Search

Abstract Background To explore how a vocational rehabilitation (VR) intervention can be integrated within existing healthcare services for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) in the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service (NHS). Methods Data from 37 semi-structured interviews with 22 people with MS, eight employers, and seven healthcare professionals were analysed using a framework method informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and an intervention logic model. Results Four themes were identified relating to the structure of current NHS services, how to improve access to and awareness of VR services, the collaboration between internal and external networks, and the benefits of integrating VR within the NHS services. Participants identified several implementation barriers such as poor links with external organisations, staffing issues, and lack of funding. To overcome these barriers, participants suggested enablers such as technology (e.g., apps or online assessments) and collaboration with third-sector organisations to reduce the pressure on the NHS. Conclusion Significant organisational changes are required to ensure a successful implementation of a VR intervention within current NHS services. Despite this, the NHS was seen as a trustworthy organisation to offer support that can optimise the health and professional lives of people with MS.

Abstract Background Moderately severe or major trauma (injury severity score (ISS) > 8) is common, often resulting in physical and psychological problems and leading to difficulties in returning to work. Vocational rehabilitation (VR) can improve return to work/education in some injuries (e.g. traumatic brain and spinal cord injury), but evidence is lacking for other moderately severe or major trauma. Methods ROWTATE is an individually randomised controlled multicentre pragmatic trial of early VR and psychological support in trauma patients. It includes an internal pilot, economic evaluation, a process evaluation and an implementation study. Participants will be screened for eligibility and recruited within 12 weeks of admission to eight major trauma centres in England. A total of 722 participants with ISS > 8 will be randomised 1:1 to VR and psychological support (where needed, following psychological screening) plus usual care or to usual care alone. The ROWTATE VR intervention will be provided within 2 weeks of study recruitment by occupational therapists and where needed, by clinical psychologists. It will be individually tailored and provided for ≤ 12 months, dependent on participant need. Baseline assessment will collect data on demographics, injury details, work/education status, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic distress, disability, recovery expectations, financial stress and health-related quality of life. Participants will be followed up by postal/telephone/online questionnaires at 3, 6 and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary objective is to establish whether the ROWTATE VR intervention plus usual care is more effective than usual care alone for improving participants’ self-reported return to work/education for at least 80% of pre-injury hours at 12 months post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes include other work outcomes (e.g. hours of work/education, time to return to work/education, sickness absence), depression, anxiety, post-traumatic distress, work self-efficacy, financial stress, purpose in life, health-related quality of life and healthcare/personal resource use. The process evaluation and implementation study will be described elsewhere. Discussion This trial will provide robust evidence regarding a VR intervention for a major trauma population. Evidence of a clinically and cost-effective VR intervention will be important for commissioners and providers to enable adoption of VR services for this large and important group of patients within the NHS. Trial registration ISRCTN: 43115471. Registered 27/07/2021.

Objectives Major trauma centres (MTCs) save lives but rehabilitation to support return-to-work (RTW) is lacking. This paper describes development of a vocational rehabilitation intervention (the ROWTATE intervention) to support RTW following traumatic injury.Design Sequential and iterative person-based approach in four stages—Stage 1: review of evidence about the efficacy and mechanisms of RTW interventions; Stage 2: interviews (n=38) and focus groups (n=25) with trauma survivors and service providers in five UK MTCs to identify the issues, and challenges faced postinjury; Stage 3: codesign workshops (n=43) with trauma stakeholders in MTCs to conceptually test and identify intervention delivery barriers/enablers; Stage 4: meetings (n=7) with intervention development working group (IDWG) to: (1) generate guiding principles, (2) identify key intervention features (process, components, mechanisms) to address unmet rehabilitation needs; (3) generate a logic model and programme theory to illustrate how the intervention works; and (4) develop a training package to support delivery.Results Trauma survivors described unmet needs relating to early advice about RTW; psychological support; pain management; hidden disabilities (eg, fatigue); estimating recovery; and community, amputee and musculoskeletal rehabilitation. Mechanisms of effective interventions identified in the review included early intervention, colocation, employer engagement, case coordination and work accommodations. Intervention features identified by IDWG members (n=13) from stages 1 and 2 were use of stepped-care approaches by occupational therapists (OTs) and clinical psychologists (CPs), OT/CP formulation for complex cases, assessment of mental health problems, individually tailored rehabilitation including vocational goal setting, cross-sector coordination/communication, employer engagement, phased RTW, education/advice for family/employers, exploration of work alternatives, ongoing review of physical and mental health needs, work stability monitoring. Conceptual testing ratified the logic model. Geography and long waiting lists were identified as potential delivery barriers.Conclusions Real-world testing of the intervention is underway in a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT Background Multiple sclerosis (MS) misdiagnosis is common, and when discovered, frequently leads to substantial disruption to patients’ lives and anxiety for clinicians. Our objective was to develop expert consensus‐based guidelines about how to communicate a misdiagnosis of MS to a patient, to reduce the potential for both psychological distress and litigation. Methods A modified Delphi method using a systematic literature review on doctor and patient experiences of the MS diagnosis communication was used to populate items for a first‐round questionnaire. Our Delphi panel represented three perspectives (clinicians, people with MS, and published experts in health communication), and we recruited 18 panelists in total (6 per perspective). Consensus was defined a priori as 75% of panelists giving an item the same rating. A feedback round was undertaken with six external reviewers, naïve to the guideline development process, and the panelists. Items were reviewed by the study team and synthesized to create the finalized guidelines. Results Consensus was reached for 45 items rated as “very important” and presented in the feedback round. The study team synthesized the 45 items to 27 items. Ten items related specifically to the communication of the MS misdiagnosis and 17 items to generic guidelines highlighted as important in the MS misdiagnosis appointment. Seven recommendations form the guidelines presented here. Conclusions Seven consensus‐based recommendations offer guidance to practising neurologists in their communication with patients in a situation that has the potential to be highly distressing, for both clinician and patient.

