Search

Context: Music-based interventions are widely acknowledged to promote the wellbeing of care home residents, particularly those whose communication is impaired, such as through stroke or dementia. Yet in such settings the use of music is limited for reasons that are not entirely clear. Objectives: The Music Interventions for Depression and Dementia in ELderly care (MIDDEL) trial in 16 English care homes was used as a case study to highlight key issues which appear to affect the successful implementation and evaluation of music-based interventions. Methods: The fidelity data from the MIDDEL trial was used to develop inferences in consultation with interventionists and researchers. Based on the literature about implementing psychosocial interventions in care homes and data from this study, a checklist was developed to enhance implementation and research pertaining to music-based interventions in care homes. Findings: New insights were found on the adherence of interventionists to the fidelity criteria. Pragmatic issues relevant to conducting a trial immediately after a pandemic are highlighted, including: the difficulties of maintaining engagement with care home personnel and the practicalities of delivering an intensive intervention to a population who have depression and dementia. We derive recommendations for improving future interventional studies in care homes. Limitations: The participating care homes may not be representative of the industry. The Covid pandemic complicated the study in numerous ways documented here. Implications: The lessons learned offer guidance for future implementation and research on music-based interventions in residential care settings.

Abstract Background Despite growing recognition of essential human rights, people with mental health conditions and psychosocial, intellectual, or cognitive disabilities’ rights are known to be frequently violated in mental healthcare worldwide, with common use of coercive practices and limited recognition of people’s right to exercise their legal capacity and make decisions for themselves on treatment and other issues affecting them. To tackle this issue, Ghana adopted the WHO QualityRights Initiative in 2019. This aims to introduce a right-based, person-centred recovery approach within the mental health care system, protecting and promoting the rights of people with mental health conditions, psychosocial, cognitive, and intellectual disabilities in the healthcare context and community. Methods E-training (capacity-building) was provided in Ghana across a broad array of stakeholder groups including healthcare professionals, carers, and people with lived experience. The training covered legal capacity, coercion, community inclusion, recovery approach, service environment, and the negative attitudes commonly held by stakeholder groups; it was completed by 17,000 people in Ghana as of December 2021. We assessed the impact of the e-training on attitudes through comparing trainees’ pre- and post-questionnaire responses on 17 items, each measured on a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree), such that higher scores indicated negative attitudes towards persons with mental health conditions and psychosocial disabilities as rights holders. Analyses were conducted on two main groups: matched pairs (417 pairs of baseline and follow-up questionnaire responses matched to a high degree of certainty), and the unmatched group (4299 individual completed questionnaire responses). Results We assessed the impact of the WHO QualityRights e-training on attitudes: training resulted in highly significant attitude changes towards alignment with human rights, with scores changing by approximately 40% between baseline and follow-up. In particular, attitude changes were seen in items representing treatment choice, legal capacity, and coercion. This change was not affected by age, gender, or background experience. Conclusions The QualityRights e-training programme is effective in changing people’s (especially healthcare professionals’) attitudes towards people with mental health conditions and psychosocial, intellectual, or cognitive disabilities: this is a step towards mental healthcare being more with human rights-based worldwide.

Background Globally, human rights violations experienced by persons with psychosocial, intellectual or cognitive disabilities continue to be a concern. The World Health Organization's (WHO) QualityRights initiative presents practical remedies to address these abuses. This paper presents an overview of the implementation of the initiative in Ghana. Aims The main objective of the QualityRights initiative in Ghana was to train and change attitudes among a wide range of stakeholders to promote recovery and respect for human rights for people with psychosocial, intellectual and cognitive disabilities. Method Reports of in-person and online training, minutes of meetings and correspondence among stakeholders of the QualityRights initiative in Ghana, including activities of international collaborators, were analysed to shed light on the implementation of the project in Ghana. Results In-person and online e-training on mental health were conducted. At the time of writing, 40 443 people had registered for the training, 25 416 had started the training and 20 865 people had completed the training and obtained a certificate. The team conducted 27 in-person training sessions with 910 people. The successful implementation of the project is underpinned by a committed partnership among stakeholders, strong leadership from the coordinating agency, the acceptance of the initiative and the outcome. A few challenges, both in implementation and acceptance, are discussed. Conclusions The exposure of the WHO QualityRights initiative to a substantial number of key stakeholders involved in mental healthcare in Ghana is critical to reducing human rights abuses for people with psychosocial, intellectual and cognitive disabilities.

Introduction Dementia is a complex medical condition that poses significant challenges to healthcare systems and support services. People living with dementia (PLWD) and their carers experience complex needs often exacerbated by social isolation and challenges in accessing support. Social prescribing (SP) seeks to enable PLWD and their carers to access community and voluntary sector resources to support them address such needs. Existing research, however, does not describe what SP interventions are currently in place in dementia care. Little is known about the needs these interventions are designed to address, the reasons that lead PLWD and their carers to participate in them, their effectiveness and the extent to which they could increase positive health outcomes if adopted and how.Methods and analysis A complex intervention systematic review of SP for PLWD and/or their carers will be conducted using an iterative logic model approach. Six electronic (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus and Cochrane/CENTRAL) and two grey literature databases (EThOS and CORE) were searched for publications between 1 January 2003 and June 2023, supplemented by handsearching of reference lists of included studies. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment, using Gough’s Weight of Evidence Framework, will be independently performed by two reviewers. A narrative approach will be employed to synthesise and report quantitative and qualitative data. Reporting will be informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Complex Interventions extension statement and checklist.Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is required due to this systematic review operating only with secondary sources. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and meetings with key stakeholders including healthcare professionals, patient and carer groups, community organisations (eg, the Social Prescribing Network and the Evidence Collaborative at the National Academy for Social Prescribing), policymakers and funding bodies.PROSPERO registration number CRD42023428625.

This work aimed to develop a Best Practice Guidance on online peer support for people with young-onset dementia (YOD). The Best Practice Guidance was developed through a systematic literature review, focus groups, an online survey, and interviews and consultations with people with YOD and professionals. The Best Practice Guidance consists of two parts. Part 1 contains information for people with YOD about what online peer support entails, what to expect from it, and how to get involved. Part 2 is aimed at those who facilitate or moderate online peer support (professionals or people with lived experience) and includes guidelines on how to optimize online peer support for people with YOD. The Best Practice Guidance on online peer support provides (1) people with YOD with evidence-based, relevant, and accessible information about what online peer support entails and how it could help them, (2) providers and facilitators with guidelines on how to optimize online peer support for people with YOD, and (3) healthcare professionals with a concise and accessible tool for signposting. Future research is needed to implement and disseminate the Best Practice Guidance among dementia organizations and healthcare practices and should include rigorous studies on the implementation and sustainability of online peer support for people with YOD.

BackgroundAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) significantly impacts the lives of people with the diagnosis and their families. A supportive social environment is important for people with ALS to adopt effective coping strategies and health behaviours, and reduce depressive symptoms. Peer support can provide a supportive social environment and can happen in-person and online. Advantages of online peer support are that people can engage from their own home, at their own time and pace, and that it offers a variety of different platforms and modes of communication.ObjectivesTo (1) explore the benefits and challenges of online peer support for people with ALS, and (2) identify successful elements of online peer support for people with ALS.MethodsThe method selected for this systematic review was a narrative synthesis. Six databases were systematically searched in April 2020 for articles published between 1989 and 2020. The search was updated in June 2022. The quality of the included studies was assessed with the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative research checklist.Results10,987 unique articles were identified through the systematic database search. Of those, 9 were included in this review. One of the main benefits of online peer support was that people could communicate using text rather than needing verbal communication, which can be challenging for some with ALS. Successful elements included using profile pages and graphics to identify others with similar or relevant experiences. Challenges included ALS symptoms which could make it difficult to use technological devices.ConclusionsPeer support can provide a non-judgmental and supportive environment for people with ALS, in which they can exchange experiences and emotional support, which can help people in developing adaptive coping strategies. However, ALS symptoms may make it more difficult for people to use technological devices and engage in online peer support. More research is needed to identify what kind of specific barriers people with ALS experience, and how these could be overcome.

Abstract Background There are currently major efforts underway in Ghana to address stigma and discrimination, and promote the human rights of those with mental health conditions, within mental health services and the community, working with the World Health Organization’s QualityRights initiative. The present study aims to investigate attitudes towards people with lived experience of mental health conditions and psychosocial disabilities as rights holders. Methods Stakeholders within the Ghanaian mental health system and community, including health professionals, policy makers, and persons with lived experience, completed the QualityRights pre-training questionnaire. The items examined attitudes towards coercion, legal capacity, service environment, and community inclusion. Additional analyses explored how far participant factors may link to attitudes. Results Overall, attitudes towards the rights of persons with lived experience were not well aligned with a human rights approach to mental health. Most people supported the use of coercive practices and often thought that health practitioners and family members were in the best position to make treatment decisions. Health/mental health professionals were less likely to endorse coercive measures compared to other groups. Conclusion This was the first in-depth study assessing attitudes towards persons with lived experience as rights holders in Ghana, and frequently attitudes did not comply with human rights standards, demonstrating a need for training initiatives to combat stigma and discrimination and promote human rights.

Abstract Background With an increasingly ageing population worldwide, the predominant attitude towards ageing is still negative. Negative stereotypes have detrimental effects on individuals’ physical and mental health. Evidence is required about factors that may predict and change these views. This study aimed to investigate if an older person’s attitude towards dementia, their belief in a just world and sense of coherence is associated with their attitudes to ageing. Methods A 25-min online survey was completed by 2,675 participants aged 50 or over who were current residents of the United Kingdom (UK). Questions included demographics, overall health, dementia carer, dementia relative status and retirement status. Standardised scales used were the Attitudes to Ageing Questionnaire (AAQ), Dementia Attitudes Scale (DAS), Just World Scale (JWS) and Sense of Coherence Scale-13 (SOC). Data was analysed with descriptive, two-tailed bivariate Pearson’s correlations, simple, and hierarchical regression analyses. Results Attitudes to dementia, just world beliefs, and sense of coherence were all significantly positively correlated with AAQ-Total, with SOC sub-scale “Meaningfulness” showing the strongest correlation. In a hierarchical regression model, higher scores on SOC-Meaningfulness, DAS-Total and belief in a just world for oneself all predicted more positive attitudes to ageing. Conclusions The more positive an individual’s attitude to dementia and the stronger they hold the belief that the world is just and coherent, the more likely they are to display positive attitudes to ageing. This initial evidence helps create a greater understanding of the factors that drive attitudes and stigma and may have implications for public health messaging.

BackgroundPrevious research has suggested that care home interactions need significant improvements, especially those between staff and residents with dementia. Reasons for the lack of interactions are staff time pressures and residents’ language impairments. Although residents may experience reduced language abilities, they can continue to communicate through other forms, including nonverbal communication and music. Person Attuned Musical Interactions (PAMI) is a staff training tool that provides staff with music therapy skill-sharing to promote high-quality interactions between staff and residents using nonverbal communication and music. The tool was originally developed in Denmark. To ensure that the tool is appropriate for UK care homes, a team of researchers in the United Kingdom have culturally adapted the tool. ObjectiveThis study aims to investigate the appropriateness of the adapted UK manual for UK care homes and to explore the impact of PAMI on residents with dementia and care staff. MethodsThe project consists of 2 phases, a qualitative field-testing study and a mixed methods evaluation study, which have been developed following the Medical Research Council’s guidelines for complex interventions. Care staff and residents with dementia will be recruited from care homes in Lincolnshire, where the care staff will be trained in the PAMI intervention before implementing the intervention in their daily routines. Fortnightly reflective sessions will be provided throughout the phases to provide supervision and monitoring. The qualitative methods include interviews, reflective session transcripts, diary entries, and resident experience questionnaires. The quantitative outcome measures are residents’ music engagement, staff’s dementia competence, residents’ quality of life, and staff burden. The resident’s music engagement will be administered at 9 fortnightly time points. Staff’s dementia competence, resident’s quality of life, and staff burden will be administered at preintervention and postintervention time points. ResultsThe study has been funded by The Music Therapy Charity as part of a PhD studentship. The study began recruiting in September 2021. The research team aims to publish the results of the first phase in July to September 2023 and those of the second phase in October to December 2023. ConclusionsThis study will be the first to investigate the culturally adapted UK PAMI. Therefore, it will provide feedback on the appropriateness of the manual for UK care homes. The PAMI intervention has the potential to offer high-quality music intervention training to a larger population of care homes who may currently be restricted by finances, the availability of time, and a lack of training opportunities. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/43408

Abstract Background In 2012, Ghana ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and enacted a Mental Health Act to improve the quality of mental health care and stop human rights violations against people with mental health conditions. In line with these objectives, Ghanaian stakeholders collected data on the quality of mental health services and respect for human rights in psychiatric facilities to identify challenges and gather useful information for the development of plans aimed to improve the quality of the services offered. This study aimed to assess psychiatric facilities from different Ghanaian regions and provide evidence on the quality of care and respect of human rights in mental health services. Methods Assessments were conducted by independent visiting committees that collected data through observation, review of documentation, and interviews with service users, staff, and carers, and provided scores using the World Health Organization QualityRights Toolkit methodology. Results This study revealed significant key challenges in the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities principles in Ghanaian psychiatric services. The rights to an adequate standard of living and enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health were not fully promoted. Only initial steps had been taken to guarantee the right to exercise legal capacity and the right to personal liberty and security. Significant gaps in the promotion of the right to live independently and be included in the community were identified. Conclusions This study identifies shortcomings and critical areas that the Ghanaian government and facilities need to target for implementing a human rights-based approach in mental health and improve the quality of mental health care throughout the country.

