least deprived fifth of the population to 124/100,000 in the most deprived fifth. The risk-adjusted OR for mortality for south Asian children was 1.36 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.57) overall, rising to 2.40 (95% CI 1.40 to 4.10) in the least deprived fifth of the population when a statistical interaction term for deprivation was included., Conclusions: In England and Wales, the admission rate to paediatric intensive care is higher for children from more deprived areas and 36% higher for children from the south Asian population. Risk-adjusted mortality increases in south Asian children as deprivation decreases.