Background People who have had a stroke or a Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) can experience psychological and/or cognitive difficulties. The body of research for psychological and neuropsychological interventions after stroke is growing, however, published systematic reviews vary in scope and methodology, with different types and severity of strokes included, and at times, diverse conclusions drawn about the effectiveness of the interventions evaluated. In this umbrella review, we aim to systematically summarise the existing systematic reviews evaluating psychological interventions for mood and cognition post-stroke/TIA. Methods We will conduct this umbrella review according to the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The following databases will be searched from inception: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Epistemonikos. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published until the search date will be included. Reviews including psychological interventions addressing mood and/or cognition outcomes for any stroke type or severity will be screened for eligibility. A narrative synthesis, including content analysis, will be used. Each stage of the review will be processed by two independent reviewers and a third reviewer will be considered to resolve disagreements. The methodological quality of the included reviews will be assessed using AMSTAR 2. Discussion Existing systematic reviews provide varied evidence on the effectiveness of psychological interventions post-stroke/TIA. This umbrella review aims to summarise knowledge and evidence on different types of psychological and neuropsychological interventions targeting mood and cognition. Findings will highlight important knowledge gaps and help prioritise future research questions. Systematic Review Registration This protocol was prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on November 15, 2022; PROSPERO CRD42022375947.

IntroductionMultiple sclerosis (MS) is generally diagnosed at an early age, making the acceptance of this chronic disease challenging. Research dedicated to young adults with MS (YawMS) is still limited. A biopsychosocial co-created intervention for YawMS integrating social, physical and psychological activities was developed (ESPRIMO intervention) in order to improve the quality of life (QoL) and well-being. This pre-post intervention assessment study examines the feasibility of the ESPRIMO intervention and its signal of efficacy.MethodsInclusion criteria were: age 18–45 years, MS diagnosis, Expanded Disability Status Scale score

Background and objectivesResearch on driving ability in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) suggests that they might be at risk for unsafe driving due to MS-related motor, visual, and cognitive impairment. Our first aim was to investigate differences in driving ability and performance between people with MS (PwMS) and those without any neurologic or psychiatric disease (“controls”). Secondly, we determined disease-related factors influencing driving ability in PwMS.MethodsWe prospectively compared standardized performance in a driving simulator between 97 persons with early MS [mean (SD) = 6.4 (7.3) years since diagnosis, mean (SD) Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) = 2.5 (1.4)] and 94 group-matched controls. Participants completed an extensive examination comprising questionnaires and assessments regarding driving, cognitive and psychological factors, as well as demographic and disease-related measures. Between-group comparisons of driving-relevant neuropsychological tests and driving performance were done. Correlations were performed to define demographic and disease-related factors on driving performance in MS.ResultsIn a driving simulator setting, PwMS had more driving accidents [T(188) = 2.762, p = 0.006], reacted slower to hazardous events [T(188) = 2.561, p = 0.011], made more driving errors [T(188) = 2.883, p = 0.004] and had a worse Driving Safety Score (DSS) [T(188) = 3.058, p = 0.003] than controls. The only disease-related measure to be associated with most driving outcomes was the Wechsler Block-Tapping test (WMS-R) backward: number of accidents (r = 0.28, p = 0.01), number of driving errors (r = 0.23, p = 0.05) and DSS (r = −0.23, p = 0.05).ConclusionDriving performance in a simulator seems to be reduced in PwMS at an early stage of disease compared to controls, as a result of increased erroneous driving, reduced reaction time and higher accident rate. MS-related impairment in mobility, vision, cognition, and in psychological and demographic aspects showed no or only minimal association to driving ability, but impairment in different areas of cognition such as spatial short-term memory, working memory and selective attention correlated with the number of accidents, and might indicate a higher risk for driving errors and worse performance. These results show that driving ability is a complex skill with involvement of many different domains, which need further research.

Abstract Introduction People should have access to healthcare services that are effective, safe and secure, patient‐centred, and coordinated and continuous. One group that has consistently reported negative experiences and feels dissatisfied with services are patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME)/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). The objective of this study was to develop a deeper understanding of the experiences of dissatisfaction among ME/CFS patients and explore the reasons for such dissatisfaction. Methods We conducted in‐depth interviews with 48 people from 24 households (comprising patients and family members), providing insight into the experiences of 37 ME/CFS sufferers in Norway. The participants were purposively sampled and included persons of different ages, genders, time since having the condition (3–30 years), and severity. Results Four main themes were developed: (1) ‘Nonexistent services’ cover patients’ experience that healthcare services had nothing to offer them after receiving their ME/CFS‐diagnosis. (2) ‘Nonpersonalised services’ documents experiences where patients did receive services, which in theory was appropriate for relieving a specific health problem, but in practice were experienced as inappropriate because they were not adapted to the patient's need. (3) ‘Slow services’ address patients’ experience of getting services too late (or too little) to be useful. (4) ‘Wrong services’ comprise patients’ experiences of being offered and/or ‘forced’ to accept services that they felt were inappropriate for their health problems. Conclusions Providers’ lacking knowledge of the condition and lack of precise recommendations for follow up may partly explain unsatisfactory experiences. Providers’ belief (or disbelief) in the condition could furthermore influence caregiving. Also, systemic issues in the healthcare sector, like high workloads and bureaucracy, can negatively affect care provision. Finally, users’ unsatisfactory experiences may also be due to a lack of patient involvement in the design of such services. Further research should investigate how patients can be involved in service design, and also providers’ perspectives on caregiving and the barriers they experience for providing high‐quality care. Patient or Public Contribution The ME‐patient organisation suggested research topics to the call from which this study got funding. Patients and caregivers provided feedback during analysis and interpretation of data.

Abstract Background Despite growing numbers of studies reporting the efficacy of complex interventions and their implementation, many studies fail to report information on implementation fidelity or describe how fidelity measures used within the study were developed. This study aimed to develop a fidelity checklist for measuring the implementation fidelity of an early, stroke-specialist vocational rehabilitation intervention (ESSVR) in the RETAKE trial. Methods To develop the fidelity measure, previous checklists were reviewed to inform the assessment structure, and core intervention components were extracted from intervention descriptions into a checklist, which was ratified by eight experts in fidelity measurement and complex interventions. Guidance notes were generated to assist with checklist completion. To test the measure, two researchers independently applied the checklist to fifteen stroke survivor intervention case notes using retrospective observational case review. The scoring was assessed for interrater reliability. Results A fidelity checklist containing 21 core components and 6 desirable components across 4 stages of intervention delivery was developed with corresponding guidance notes. Interrater reliability of each checklist item ranged from moderate to perfect (Cohen’s kappa 0.69–1). Conclusions The resulting checklist to assess implementation fidelity is fit for assessing the delivery of vocational rehabilitation for stroke survivors using retrospective observational case review. The checklist proved its utility as a measure of fidelity and may be used to inform the design of future implementation strategies. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN12464275. Registered on 13 March 2018.