Abstract Background Improving care at home for people with dementia is a core policy goal in the dementia strategies of many European countries. A challenge to effective home support is the occurrence of crises in the care of people with dementia which arise from changes in their health and social circumstances. Improving the management of these crises may prevent hospital admissions and facilitate better and longer care at home. This trial is part of a National Institute for Health Research funded programme, AQUEDUCT, which aims to improve the quality and effectiveness of teams working to manage crises in dementia. Methods/design It is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of an online Resource Kit to enhance practice in teams managing crises in dementia care. Thirty teams managing mental health crises in dementia in community settings will be randomised between the Resource Kit intervention and treatment as usual. The primary outcome measure is psychiatric admissions to hospital for people with dementia in the teams’ catchment area recorded 6 months after randomisation. Other outcomes include quality of life measures for people with dementia and their carers, practitioner impact measures, acute hospital admissions and costs. To enhance understanding of the Resource Kit intervention, qualitative work will explore staff, patient and carers’ experience. Discussion The Resource Kit intervention reflects current policy to enable home-based care for people with dementia by addressing the management of crises which threaten the viability of care at home. It is based upon a model of best practice for managing crises in dementia designed to enhance the quality of care, developed in partnership with people with dementia, carers and practitioners. If the Resource Kit is shown to be clinically and cost-effective in this study, this will enhance the probability of its incorporation into mainstream practice. Trial registration ISRCTN 42855694 ; Registered on 04/03/2021; Protocol number: 127686/2020v9; Research Ethics Committee, 09/03/2021, Ref 21/WM/0004; IRAS ID: 289982

BackgroundSelf-management, autonomy, and quality of life are key constructs in enabling people to live well with dementia. This population often becomes isolated following diagnosis, but it is important for them to feel encouraged to maintain their daily activities and stay socially active. Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE) fosters social inclusion and greater dementia self-management through an interactive handbook. ObjectiveThis study aimed to develop a paper-based PRIDE manual on a web-based platform. MethodsTwo overarching stages were used to create the web-based version of PRIDE. The first was Preliminary Development, which encompassed tendering, preliminary development work, consultations, beta version of the website, user testing and consultation on beta version, and production of the final web-based prototype. The second stage was Development of the Final PRIDE App, which included 2 sprints and further user testing. ResultsThrough a lengthy development process, modifications were made to app areas such as the log-in process, content layout, and aesthetic appearance. Feedback from the target population was incorporated into the process to achieve a dementia-friendly product. The finished PRIDE app has defined areas for reading dementia-related topics, creating activity plans, and logging these completed activities. ConclusionsThe PRIDE app has evolved from its initial prototype into a more dementia-friendly and usable program that is suitable for further testing. The finished version will be tested in a reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance study, with its potential reach, effectiveness, and adoption explored. Feedback gathered during the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance study will lead to any further developments in the app to increase its applicability to the target audience and usability.

BackgroundMany people with young onset dementia (YOD) may feel isolated. Peer support has the potential to improve social health, but the inconsistent availability of age-appropriate, in-person (peer) support services for people with YOD suggests that many people with YOD miss out on the potential benefits. Online peer support could be useful, as it overcomes geographical barriers, offers a variety of options, and adjusts to various needs and preferences. ObjectiveOur study aims to develop evidence-based best practice guidance on online peer support for people with YOD and group facilitators to improve online peer support for people with YOD. MethodsOur mixed methods study consists of 4 phases and follows the guidelines of the Medical Research Council on complex interventions. Each phase consists of multiple substudies. The study focuses on the development stage of the Medical Research Council framework and additionally develops a plan for the feasibility/piloting, evaluation, and implementation stages. The participants are people living with YOD and peer support facilitators. The qualitative research methods include interviews, focus groups, and open questions in a web-based survey. The quantitative methods include a web-based survey consisting of existing outcome measures. ResultsThe study is funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions – Innovative Training Networks (H2020-MSCA-ITN-2018; grant agreement number: 813196), and it received ethical approval from the London Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number: 21/LO/0248) in April 2021. Recruitment started in May 2021. Data collection and analysis are expected to be finished by September 2022. ConclusionsThe best practice guidance can provide people with YOD with tailored and evidence-based information about online peer support, and it will be disseminated locally (in the United Kingdom) and internationally through dementia organizations, research networks, and academic institutions. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/38379

BackgroundWith the rapid increase in the prevalence of dementia in the United Kingdom and beyond, the emotional, social, and economic burden on individuals, families, and health care services continues to rise. Currently, interventions that enable people living with dementia to better manage their condition and achieve a good quality of life are needed. ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore how the Promoting Independence in Dementia (PRIDE) app can promote and support the self-management of people living with mild dementia. MethodsFeasibility of a pre-post study design incorporating the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework will be studied. We will use up to 6 National Health Service Trusts as research sites and the Join Dementia Research website and accept self-referrals to recruit 60 to 90 people living with mild dementia. Participants will complete the PRIDE app intervention over 8 weeks with support from a dementia adviser facilitator. Measures exploring mood, physical well-being, and quality of life will be collected at baseline and at follow-ups at 3 and 6 months. Facilitators and National Health Service staff will be invited to complete interviews shortly after the intervention phase. ResultsData collection began in June 2021 and is predicted to cease by the end of August 2022. Analysis of the quantitative measures will explore the impact of the PRIDE app on participants’ independence, mood, and quality of life. Interview data will discuss participant experiences, how the use of the app affected them, and if it has the potential to be successfully implemented and maintained in dementia services. ConclusionsThis study will show the potential reach, effectiveness, and adoption of the PRIDE app intervention in the lives of people with mild dementia. The findings from this study will inform future research on the PRIDE app and any further developments to improve its effectiveness. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)DERR1-10.2196/33881