Abstract Background Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic condition of the central nervous system, affecting around 1 in every 600 people in the UK, with 130 new diagnoses every week. Cognitive difficulties are common amongst people with MS, with up to 70% experiencing deficits in higher-level brain functions—such as planning and problem-solving, attention, and memory. Cognitive deficits make it difficult for people with MS to complete everyday tasks and limit their abilities to work, socialise, and live independently. There is a clear need—and recognised research priority—for treatments that can improve cognitive functioning in people with MS. The absence of effective cognitive interventions exacerbates burdens on the services accessed by people with MS—requiring these services to manage sequelae of untreated cognitive deficits, including reduced quality of life, greater disability and dependence, and poorer adherence to disease-modifying treatments. Our planned research will fill the evidence gap through developing—and examining the feasibility of trialling—a novel online cognitive rehabilitation programme for people with MS (SMART). The SMART programme directly trains relational skills (the ability to flexibly relate concepts to one another) based on theory that these skills are critical to broader cognitive functioning. Methods The primary objective of this study aims to conduct a feasibility study to inform the development of a definitive trial of SMART for improving cognitive functioning in people with MS. The secondary objective is to develop the framework for a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a definitive trial, and the exploratory objective is to assess the signal of efficacy. Discussion As a feasibility trial, outcomes are unlikely to immediately effect changes to NHS practice. However, this is a necessary step towards developing a definitive trial—and will give us a signal of efficacy, a prerequisite for progression to a definitive trial. If found to be clinically and cost-effective, the latter trial could create a step-change in MS cognitive rehabilitation—improving service delivery and optimising support with limited additional resources. Trial registration Registration ID: ClnicalTrials.gov: NCT04975685—registered on July 23rd, 2021. Protocol version: 2.0, 25 November 2021

Objectives: Guidelines recommend knee osteoarthritis pain management based on biopsychosocial mechanisms. Treatment adherence and effectiveness may be affected if there is a mismatch between patient perspectives and treatment focus. We therefore examined patient perspectives on mechanisms of their knee pain, why it persisted or changed over the past year, whether their understanding had changed, and whether their understanding aligned with that of others with whom they interact. Methods: Individuals with chronic knee pain (n ​= ​50) were purposively recruited from the Knee Pain and related health In the Community (KPIC) cohort to represent worsened, improved, or unchanged pain or anxiety between baseline and one year later. Framework analysis, a comparative form of thematic analysis, was used across transcripts of semi-structured telephone interviews. Results: Data were collapsed into themes of diagnosis, joint structure, ageing, physical activity, weight management, and treatment. Participants focused on biomechanical rather than psychological pain mechanisms. Some participants attributed pain improvement to increased and others to decreased physical activity. Participants reported no change in their understanding of their pain during the preceding year, but that their attitudes to pain, for example acceptance, had changed. Participants reported that they and others around them lacked understanding of their pain and why it did or did not change. Conclusion: People report a predominantly biomechanical understanding of why their knee pain remains constant or changes over time. Clinicians should support patients to develop a biopsychosocial understanding of knee pain aligned to treatment across the range of biological, psychological, and social modalities.

Abstract Background Cognitive problems affect up to 70% of people with multiple sclerosis (MS), which can negatively impact mood, ability to work, and quality of life. Addressing cognitive problems is a top 10 research priority for people with MS. Our ongoing research has systematically developed a cognitive screening and management pathway (NEuRoMS) tailored for people with MS, involving a brief cognitive evaluation and rehabilitation intervention. The present study aims to assess the feasibility of delivering the pathway and will inform the design of a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the intervention and eventually guide its clinical implementation. Methods The feasibility study is in three parts. Part 1 involves an observational study of those who receive screening and support for cognitive problems, using routinely collected clinical data. Part 2 is a two-arm, parallel group, multicentre, feasibility RCT with a nested fidelity evaluation. This part will evaluate the feasibility of undertaking a definitive trial comparing the NEuRoMS intervention plus usual care to usual care only, amongst people with MS with mild cognitive problems (n = 60). In part 3, semi-structured interviews will be undertaken with participants from part 2 (n = 25), clinicians (n = 9), and intervention providers (n = 3) involved in delivering the NEuRoMS cognitive screening and management pathway. MS participants will be recruited from outpatient clinics at three UK National Health Service hospitals. Discussion Timely screening and effective management of cognitive problems in MS are urgently needed due to the detrimental consequences of cognitive problems on people with MS, the healthcare system, and wider society. The NEuRoMS intervention is based on previous and extant literature and has been co-constructed with relevant stakeholders. If effective, the NEuRoMS pathway will facilitate timely identification and management of cognitive problems in people with MS. Trial registration ISRCTN11203922 . Prospectively registered on 09.02.2021.

We reflect on our experiences using Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in the project “TAS for Health at Home”. Driven by a multi-disciplinary research team that consisted of experts in mental health, stroke rehabilitation, management of multiple sclerosis, human factors, human-computer interaction, privacy, cybersecurity, architecture, and Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) groups, the project aimed at eliciting user perceptions of autonomous systems supporting healthcare regimes at home. We discuss the home as a unique place to consider RRI approaches and reflect on the actual process of carrying out RRI within the project, including the multi-disciplinarity of the project, our engagement with PPI groups, and how we involved the wider community concerned with Trustworthy Autonomous Systems (TAS). We conclude by summarising our reflections and providing a first step towards RRI-based guidelines for developing healthcare technology for the home.

ObjectiveTo provide an overview of the evidence on driving ability in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), specifically to (i) study the impact of MS impairment on driving ability and (ii) evaluate predictors for driving performance in MS.MethodsTo identify relevant studies, different electronic databases were screened in accordance with PRISMA guidelines; this includes reference lists of review articles, primary studies, and trial registers for protocols. Furthermore, experts in the field were contacted. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to identify relevant articles targeting driving in people with MS that investigated driving-related issues with a formal driving assessment (defined as either an on-road driving assessment; or naturalistic driving in a car equipped with video cameras to record the driving; or a driving simulator with a steering wheel, a brake pedal, and an accelerator).ResultsTwenty-four publications, with 15 unique samples (n = 806 PwMS), were identified. To assess driving ability, on-road tests (14 papers) and driving simulators (10 papers) were used. All studies showed moderate to high study quality in the CASP assessment. About 6 to 38% of PwMS failed the on-road tests, showing difficulties in different areas of driving. Similarly, PwMS showed several problems in driving simulations. Cognitive and visual impairment appeared to most impact driving ability, but the evidence was insufficient and inconsistent.ConclusionThere is an urgent need for more research and standardized guidelines for clinicians as one in five PwMS might not be able to drive safely. On-road tests may be the gold standard in assessing driving ability, but on-road protocols are heterogeneous and not infallible. Driving simulators assess driving ability in a standardized way, but without standardized routes and driving outcomes, comparability between studies is difficult. Different aspects, such as cognitive impairment or vision problems, impact driving ability negatively and should be taken into consideration when making decisions about recommending driving cessation.Systematic review registrationIdentifier [10.17605/OSF.IO/WTG9J].

Objectives To assess smoking habits, nicotine use, exposure to passive smoking, awareness of associated harms, and experiences with and preferences for smoking cessation support among people with multiple sclerosis (MS).Design Online survey, convenience sampling.Setting Community setting, Australia.Participants Adults living in Australia with probable or diagnosed MS were recruited via social media and newsletters to participate in 2020.Results Of the 284 participants in our convenience sample, 25.7% were current smokers (n=73) and 38.0% were former smokers (n=108). Awareness of the harms of smoking on MS onset (n=68, 24.3%) and progression (n=116, 41.6%) was low. Almost a quarter (n=67, 23.8%) of participants were regularly exposed to passive smoke, and awareness of associated harm was also low (n=47, 16.8%). Among current smokers, 76.1% (n=54) had tried quitting and 73.2% considered quitting within 6 months (n=52). Many participants reported perceived short-term benefits of smoking, and long-term benefits of quitting, on MS symptoms and general well-being (short-term n=28, 40.0%; long-term n=28, 82.4%). While most participants reported that their neurologist (n=126, 75.4%) or other healthcare providers (n=125, 74.9%) had assessed smoking status, very few neurologists (n=3, 1.8%) or other healthcare providers (n=14, 8.4%) had provided help with quitting. Most current smokers preferred speaking about smoking to a neurologist (n=36, 52.2%) or general practitioner (n=41, 59.4%). Almost 60% of the current smokers wanted additional cessation information specific to MS (n=41, 59.4%), and 45.5% said this information would motivate them to quit smoking (n=30).Conclusions Our convenience sample, which may not be representative, indicated an urgent need for regular evidence-based smoking cessation supports for people with MS. Most participants felt they would benefit from smoking cessation advice. MS clinicians, in collaboration with patient organisations, smoking cessation services and general practitioners, should make smoking cessation promotion with people with MS a priority.

Abstract Background Traumatic injuries are common amongst working-age adults. Survivors often experience physical and psychological problems, reduced quality of life and difficulty returning to work. Vocational rehabilitation improves work outcomes for a range of conditions but evidence of effectiveness for those with traumatic injuries is lacking. This study assesses feasibility of delivering a vocational rehabilitation intervention to enhance return to work and improve quality of life and wellbeing in people with at least moderate trauma to inform design of a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT). Methods Non-randomised, single-arm, multi-centre mixed-methods feasibility study with nested case studies and qualitative study. The case studies comprise interviews, observations of clinical contacts and review of clinical records. The qualitative study comprises interviews and/or focus groups. Participants will be recruited from two UK major trauma centres. Participants will comprise 40 patients aged 16–69 with an injury severity score of > 8 who will receive the intervention and complete questionnaires. Interviews will be conducted with 10 patients and their occupational therapists (OTs), clinical psychologists (CPs), employers and commissioners of rehabilitation services. Fidelity will be assessed in up to six patients by observations of OT and CP—patient contacts, review of patient records and intervention case report forms. OT and CP training will be evaluated using questionnaires and competence to deliver the intervention assessed using a team objective structured clinical examination and written task. Patients participating in and those declining participation in the study will be invited to take part in interviews/focus groups to explore barriers and facilitators to recruitment and retention. Outcomes include recruitment and retention rates, intervention fidelity, OT and CP competence to deliver the intervention, experiences of delivering or receiving the intervention and factors likely to influence definitive trial delivery. Discussion Effective vocational rehabilitation interventions to enhance return to work amongst trauma patients are urgently needed because return to work is often delayed, with detrimental effects on health, financial stability, healthcare resource use and wider society. This protocol describes a feasibility study delivering a complex intervention to enhance return to work in those with at least moderate trauma. Trial registration ISRCTN: 74668529 . Prospectively registered on 23 January 20

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune, inflammatory neurological disease of the central nervous system (CNS), increasing in incidence and prevalence across both developed and developing countries. Cognitive difficulties are common in MS sufferers with 70% experiencing difficulties in higher-level brain functioning such as planning, attention, problem solving, and memory. Computerised cognitive training programmes may hold promise as a treatment option for improving cognitive function in people with MS, subject to exploring and addressing potential barriers to usability and acceptability. Methods: This study aimed to test the usability and acceptability of a computerised cognitive training intervention—Strengthening Mental Abilities Through Relational Training (SMART) —for people with MS, through a mostly qualitative prefeasibility design (n= 12). There were two phases of testing: (1) initial usability testing via a think-aloud protocol (n= 6) and (2) alpha-testing to assess experienced acceptability over a four-week period of engagement (n= 6). Data from the two phases were subjected to Framework Analysis, wherein we deductively applied the Health IT Usability Evaluation Model and Theoretical Framework of Acceptability to assess usability and acceptability, respectively. Results: Results show SMART to have satisfactory usability with participants reacting positively to the formatting, visuality, and process of the interface. Minor suggestions were made on how best to adapt SMART for people with MS, but the programme and facilitative support were generally perceived to be acceptable, with participants expressing positive feelings about taking part in the intervention, despite associated burdens. Conclusions: This prefeasibility study provides preliminary evidence of the usability and acceptability of SMART as a computerised cognitive training programme for people with MS. We conclude that we can now move forward with a feasibility trial of SMART, with the intention of proceeding to a definitive trial with cost-effectiveness analysis.