BackgroundParkinson disease (PD) significantly impacts the lives of people with the diagnosis and their families. In addition to the physical symptoms, living with PD also has an emotional impact. This can result in withdrawal from social roles, increasing the risk for social isolation and loneliness. Peer support is a way to stay socially connected, share experiences, and learn new coping skills. Peer support can be provided both in person and on the internet. Some of the advantages of online peer support are that it overcomes geographical barriers and provides a form of anonymity; moreover, support can be readily available when needed. However, the psychosocial impact of PD is still underresearched, and there is no systematic synthesis of online peer support for people with PD. ObjectiveThis review aims to explore the benefits and challenges of online peer support and identify successful elements of online peer support for people with PD. MethodsThe method selected for this systematic review is narrative synthesis. A total of 6 databases were systematically searched in April 2020 for articles published between 1989 and 2020. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative research checklist and the Downs and Black quality checklist. ResultsA total of 10,987 unique articles were identified through a systematic database search. Of these 10,987 articles, 8 (0.07%) were included in this review. Of the 8 studies, 5 (63%) were of good or high quality, 2 (25%) were of medium or fair quality, and 1 (13%) study was of poor quality. Web-based platforms included discussion forums, a web-based virtual world, and Facebook groups. Most papers reported on text-based communication. The included studies reported on sharing social support and personal experiences. Successful elements included increasing similarity between members and offering the opportunity to directly ask questions to a physician. Challenges included members leaving without a warning and PD symptoms hindering the use of technology. ConclusionsPeer support can improve social support and help people with PD in living meaningful and satisfying lives. Peer support is unique and cannot be replaced by family members, friends, or health care professionals. Online peer support can be a solution for those who do not have access to an in-person support group or whose PD symptoms restrict them from travelling. However, research on the personal experiences of those who engage in online peer support and potential barriers in accessing it remains limited. Future research could use qualitative methods to explore these fields further.

Abstract Background As the number of people living with dementia grows, so does the need to provide them with adequate psychosocial support. Many people with dementia live at home with family carers, who also require social and emotional support to cope with their role. Community group singing has received attention for its potential to support people with dementia and their carers. It is postulated that singing can improve cognitive function, strengthen the bonds between care partners and help to establish social support networks. However, there is a lack of rigorous evidence of singing’s benefits for this population. This study aims to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of community singing in dementia, to pave the way for a larger, conclusive study. Methods The PRESIDE study is designed as a two-arm, parallel-group randomised trial with a waiting list control. Dyads consisting of a person with dementia (n = 80) and their carer (n = 80) will be recruited. Each dyad will be randomised either to attend 10 weeks of community group singing sessions straight away or to wait for 3 months before attending the sessions. The singing sessions will be led by experienced professional musicians and will last about 90 min, including time for socialising. The primary outcome of this study is the attainment of feasibility criteria around recruitment, retention and the acceptability of the waiting list control. Secondary outcomes include the quality of life, mood, cognition, and musical engagement of the person with dementia, and quality of life, mood, and experiences/challenges of the carer. These data will be collected during home visits at baseline, and 3 and 6 months post-baseline. Discussion Despite growing public interest in the positive effects of singing, and encouraging findings from qualitative and non-randomised quantitative studies, there is a lack of rigorous evidence. This is the first randomised controlled trial of community group singing for people with dementia in Europe, to our knowledge. If the results favour a full trial, conclusively demonstrating the effectiveness of group singing could positively affect the opportunities available to community-dwelling people with dementia and their carers. Trial registration Unique identification number in ISRCTN registry: ISRCTN10201482 . Date registered: 12 May 2020

Abstract Background Teams delivering crisis resolution services for people with dementia and their carers provide short-term interventions to prevent admission to acute care settings. There is great variation in these services across the UK. This article reports on a consensus process undertaken to devise a Best Practice Model and evaluation Tool for use with teams managing crisis in dementia. Methods The Best Practice Model and Tool were developed over a three stage process: (i) Evidence gathering and generation of candidate standards (systematic review and scoping survey, interviews and focus groups); (ii) Prioritisation and selection of standards (consultation groups, a consensus conference and modified Delphi process); (iii) Refining and operationalising standards (consultation group and field-testing). Results One hundred sixty-five candidate standards arose from the evidence gathering stage; were refined and reduced to 90 through a consultation group exercise; and then reduced to 50 during the consensus conference and weighted using a modified Delphi process. Standards were then operationalised through a clinical consultation group and field-tested with 11 crisis teams and 5 non-crisis teams. Scores ranged from 48 to 92/100. The median score for the crisis teams was 74.5 (range 67–92), and the median score for non-crisis teams was 60 (range 48–72). Conclusions With further psychometric testing, this Best Practice Model and Tool will be ideal for the planning, improvement and national benchmarking of teams managing dementia crises in the future.

BackgroundA community-based occupational therapy intervention for people with mild to moderate dementia and their family carers: the Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia-UK version (COTiD-UK); and Treatment as usual (TAU) were randomly assigned to 468 pairs (each comprising a person with dementia and a family carer) in the Valuing Active Life in Dementia (VALID) randomised controlled trial (RCT).ObjectivesTo compare the cost-utility of the COTiD-UK intervention compared to TAU, using data from the VALID RCT.MethodsWe performed a cost-utility analysis estimating mean costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) per person with dementia and carer for both treatments over a 26 weeks' time horizon based on resource use data and utility values collected in the trial.ResultsTaking the National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective, including costs and benefits to the person with dementia only, measuring Health Related Quality of Life based on Dementia Quality of Life scale (DEMQOL), accounting for missing data and adjusting for baseline values, there was a significant difference in costs between COTiD-UK and TAU (mean incremental cost for COTiD-UK £784 (95% CI £233 to £1334)), but no significant difference in outcomes (mean QALYs gained 0.00664 (95% CI -0.00404, 0.01732)). The Incremental Net Monetary Benefit (INMB) for COTiD-UK versus TAU was negative at a maximum willingness to pay for a QALY of £20000 (mean -£651, 95% CI -£878 to -£424) or £30000 (mean -£585, 95% CI -£824 to -£345). Extensive sensitivity analyses confirmed the results.ConclusionsThis community-based occupational therapy intervention has a very low probability of being cost-effective.

Abstract Background Memory services often see people with early stage dementia who are largely independent and able to participate in community activities but who run the risk of reducing activities and social networks. PRIDE is a self-management intervention designed to promote living well and enhance independence for people with mild dementia. This study aims to examine the feasibility of conducting a definitive randomised trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the PRIDE intervention offered in addition to usual care or with usual care alone. Methods/design PRIDE is a parallel, two-arm, multicentre, feasibility, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Eligible participants aged 18 or over who have mild dementia (defined as a score of 0.5 or 1 on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale) who can participate in the intervention and provide informed consent will be randomised (1:1) to treatment with the PRIDE intervention delivered in addition to usual care, or usual care only. Participants will be followed-up at 3 and 6 month’s post-randomisation. There will be an option for a supporter to join each participant. Each supporter will be provided with questionnaires at baseline and follow-ups at 3 to 6 months. Embedded qualitative research with both participants and supporters will explore their perspectives on the intervention investigating a range of themes including acceptability and barriers and facilitators to delivery and participation. The feasibility of conducting a full RCT associated with participant recruitment and follow-up of both conditions, intervention delivery including the recruitment, training, retention of PRIDE trained facilitators, clinical outcomes, intervention and resource use costs and the acceptability of the intervention and study related procedures will be examined. Discussion This study will assess whether a definitive randomised trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of whether the PRIDE intervention offered in addition to usual care is feasible in comparison to usual care alone, and if so, will provide data to inform the design and conduct of a future trial. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN11288961, registered on 23 October 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12345678 Protocol V2.1 dated 19 June 2019.