Objectives This study aimed to: (1) understand the context for delivering a trauma vocational rehabilitation (VR) intervention; (2) identify potential barriers and enablers to the implementation of a VR intervention post-trauma.Design Qualitative study. Data were collected in person or via phone using different methods: 38 semistructured interviews, 11 informal ‘walk-through care pathways’ interviews, 5 focus groups (n=25), 5 codesign workshops (n=43). Data were thematically analysed using the framework approach, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.Setting Stakeholders recruited across five UK major trauma networks.Participants A variety of stakeholders were recruited (n=117) including trauma survivors, rehabilitation physicians, therapists, psychologists, trauma coordinators and general practitioners. We recruited 32 service users (trauma survivors or carers) and 85 service providers.Results There were several issues associated with implementing a trauma VR intervention including: culture within healthcare/employing organisations; extent to which healthcare systems were networked with other organisations; poor transition between different organisations; failure to recognise VR as a priority; external policies and funding. Some barriers were typical implementation issues (eg, funding, policies, openness to change). This study further highlighted the challenges associated with implementing a complex intervention like VR (eg, inadequate networking/communication, poor service provision, perceived VR priority). Our intervention was developed to overcome these barriers through adapting a therapist training package, and by providing early contact with patient/employer, a psychological component alongside occupational therapy, case coordination/central point of contact, and support crossing sector boundaries (eg, between health/employment/welfare).Conclusions Findings informed the implementation of our VR intervention within the complex trauma pathway. Although we understand how to embed it within this context, the success of its implementation needs to be measured as part of a process evaluation in a future trial.

ObjectivesThe overall purpose of this research programme is to develop and test the feasibility of a complex intervention for knee pain delivered by a nurse, and comprising both non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. In this first phase, we examined the acceptability of the non-pharmacological component of the intervention; issues faced in delivery, and resolved possible challenges to delivery.MethodsEighteen adults with chronic knee pain were recruited from the community. The intervention comprised holistic assessment, education, exercise, weight-loss advice (where appropriate) and advice on adjunctive treatments such as hot/cold treatments, footwear modification and walking aids. After nurse training, the intervention was delivered in four sessions spread over five weeks. Participants had one to one semi-structured interview at the end of the intervention. The nurse was interviewed after the last visit of the last participant. These were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes were identified by one author through framework analysis of the transcripts, and cross-checked by another.ResultsMost participants found the advice from the nurse easy to follow and were satisfied with the package, though some felt that too much information was provided too soon. The intervention changed their perception of managing knee pain, learning that it can be improved with self-management. However, participants thought that the most challenging part of the intervention was fitting the exercise regime into their daily routine. The nurse found discussion of goal setting to be challenging.ConclusionThe nurse-led package of care is acceptable within a research setting. The results are promising and will be applied in a feasibility randomised-controlled trial.

Background and ObjectivesCognitive and emotional changes affect the majority of individuals with acquired brain injury (ABI) and are associated with poorer outcomes. The evidence for “siloed” rehabilitation approaches targeting cognition and mood separately remains mixed. Valued living (i.e., acting consistently with personal values) is associated with better psychological functioning and participation in work and other productive activities. Rehabilitation interventions that concurrently address cognitive and emotional barriers to valued living may therefore result in improved outcomes. VaLiANT (Valued Living After Neurological Trauma) is an 8-week group intervention developed by our team, which uniquely combines cognitive rehabilitation and psychological therapy to improve wellbeing and meaningful participation (i.e., valued living) following ABI.MethodThis protocol describes the design and implementation of a Phase II parallel-group randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessors, to evaluate the potential efficacy of VaLiANT and the feasibility of a Phase III trial. Participants are adults with a history of ABI at least 3 months prior to study entry, who experience cognitive and/or emotional difficulties and associated reduced participation in valued activities. Random allocation to the treatment condition (8-week VaLiANT group program) or a usual care waitlist control condition occurs at a 2:1 treatment: control ratio. The primary outcome is wellbeing, measured by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale. Secondary outcomes include measures of valued living, mood, cognitive complaints, quality of life, community participation, post-traumatic growth, and self-efficacy. All measures are collected across three time points by blinded assessors (baseline, 8-week follow-up, 16-week follow-up). Trial feasibility will be evaluated against recruitment rates, drop-out rates, intervention acceptability, and treatment fidelity (manual adherence and therapist competence).DiscussionThis trial will extend current knowledge on how to improve long-term outcomes following ABI by evaluating an innovative integrated, multi-domain approach to rehabilitation concurrently addressing cognitive and emotional barriers to participation in meaningful life roles.

Abstract Background People with dementia progressively lose cognitive and functional abilities. Interventions promoting exercise and activity may slow decline. We developed a novel intervention to promote activity and independence and prevent falls in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or early dementia. We successfully undertook a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) to refine the intervention and research delivery. We are now delivering a multi-centred RCT to evaluate its clinical and cost-effectiveness. Methods We will recruit 368 people with MCI or early dementia (Montreal Cognitive Assessment score 13–25) and a family member or carer from memory assessment clinics, other community health or social care venues or an online register (the National Institute for Health Research Join Dementia Research). Participants will be randomised to an individually tailored activity and exercise programme delivered using motivational theory to promote adherence and continued engagement, with up to 50 supervised sessions over one year, or a brief falls prevention assessment (control). The intervention will be delivered in participants’ homes by trained physiotherapists, occupational therapists and therapy assistants. We will measure disabilities in activities of daily living, physical activity, balance, cognition, mood, quality of life, falls, carer strain and healthcare and social care use. We will use a mixed methods approach to conduct a process evaluation to assess staff training and delivery of the intervention, and to identify individual- and context-level mechanisms affecting intervention engagement and activity maintenance. We will undertake a health economic evaluation to determine if the intervention is cost-effective. Discussion We describe the protocol for a multi-centre RCT that will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a therapy programme designed to promote activity and independence amongst people living with dementia. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN15320670. Registered on 4 September 2018.

Objectives To evaluate fidelity of delivery of a nurse-led non-pharmacological complex intervention for knee pain.Setting Secondary care. Single-centre study.Study design Mixed methods study.Participants Eighteen adults with chronic knee pain.Inclusion criteria Age >40 years, knee pain present for longer than 3 months, knee pain for most days of the previous month, at least moderate pain in two of the five domains of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain scale.Interventions Nurse-led non-pharmacological intervention comprising assessment, education, exercise, use of hot/cold treatments, footwear modification, walking aids and weight-loss advice (if required).Outcome(s) Primary: fidelity of delivery of intervention, secondary: nurses’ experience of delivering intervention.Methods Each intervention session with every participant was video recorded and formed part of fidelity assessment. Fidelity checklists were completed by the research nurse after each session and by an independent researcher, after viewing the video-recordings blinded to nurse ratings. Fidelity scores (%), percentage agreement and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were calculated. Two semi-structured interviews were conducted with the research nurse.Results Fourteen participants completed all visits. 62 treatment sessions took place. Nurse self-report and assessor video rating scores for all 62 treatment sessions were included in fidelity assessment. Overall fidelity was higher on nurse self-report (97.7%) than on objective video-rating (84.2%). Percentage agreement between nurse self-report and video-rating was 73.3% (95% CI 71.3 to 75.3). Fidelity was lowest for advice on footwear and walking aids. The nurse reported difficulty advising on thermal treatments, footwear and walking aids, and did not feel confident negotiating achievable and realistic goals with participants.Conclusions A trained research nurse can deliver most components of a non-pharmacological intervention for knee pain to a high degree of fidelity. Future research should assess intervention fidelity in a routine clinical setting, and examine its clinical and cost-effectiveness.Trial registration number NCT03670706.

Objectives To capture the complexities and unique experience of a newly formed multidisciplinary and multicentre research team developing and deploying a COVID-19 study and to identify lessons learnt.Design Co-autoethnographic study.Setting Staff at two UK academic institutions, a national charity and two major UK hospitals.Participants Researchers, clinicians, academics, statisticians and analysts, patient and public involvement representatives and national charity.Methods The sampling frame was any content discussed or shared between research team members (emails, meeting minutes, etc), standard observational dimensions and reflective interviews with team members. Data were thematically analysed.Results Data from 34 meetings and >50 emails between 17 March and 5 August 2020 were analysed. The analysis yielded seven themes with ‘Managing our stress’ as an overarching theme.Conclusions Mutual respect, flexibility and genuine belief that team members are doing the best they can under the circumstances are essential for completing a time-consuming study, requiring a rapid response during a pandemic. Acknowledging and managing stress and a shared purpose can moderate many barriers, such as the lack of face-to-face interactions, leading to effective team working.

Background: Cognitive–behavioural therapy aims to increase quality of life by changing cognitive and behavioural factors that maintain problematic symptoms. A previous overview of cognitive–behavioural therapy systematic reviews suggested that cognitive–behavioural therapy was effective for many conditions. However, few of the included reviews synthesised randomised controlled trials. Objectives: This project was undertaken to map the quality and gaps in the cognitive–behavioural therapy systematic review of randomised controlled trial evidence base. Panoramic meta-analyses were also conducted to identify any across-condition general effects of cognitive–behavioural therapy. Data sources: The overview was designed with cognitive–behavioural therapy patients, clinicians and researchers. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Child Development & Adolescent Studies, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and OpenGrey databases were searched from 1992 to January 2019. Review methods: Study inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) fulfil the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination criteria; (2) intervention reported as cognitive–behavioural therapy or including one cognitive and one behavioural element; (3) include a synthesis of cognitive–behavioural therapy trials; (4) include either health-related quality of life, depression, anxiety or pain outcome; and (5) available in English. Review quality was assessed with A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)-2. Reviews were quality assessed and data were extracted in duplicate by two independent researchers, and then mapped according to condition, population, context and quality. The effects from high-quality reviews were pooled within condition groups, using a random-effect panoramic meta-analysis. If the across-condition heterogeneity was I2

Background: The global incidence of traumatic brain injuries is rising, with at least 80% being classified as mild. These mild injuries are not visible on routine clinical imaging. The potential clinical role of a specific imaging biomarker be it diagnostic, prognostic or directing and monitoring progress of personalised treatment and rehabilitation has driven the exploration of several new neuroimaging modalities. This systematic review examined the evidence for magnetoencephalography (MEG) to provide an imaging biomarker in mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods: Our review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO: CRD42019151387. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, trial registers, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and conference abstracts and identified 37 papers describing MEG changes in mTBI eligible for inclusion. Since meta-analysis was not possible, based on the heterogeneity of reported outcomes, we provide a narrative synthesis of results. Results: The two most promising MEG biomarkers are excess resting state low frequency power, and widespread connectivity changes in all frequency bands. These may represent biomarkers with potential for diagnostic application, which reflect time sensitive changes, or may be capable of offering clinically relevant prognostic information. In addition, the rich data that MEG produces are well-suited to new methods of machine learning analysis, which is now being actively explored. Interpretation: MEG reveals several promising biomarkers, in the absence of structural abnormalities demonstrable with either computerised tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. This review has not identified sufficient evidence to support routine clinical use of MEG in mTBI currently. However, verifying MEG’s potential would help meet an urgent clinical need within civilian, sports and military medicine.

Introduction Knee pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) is a common cause of disability. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence OA guidelines recommend education, exercise and weight loss advice (if overweight) as core interventions before pharmacological adjuncts. However, implementation of these in primary care is often suboptimal. This study aims to develop a complex intervention with non-pharmacological and pharmacological components that can be delivered by nurses. The feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and feasibility of undertaking a future cohort randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be explored.Methods and analysis In phase 1, we will develop a training programme for nurses and evaluate the fidelity and acceptability of the non-pharmacological element of the intervention. Fidelity checklists completed by the nurse will be compared with video analysis of the treatment sessions. Patients and nurses will be interviewed to determine the acceptability of the intervention and explore challenges to intervention delivery. The non-pharmacological component will be modified based on the findings. In phase 2, we will assess the feasibility of conducting a cohort RCT comprising both the pharmacological and modified non-pharmacological components. We will compare three groups: group A will receive the non-pharmacological components delivered before pharmacological components; group B will receive pharmacological components followed by the non-pharmacological components; and group C (control arm) will continue to receive usual care. Study outcomes will be collected at three time points: baseline, 13 and 26 weeks after randomisation. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with a sample of participants from each of the two active intervention arms.Ethics and dissemination This protocol was approved by the East Midlands-Derby Research Ethics Committee (18/EM/0288) and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (protocol v4.0, 10/02/2020). The study will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidance and standards. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed academic journals.Trial registration number NCT03670706