Abstract Background Interpreting data about intervention effectiveness requires an understanding of which intervention components were delivered and whether they were delivered as planned (fidelity of delivery). These studies aimed to develop a reliable measure for assessing fidelity of delivery of the Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia-UK intervention (COTiD-UK) (Study 1) and measure fidelity of delivery of COTiD-UK across sessions, sites and occupational therapists (Study 2). Methods The studies used a longitudinal observational design nested within a multi-site randomised controlled trial. Where practicable, all intervention sessions were audio-recorded. Fidelity checklists and coding guidelines were developed, piloted and refined until good agreement was achieved between two coders. Ten percent of sessions were purposively sampled from 12 sites and 31 occupational therapists. Transcripts were coded using checklists developed in Study 1; 10% of sets of intervention session transcripts were double coded to ensure that agreement was maintained. Percentages of components that were delivered were calculated for each session, site and occupational therapist. Results A reliable measure of fidelity of delivery for COTiD-UK was developed after several rounds of piloting and amendments. COTiD-UK was delivered with moderate fidelity across all six sessions (range: 52.4–75.5%). The mean range of fidelity varied across sites (26.7–91.2%) and occupational therapists (26.7–94.1%). Conclusions A reliable, systematic method for measuring fidelity of delivery of COTiD-UK was developed and applied, and can be adapted for use in similar interventions. As COTiD-UK was delivered with moderate fidelity, there is a reasonable degree of confidence that intervention effects were attributable to COTiD-UK.

BackgroundThe increasing prevalence of dementia has promoted a move toward equipping people with the skills required for greater self-management of the condition to enable a better quality of life. Self-management encompasses numerous skills, such as goal setting and decision making, which aim to improve an individual’s physical and mental well-being when they live with long-term health conditions. Effective self-management may lead to increased well-being and quality of life. Reviews of web-based and app-based interventions have suggested that they have the potential to provide self-management support for people living with a range of conditions, including dementia. ObjectiveThe aim of this review is to explore the existing use of web-based or app-based interventions that facilitate or support self-management in dementia and discuss their effectiveness in promoting self-management and independence. MethodsA total of 5 electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant articles published between January 2010 and March 2020. Included studies were appraised using the Downs and Black checklist and the Critical Appraisal Skills Program qualitative research checklist. A narrative synthesis framework was applied using tables and conceptual mapping to explore the relationships within and among studies. ResultsA total of 2561 articles were identified from the initial search, of which 11 (0.43%) met the inclusion criteria for the final analysis. These included 5 quantitative, 4 mixed methods, and 2 qualitative studies. All the included articles were of fair to high quality across the two appraisal measures. Interventions were delivered through a range of web-based and app-based technologies and targeted several self-management concepts. However, there was inconsistency regarding the domains, often affected by dementia, that were targeted by the interventions reviewed. ConclusionsWeb-based and app-based interventions for dementia can be delivered through a range of means and can target different aspects of self-management. The small number of studies included in this review report positive outcomes that seem to support the use of these interventions for people living with dementia. However, there is a clear need for more high-quality research into this type of intervention delivery and for studies that use a much larger number of participants across the dementia spectrum. Future research should consider the barriers to and facilitators of intervention adoption highlighted in this review and whether interventions can encompass the physical, social, cognitive, and emotional domains affected by dementia.

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.

Abstract Background Modifying lifestyle risk factors for dementia is a public health priority. Motivation for change is integral to the modification of health-related risk behaviours. This study investigates the psychometric properties of the previously validated tool entitled ‘Motivation to Change Lifestyle and Health Behaviours for Dementia Risk Reduction Scale’ (MCLHB-DRR) for use in the UK. Methods A sample of 3,948 individuals aged 50 and over completed the 27-item MCLHB-DRR online. The psychometric properties of the scale were explored via Exploratory Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) with Oblimin rotation. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to confirm the factor structure using chi-square (χ2), the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the comparative fit index (CFI), the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and Root Mean Square Residual (RMR) as fit indices to evaluate the model fit. Internal consistency (Cronbach α) was measured for the final scale version. Results Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) resulted in a parsimonious 10-item, two-factor structure (5 items each, factor loadings > 0.3) that explained 52.83% of total variance. Based on the Pattern Matrix, Factor 1 was labelled “Positive Cues to Action” and Factor 2 was labelled “Negative Cues to Action”. After addressing some errors in covariances, CFA showed a good fit where all fit indices were larger than 0.90 (GFI = 0.968, CFI = 0.938) and smaller than 0.08 (RMSEA = 0.072, RMR = 0.041). The standardized coefficients of Factor 1 and Factor 2 ranged from 0.30 to 0.73 and were all statistically significant (p

Introdução: As pessoas com demência e os seus familiares deveriam ter acesso atempado a cuidados formais na comunidade (centros de dia, apoio domiciliário). O projecto EU-Actifcare investigou o acesso/utilização destes serviços em países europeus. Descrevemos a implementação do estudo de coorte e a avaliação inicial em Portugal, com foco nas necessidades de cuidados e recurso aos serviços. Material e Métodos: Selecionámos uma amostra de conveniência de 66 pessoas com diagnóstico de demência ligeira a moderada (residindo na comunidade sem cuidados formais relevantes) e respetivos familiares-cuidadores. A avaliação (clínico-funcional e social) incluiu os instrumentos Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly e Resource Utilization in Dementia. Resultados: Identificámos necessidades não-cobertas dos doentes (média 1,1; DP = 1,7), principalmente de companhia (23% dos casos), sofrimento psicológico (20%) e atividades diárias (14%). Os familiares-cuidadores dedicavam 150 minutos/dia (mediana) à prestação de cuidados e 44% apresentavam necessidades não-cobertas de sofrimento psicológico. Quando havia problemas de acesso/utilização dos serviços de saúde e sociais na comunidade, estes estavam frequentemente relacionados com recusa ou desconhecimento de utentes/familiares. Discussão: A seleção dos participantes não foi fácil, pela especificidade dos critérios adotados. Não almejando representatividade nacional, recrutámos uma amostra típica de pessoas em estádios ligeiros a moderados de demência, em serviços e regiões diferentes. Nalguns casos, encontrámos necessidades não-cobertas e repercussões familiares que já justificariam respostas de serviços na comunidade, não fossem os problemas de acesso/utilização. Conclusão: Na área das demências, existem dificuldades no acesso atempado e utilização efectiva de cuidados formais, coexistindo com uma cobertura menor de necessidades específicas.

Abstract Background Family caregivers of people living with dementia can experience feelings of burden and stress but the concept of sense of coherence has been identified as an important protective trait against the negative impact of caregiving. Despite this, there has been no psychometric evaluation of the Sense of Coherence scale-13 with this population. Therefore, a psychometric evaluation was conducted using a mixed-methods approach. Method Five hundred and eighty-three caregivers of people living with dementia participated in the study. We examined the feasibility, internal consistency, construct validity, floor and ceiling effects, concurrent validity and face validity of the Sense of Coherence scale-13. Results The Sense of Coherence scale-13 demonstrated adequate internal consistency. Sense of coherence was positively related to resilience, sense of competence and health related quality of life, demonstrating good concurrent validity. However, the face validity of the scale was assessed as poor. Conclusion The sense of coherence scale performed well under psychometric evaluation however guidance for caregivers should be examined and revised to reflect feedback from caregivers who completed this study, which could lead to improved face validity for this scale. Trial registration number ISRCTN10748953. Registered 18th September 2014.

Abstract Evidence suggests that the prescription of bladder anticholinergics is increasing. Recent studies have accentuated concerns about whether certain prescribed medications could increase risk of dementia, including anticholinergic drugs, and specifically anticholinergics used for bladder symptoms. Nevertheless, it can be difficult to draw together the evidence to review the case for possible causation. Recognising this issue in 1965, Bradford‐Hill set out nine criteria to help assess whether evidence of a causal relationship could be inferred between a presumed cause and an observed effect. In this commentary, we explore the extent to which associations between anticholinergics and dementia satisfy the Bradford‐Hill criteria and examine the potential implications. First, we look at studies that have examined the relationship between anticholinergic drugs with urological properties (bladder drugs) and the onset of dementia, and then present those studies which specifically focus on the cognitive effects of bladder drugs that affect muscarinic receptors in the brain versus the bladder on older people along with suggestions for future research. We also discuss the risks and benefits of these drugs for treating overactive bladder. If it can be shown that certain medications carry a specific risk of dementia, it is possible that initiatives to change prescribing could become a key tool in reducing the risk of dementia and may be easier to implement than some lifestyle changes.

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.

Objectives: There is currently little known about why people decline to participate in dyadic, psychosocial dementia research. This interview study aims to explore the reasons why people declined to participate in the Valuing Active Life in Dementia research trial. Methods: Ten family carers of people with dementia, who were part of a dyad that had declined to take part in the randomised controlled trial, participated in qualitative telephone interviews to explore their reasons for declining. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify themes. Findings: Two themes with related sub-themes were identified: (1) Protectiveness – protecting the person with dementia, themselves as carers and their current lifestyle; (2) ‘It’s not for us’ – the time commitment, and the possible unsuitability of the intervention, was seen to outweigh the perceived benefit of taking part. People with dementia were not always involved in the decision-making process, with carers stating the decision not to participate was made in the usual way as all their decisions. No apparent differences between the spousal and the child carers were apparent in the small sample. Conclusion: Recruitment to randomised controlled trials can be considered difficult or unfair because some participants will miss out on the desired intervention. However, this study shows that concern about the time and inconvenience of being involved in the trial can put people off research participation. Identifying possible reasons for declining research participation contributes to the design of future trials and recruitment strategies, so that the potential benefit is considered relative to the time and effort involved. Offering research opportunities to people with dementia and their families at the right stage of the dementia trajectory for their needs, facilitating personalised recruitment strategies with finely tailored researcher communication skills should help maximise recruitment, reduce attrition and deliver a more successful trial.

Background: Even with a strong evidence base, many healthcare interventions fail to be translated to clinical practice due to the absence of robust implementation strategies. For disorders such as Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, access to evidence-based interventions beyond research settings is of great importance. Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (CST) is a brief, group-based intervention, with consistent evidence of effectiveness.Methods: An implementation focused, three-phase methodology was developed using extensive stakeholder engagement. The methods resulted in a standardized Implementation Plan for the successful translation of CST from research to practice. The methodology was developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and refined in three countries that vary in levels of economic development and healthcare systems (Brazil, India and Tanzania).Results: Five Implemention Plans for CST were produced. Each plan contained implementation strategies and action plans devised in conjunction with policy professionals, healthcare professionals, people with dementia and family carers, and an international team of researchers and clinicians.Conclusion: This novel methodology can act as a template for implementation studies in diverse healthcare systems across the world. It is an effective means of devising socio-culturally informed Implementation Plans that account for economic realities, health equity and healthcare access.

Background: The effective management of agitation and other neuropsychiatric and behavioural symptoms in people with dementia is a major challenge, particularly in care home settings, where dementia severity is higher and there is limited training and support for care staff. There is evidence for the value of staff training and the use of psychosocial approaches; however, no intervention currently exists that combines these elements into an intervention that is fit for purpose and effective in these settings based on evidence from a randomised controlled trial. Objective: The objective was to develop and evaluate a complex intervention to improve well-being, reduce antipsychotic use and improve quality of life in people with dementia in care homes through person-centred care, management of agitation and non-drug approaches. Design: This was a 5-year programme that consisted of six work packages. Work package 1 consisted of two systematic reviews of personalised psychosocial interventions for behavioural and psychological symptoms for people with dementia in care homes. Work package 2 consisted of a metasynthesis of studies examining implementation of psychosocial interventions, in addition to developing a draft Well-being and Health for people with Dementia (WHELD) programme. Work package 3 consisted of a factorial study of elements of the draft WHELD programme in 16 care homes. Work package 4 involved optimisation of the WHELD programme based on work package 3 data. Work package 5 involved a multicentre randomised controlled trial in 69 care homes, which evaluated the impact of the optimised WHELD programme on quality of life, agitation and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia. Work package 6 focused on dissemination of the programme. Setting: This programme was carried out in care homes in the UK. Participants: Participants of this programme were people with dementia living in care homes, and the health and care professionals providing treatment and care in these settings. Results: Work package 1: reviews identified randomised controlled trials and qualitative evidence supporting the use of psychosocial approaches to manage behavioural symptoms, but highlighted a concerning lack of evidence-based training manuals in current use. Work package 2: the meta-analysis identified key issues in promoting the use of interventions in care homes. The WHELD programme was developed through adaptation of published approaches. Work package 3: the factorial trial showed that antipsychotic review alone significantly reduced antipsychotic use by 50% (odds ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.60). Antipsychotic review plus social interaction significantly reduced mortality (odds ratio 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.57), but this group showed significantly worse outcomes in behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia than the group receiving neither antipsychotic review nor social interaction (mean difference 7.37 symptoms, 95% confidence interval 1.53 to 13.22 symptoms). This detrimental impact was reduced when combined with social interaction (mean difference –0.44 points, 95% confidence interval –4.39 to 3.52 points), but with no significant benefits for agitation. The exercise intervention significantly improved neuropsychiatric symptoms (mean difference –3.58 symptoms, 95% confidence interval –7.08 to –0.09 symptoms) but not depression (mean difference –1.21 points, 95% confidence interval –4.35 to 1.93 points). Qualitative work with care staff provided additional insights into the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. Work package 4: optimisation of the WHELD programme led to a final version that combined person-centred care training with social interaction and pleasant activities. The intervention was adapted for delivery through a ‘champion’ model. Work package 5: a large-scale, multicentre randomised controlled trial in 69 care homes showed significant benefit to quality of life, agitation and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms, at reduced overall cost compared with treatment as usual. The intervention conferred a statistically significant improvement in quality of life (Dementia Quality of Life Scale – Proxy z-score of 2.82, mean difference 2.54, standard error of measurement 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 4.28, Cohen’s d effect size of 0.24; p = 0.0042). There were also statistically significant benefits in agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory z-score of 2.68, mean difference –4.27, standard error of measurement 1.59, 95% confidence interval –7.39 to –1.15, Cohen’s d effect size of 0.23; p = 0.0076) and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory – Nursing Home version z-score of 3.52, mean difference –4.55, standard error of measurement 1.28, 95% confidence interval –7.07 to –2.02, Cohen’s d of 0.30; p