Background: Depression is common in multiple sclerosis (MS); however, its assessment is complicated by biological processes. In this context it is important to consider the performance of depression screening measures including that their factor structure is consistent with expectation. This study sought to identify the factor structure of the Center for Epidemiological Study - Depression Scale (CES-D) in people with MS (PwMS). Methods: Participants (N = 493) were those who had consented to take part in a large three-phase longitudinal study of depression in PwMS. CES-D questionnaires completed at phase 1 of the study were utilised. An error in the questionnaire meant it was most appropriate to consider data for 19 of the 20 CES-D questionnaire items. The data was split into two samples by a random selection process to create an exploratory, model development sample and a validation sample. The first sample was subject to confirmatory factor analysis. Following examination of model fit and specification errors, the original model was modified. The revised model was tested in the confirmation sample to assess reproducibility. Results: The analysis results supported the original four factor solution for the CES-D, that is: Depressed Affect, Positive Affect, Somatic Complaints/Activity Inhibition, and Interpersonal Difficulties. Conclusions: The CES-D appears to have a coherent structure with which to examine depression in PwMS.

Background: Post-stroke fatigue (PSF) is one of the most common and frustrating outcomes of stroke. It has a high prevalence and it can persist for many years after stroke. PSF itself contributes to a wider range of undesirable outcomes that affect all aspects of daily life. The aim of this review was to identify and summarise the most recent research on PSF, in order to update the evidence base. Methods: We updated an existing review (Hinkle et al. 2017) systematically searching CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and PubMed to cover new research studies between 1st March 2016 and the search date (19th January 2020). We included interventional and observational research, and clinical practice guidelines that were not covered in the original review. After duplicate removal in EndNote, two reviewers screened the search results in Rayyan, and data from eligible full texts were extracted onto an Excel spreadsheet. Finally, we used RobotReviewer and a human reviewer to assess the risk of bias of randomised trials for this scoping review. Results: We identified 45 records for 30 studies (14 observational, 10 interventional studies, and 6 guidelines). Apart from one, the interventional studies were single-centred, had high risk of bias and small sample size (median 50). They investigated exercise, pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, education, and light therapy. Observational studies mainly reported the factors related to PSF including co-morbidities, depression and anxiety, quality of life, activities of daily living, stroke severity, medication use and polypharmacy, polymorphism, pain, apathy, limb heaviness, neuroticism, mobility, and thyroid-stimulating hormone. Guidelines either did not report on PSF or, when reported, their recommendations were supported by little or low level of evidence. Conclusion: Although we identified a number of recent studies which have added to our current knowledge on PSF, none are robust enough to change current clinical practice.

Abstract Background The promotion of smoking cessation within lung cancer screening could lead to benefits for smoking-related disease and improve cost-effectiveness of screening. Little is known about how smokers respond to lung cancer screening and how this impacts smoking behaviour. We aimed to understand how lung cancer screening influences individual motivations about smoking, including in those who have stopped smoking since screening. Methods Thirty one long-term smokers aged 51–74 took part in semi-structured interviews about smoking. They had been screened with the EarlyCDT-Lung Test (13 positive result; 18 negative) as part of the Early Cancer Detection Test Lung Cancer Scotland Study. They were purposively sampled for interview based on their self-reported post-screening smoking behaviour. Eleven participants had stopped smoking since screening. Verbatim interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Results Two key overarching themes were interpretations of screening test results and emotional responses to those interpretations. Participants’ understanding of the risk implied by their test result was often inaccurate, for example a negative result interpreted as an ‘all-clear’ from lung cancer and a positive result as meaning lung cancer would definitely develop. Those interpretations led to emotional responses (fear, shock, worry, relief, indifference) influencing motivations about smoking. Other themes included a wake-up call causing changes in perceived risk of smoking-related disease, a feeling that now is the time to stop smoking and family influences. There was no clear pattern in smoking motivations in those who received positive or negative test results. Of those who had stopped smoking, some cited screening experiences as the sole motivation, some cited screening along with other coinciding factors, and others cited non-screening reasons. Cues to change were experienced at different stages of the screening process. Some participants indicated they underwent screening to try and stop smoking, while others expressed little or no desire to stop. Conclusions We observed complex and individualised motivations about smoking following lung cancer screening. To be most effective, smoking cessation support in this context should explore understanding of screening test results and may need to be highly tailored to individual emotional responses to screening.

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.

Exercise-based therapy may improve health status for people with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) or dementia but cannot work without adherence, which has proven difficult. This review aimed to evaluate strategies to support adherence among people with MCI or Dementia and was completed in Nottingham/UK in 2017. A narrative synthesis was used to investigate the effectiveness or usefulness of adherence support strategies. Fifteen adherence support strategies were used including theoretical underpinning (programmes based on behavior change theories), individual tailoring, worksheets and exercise booklets, goal setting, phone calls or reminders, newsletters, support to overcome exercise barriers, information, adaptation periods, individual supervision, support for clinicians, group setting, music, accelerometers/pedometers and emphasis on enjoyable activities. Music was the only strategy that was investigated in a comparative design but was found to be effective only for those who were generally interested in participating in activities. A wide range of adherence support strategies are being included in exercise interventions for people with MCI or dementia, but the evidence regarding their effectiveness is limited.