ObjectiveTo explore what motivates individuals to change their behaviour to reduce their risk of dementia.MethodsWe conducted secondary qualitative analysis of a UK-based online survey on motivation to change lifestyle and health behaviour for dementia risk reduction. Participants were recruited through social media, the Join Dementia Research network and the National Institute for Health Research Portfolio. Free-text comments from people aged ≥50 years were analysed by two researchers independently using inductive content analysis. Inter-rater agreement was measured through Cohen's Kappa coefficient.ResultsOf the 3,948 participants completing the survey, 653 provided free text comments that were included in the analysis (Mean age = 64.1; SD = 8.3 years). The majority of the sample were women (n = 459; 70.3%), Caucasian (n = 625; 95.7%) and married/in partnership (n = 459; 70.3%). Three overarching themes were identified: (1) motivators to changing lifestyle; (2) barriers for lifestyle change; and, (3) quality of the information received. The inter-rater reliability of the coding was high (k = 0.7). Having a family history of dementia or feeling like they had a healthy lifestyle already were motivating factors for behaviour change. Having competing health priorities other than dementia and caring for someone acted as de-motivators as they reduced the time available to dedicate to one's own health. Evidence-based information around dementia prevention was a motivator, but commonly the information was not trusted.DiscussionAligned with the World Health Organisation (WHO) mandate on dementia prevention, community health campaigns targeting population awareness around behaviour change and dementia risk factor reduction are urgently needed. To be successful, such campaigns will need to be accompanied by individual approaches that can overcome age-related barriers and individual differences in motivation levels, personal barriers and trust in the information received.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233039.].

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.

Objectives: A variety of health services delivered via the Internet, or “eHealth interventions,” to support caregivers of people with dementia have shown evidence of effectiveness, but only a small number are put into practice. This study aimed to investigate whether, how and why their implementation took place. Methods: This qualitative study followed up on the 12 publications included in Boots et al.'s (2014) widely cited systematic review on eHealth interventions for informal caregivers of people with dementia, in order to explore further implementation into practice. Publicly available online information, implementation readiness (ImpRess checklist scores), and survey responses were assessed. Findings: Two interventions were freely available online, two were available in a trial context, and one was exclusively available to clinical staff previously involved in the research project. The remaining seven were unavailable. All scores on the ImpRess checklist were at 50% or lower of the total, indicating that the interventions were not ready to implement at the time of the Boots et al. (2014) review, though some interventions were scored as more implementation-ready in subsequent follow-up publications. Responses to the survey were received from six out of twelve authors. Key learnings from the survey included the importance of the involvement of stakeholders at all stages of the process, as well as the flexible adaptation and commercialization of the intervention. Conclusions: In general, low levels of implementation readiness were reported and often the information necessary to assess implementation readiness was unavailable. The only two freely available interventions had long-term funding from aging foundations. Authors pointed to the involvement of financial gatekeepers in the development process and the creation of a business model early on as important facilitators to implementation. Future research should focus on the factors enabling sustainable implementation. Keywords: Dementia, Caregiver, Internet, eHealth, Implementation

Abstract Background People with dementia progressively lose abilities and are prone to falling. Exercise- and activity-based interventions hold the prospect of increasing abilities, reducing falls, and slowing decline in cognition. Current falls prevention approaches are poorly suited to people with dementia, however, and are of uncertain effectiveness. We used multiple sources, and a co-production approach, to develop a new intervention, which we will evaluate in a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT), with embedded adherence, process and economic analyses. Methods We will recruit people with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia from memory assessment clinics, and a family member or carer. We will randomise participants between a therapy programme with high intensity supervision over 12 months, a therapy programme with moderate intensity supervision over 3 months, and brief falls assessment and advice as a control intervention. The therapy programmes will be delivered at home by mental health specialist therapists and therapy assistants. We will measure activities of daily living, falls and a battery of intermediate and distal health status outcomes, including activity, balance, cognition, mood and quality of life. The main aim is to test recruitment and retention, intervention delivery, data collection and other trial processes in advance of a planned definitive RCT. We will also study motivation and adherence, and conduct a process evaluation to help understand why results occurred using mixed methods, including a qualitative interview study and scales measuring psychological, motivation and communication variables. We will undertake an economic study, including modelling of future impact and cost to end-of-life, and a social return on investment analysis. Discussion In this study, we aim to better understand the practicalities of both intervention and research delivery, and to generate substantial new knowledge on motivation, adherence and the approach to economic analysis. This will enable us to refine a novel intervention to promote activity and safety after a diagnosis of dementia, which will be evaluated in a definitive randomised controlled trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02874300; ISRCTN 10550694.

Abstract Background As part of the ActifCare (ACcess to Timely Formal Care) project, we conducted expert interviews in eight European countries with policy and political decision makers, or representatives of relevant institutions, to determine their perspectives on access to formal care for people with dementia and their carers. Methods Each ActifCare country (Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom) conducted semi-structured interviews with 4–7 experts (total N = 38). The interview guide addressed the topics “Complexity and Continuity of Care”, “Formal Services”, and “Public Awareness”. Country-specific analysis of interview transcripts used an inductive qualitative content analysis. Cross-national synthesis focused on similarities in themes across the ActifCare countries. Results The analysis revealed ten common themes and two additional sub-themes across countries. Among others, the experts highlighted the need for a coordinating role and the necessity of information to address issues of complexity and continuity of care, demanded person-centred, tailored, and multidisciplinary formal services, and referred to education, mass media and campaigns as means to raise public awareness. Conclusions Policy and political decision makers appear well acquainted with current discussions among both researchers and practitioners of possible approaches to improve access to dementia care. Experts described pragmatic, realistic strategies to influence dementia care. Suggested innovations concerned how to achieve improved dementia care, rather than transforming the nature of the services provided. Knowledge gained in these expert interviews may be useful to national decision makers when they consider reshaping the organisation of dementia care, and may thus help to develop best-practice strategies and recommendations.

Abstract Background Research reporting results of clinical trials, psychosocial or technological interventions frequently omit critical details needed to inform implementation in practice. The aim of this article is to develop an Implementation Readiness (ImpRess) checklist, that includes criteria deemed useful in measuring readiness for implementation and apply it to trials of cognitive stimulation in dementia, providing a systematic review of their readiness for widespread implementation. Methods Five electronic databases were searched. After initial screening of papers, two reviewers assessed quality and scored the included studies based on the ImpRess checklist specifically developed for this review. Results Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. As determined by the ImpRess checklist, scores ranged from 11 to 29 out of 52. According to the checklist the most comprehensive and ready to implement version of cognitive stimulation was Cognitive Stimulation Therapy. Conclusions Reports of interventions rarely include consideration of implementation in practice. Contrary to the growing number of reporting guidelines, crucial items within the ImpRess checklist have been frequently overlooked. This study was able to show that the ImpRess checklist was feasible in practice and reliable. The checklist may be useful in evaluating readiness for implementation for other manualised interventions.

BackgroundAgitation is a common, challenging symptom affecting large numbers of people with dementia and impacting on quality of life (QoL). There is an urgent need for evidence-based, cost-effective psychosocial interventions to improve these outcomes, particularly in the absence of safe, effective pharmacological therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a person-centred care and psychosocial intervention incorporating an antipsychotic review, WHELD, on QoL, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes, and to determine its cost.Methods and findingsThis was a randomised controlled cluster trial conducted between 1 January 2013 and 30 September 2015 that compared the WHELD intervention with treatment as usual (TAU) in people with dementia living in 69 UK nursing homes, using an intention to treat analysis. All nursing homes allocated to the intervention received staff training in person-centred care and social interaction and education regarding antipsychotic medications (antipsychotic review), followed by ongoing delivery through a care staff champion model. The primary outcome measure was QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy). Secondary outcomes were agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory [CMAI]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home Version [NPI-NH]), antipsychotic use, global deterioration (Clinical Dementia Rating), mood (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia), unmet needs (Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly), mortality, quality of interactions (Quality of Interactions Scale [QUIS]), pain (Abbey Pain Scale), and cost. Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. In all, 847 people were randomised to WHELD or TAU, of whom 553 completed the 9-month randomised controlled trial. The intervention conferred a statistically significant improvement in QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy Z score 2.82, p = 0.0042; mean difference 2.54, SEM 0.88; 95% CI 0.81, 4.28; Cohen's D effect size 0.24). There were also statistically significant benefits in agitation (CMAI Z score 2.68, p = 0.0076; mean difference 4.27, SEM 1.59; 95% CI -7.39, -1.15; Cohen's D 0.23) and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-NH Z score 3.52, p < 0.001; mean difference 4.55, SEM 1.28; 95% CI -7.07,-2.02; Cohen's D 0.30). Benefits were greatest in people with moderately severe dementia. There was a statistically significant benefit in positive care interactions as measured by QUIS (19.7% increase, SEM 8.94; 95% CI 2.12, 37.16, p = 0.03; Cohen's D 0.55). There were no statistically significant differences between WHELD and TAU for the other outcomes. A sensitivity analysis using a pre-specified imputation model confirmed statistically significant benefits in DEMQOL-Proxy, CMAI, and NPI-NH outcomes with the WHELD intervention. Antipsychotic drug use was at a low stable level in both treatment groups, and the intervention did not reduce use. The WHELD intervention reduced cost compared to TAU, and the benefits achieved were therefore associated with a cost saving. The main limitation was that antipsychotic review was based on augmenting processes within care homes to trigger medical review and did not in this study involve proactive primary care education. An additional limitation was the inherent challenge of assessing QoL in this patient group.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that the WHELD intervention confers benefits in terms of QoL, agitation, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, albeit with relatively small effect sizes, as well as cost saving in a model that can readily be implemented in nursing homes. Future work should consider how to facilitate sustainability of the intervention in this setting.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN62237498.

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.

Background: Group cognitive stimulation therapy programmes can benefit cognition and quality of life for people with dementia. Evidence for home-based, carer-led cognitive stimulation interventions is limited. Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of carer-delivered individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) for people with dementia and their family carers, compared with treatment as usual (TAU). Design: A multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial assessing clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Assessments were at baseline, 13 weeks and 26 weeks (primary end point). Setting: Participants were recruited through Memory Clinics and Community Mental Health Teams for older people. Participants: A total of 356 caregiving dyads were recruited and 273 completed the trial. Intervention: iCST consisted of structured cognitive stimulation sessions for people with dementia, completed up to three times weekly over 25 weeks. Family carers were supported to deliver the sessions at home. Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes for the person with dementia were cognition and quality of life. Secondary outcomes included behavioural and psychological symptoms, activities of daily living, depressive symptoms and relationship quality. The primary outcome for the family carers was mental/physical health (Short Form questionnaire-12 items). Health-related quality of life (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions), mood symptoms, resilience and relationship quality comprised the secondary outcomes. Costs were estimated from health and social care and societal perspectives. Results: There were no differences in any of the primary outcomes for people with dementia between intervention and TAU [cognition: mean difference –0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) –2.00 to 0.90; p-value = 0.45; self-reported quality of life: mean difference –0.02, 95% CI –1.22 to 0.82; p-value = 0.97 at the 6-month follow-up]. iCST did not improve mental/physical health for carers. People with dementia in the iCST group experienced better relationship quality with their carer, but there was no evidence that iCST improved their activities of daily living, depression or behavioural and psychological symptoms. iCST seemed to improve health-related quality of life for carers but did not benefit carers’ resilience or their relationship quality with their relative. Carers conducting more sessions had fewer depressive symptoms. Qualitative data suggested that people with dementia and their carers experienced better communication owing to iCST. Adjusted mean costs were not significantly different between the groups. From the societal perspective, both health gains and cost savings were observed. Conclusions: iCST did not improve cognition or quality of life for people with dementia, or carers’ physical and mental health. Costs of the intervention were offset by some reductions in social care and other services. Although there was some evidence of improvement in terms of the caregiving relationship and carers’ health-related quality of life, iCST does not appear to deliver clinical benefits for cognition and quality of life for people with dementia. Most people received fewer than the recommended number of iCST sessions. Further research is needed to ascertain the clinical effectiveness of carer-led cognitive stimulation interventions for people with dementia. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN65945963. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further information.