Background: People with multiple sclerosis have problems with memory and attention. The effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation has not been established. Objectives: The objectives were to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a cognitive rehabilitation programme for people with multiple sclerosis. Design: This was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in which participants were randomised in a ratio of 6 : 5 to receive cognitive rehabilitation plus usual care or usual care alone. Participants were assessed at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Setting: The trial was set in hospital neurology clinics and community services. Participants: Participants were people with multiple sclerosis who had cognitive problems, were aged 18–69 years, could travel to attend group sessions and gave informed consent. Intervention: The intervention was a group cognitive rehabilitation programme delivered weekly by an assistant psychologist to between four and six participants for 10 weeks. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale – Psychological subscale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included results from the Everyday Memory Questionnaire, the 30-Item General Health Questionnaire, the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version and a service use questionnaire from participants, and the Everyday Memory Questionnaire – relative version and the Modified Carer Strain Index from a relative or friend of the participant. Results: Of the 449 participants randomised, 245 were allocated to cognitive rehabilitation (intervention group) and 204 were allocated to usual care (control group). Of these, 214 in the intervention group and 173 in the control group were included in the primary analysis. There was no clinically important difference in the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale – Psychological subscale score between the two groups at the 12-month follow-up (adjusted difference in means –0.6, 95% confidence interval –1.5 to 0.3; p = 0.20). There were no important differences between the groups in relation to cognitive abilities, fatigue, employment, or carer strain at follow-up. However, there were differences, although small, between the groups in the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale – Psychological subscale score at 6 months (adjusted difference in means –0.9, 95% confidence interval –1.7 to –0.1; p = 0.03) and in everyday memory on the Everyday Memory Questionnaire as reported by participants at 6 (adjusted difference in means –5.3, 95% confidence interval –8.7 to –1.9) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means –4.4, 95% confidence interval –7.8 to –0.9) and by relatives at 6 (adjusted difference in means –5.4, 95% confidence interval –9.1 to –1.7) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means –5.5, 95% confidence interval –9.6 to –1.5) in favour of the cognitive rehabilitation group. There were also differences in mood on the 30-Item General Health Questionnaire at 6 (adjusted difference in means –3.4, 95% confidence interval –5.9 to –0.8) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means –3.4, 95% confidence interval –6.2 to –0.6) in favour of the cognitive rehabilitation group. A qualitative analysis indicated perceived benefits of the intervention. There was no evidence of a difference in costs (adjusted difference in means –£574.93, 95% confidence interval –£1878.93 to £729.07) or quality-adjusted life-year gain (adjusted difference in means 0.00, 95% confidence interval –0.02 to 0.02). No safety concerns were raised and no deaths were reported. Limitations: The trial included a sample of participants who had relatively severe cognitive problems in daily life. The trial was not powered to perform subgroup analyses. Participants could not be blinded to treatment allocation. Conclusions: This cognitive rehabilitation programme had no long-term benefits on quality of life for people with multiple sclerosis. Future work: Future research should evaluate the selection of those who may benefit from cognitive rehabilitation. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN09697576. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 4. See the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library website for further project information.

Objectives To measure the clinical, structural and functional changes of an individualised structured cognitive rehabilitation in mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) population.Setting A single centre study, Malaysia.Participants Adults aged between 18 and 60 years with mTBI as a result of road traffic accident, with no previous history of head trauma, minimum of 9 years education and abnormal cognition at 3 months will be included. The exclusion criteria include pre-existing chronic illness or neurological/psychiatric condition, long-term medication that affects cognitive/psychological status, clinical evidence of substance intoxication at the time of injury and major polytrauma. Based on multiple estimated calculations, the minimum intended sample size is 50 participants (Cohen’s d effect size=0.35; alpha level of 0.05; 85% power to detect statistical significance; 40% attrition rate).Interventions Intervention group will receive individualised structured cognitive rehabilitation. Control group will receive the best patient-centred care for attention disorders. Therapy frequency for both groups will be 1 hour per week for 12 weeks.Outcome measures Primary: Neuropsychological Assessment Battery-Screening Module (S-NAB) scores. Secondary: Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) parameters and Goal Attainment Scaling score (GAS).Results Results will include descriptive statistics of population demographics, CogniPlus cognitive program and metacognitive strategies. The effect of intervention will be the effect size of S-NAB scores and mean GAS T scores. DTI parameters will be compared between groups via repeated measure analysis. Correlation analysis of outcome measures will be calculated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient.Conclusion This is a complex clinical intervention with multiple outcome measures to provide a comprehensive evidence-based treatment model.Ethics and dissemination The study protocol was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee UMMC (MREC ID NO: 2016928–4293). The findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.Trial registration number NCT03237676

Background: There is currently insufficient evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of psychological therapies for post-stroke depression. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of undertaking a definitive trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural activation (BA) compared with usual stroke care for treating post-stroke depression. Design: Parallel-group, feasibility, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with nested qualitative research and a health economic evaluation. Setting: Acute and community stroke services in three sites in England. Participants: Community-dwelling adults 3 months to 5 years post stroke who are depressed, as determined by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) or the Visual Analogue Mood Scales ‘Sad’ item. Exclusions: patients who are blind and/or deaf, have dementia, are unable to communicate in English, do not have mental capacity to consent, are receiving treatment for depression at the time of stroke onset or are currently receiving psychological intervention. Randomisation and blinding: Participants were randomised (1 : 1 ratio) to BA or usual stroke care. Randomisation was conducted using a computer-generated list with random permuted blocks of varying sizes, stratified by site. Participants and therapists were aware of the allocation, but outcome assessors were blind. Interventions: The intervention arm received up to 15 sessions of BA over 4 months. BA aims to improve mood by increasing people’s level of enjoyable or valued activities. The control arm received usual care only. Main outcome measures: Primary feasibility outcomes concerned feasibility of recruitment to the main trial, acceptability of research procedures and measures, appropriateness of baseline and outcome measures, retention of participants and potential value of conducting the definitive trial. Secondary feasibility outcomes concerned the delivery of the intervention. The primary clinical outcome 6 months post randomisation was the PHQ-9. Secondary clinical outcomes were Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire – Hospital version, Nottingham Leisure Questionnaire, Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living, Carer Strain Index, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version and health-care resource use questionnaire. Results: Forty-eight participants were recruited in 27 centre-months of recruitment, at a recruitment rate of 1.8 participants per centre per month. The 25 participants randomised to receive BA attended a mean of 8.5 therapy sessions [standard deviation (SD) 4.4 therapy sessions]; 23 participants were allocated to usual care. Outcome assessments were completed by 39 (81%) participants (BA, n = 18; usual care, n = 21). Mean PHQ-9 scores at 6-month follow-up were 10.1 points (SD 6.9 points) and 14.4 points (SD 5.1 points) in the BA and control groups, respectively, a difference of –3.8 (95% confidence interval –6.9 to –0.6) after adjusting for baseline PHQ-9 score and centre, representing a reduction in depression in the BA arm. Therapy was delivered as intended. BA was acceptable to participants, carers and therapists. Value-of-information analysis indicates that the benefits of conducting a definitive trial would be likely to outweigh the costs. It is estimated that a sample size of between 580 and 623 participants would be needed for a definitive trial. Limitations: Target recruitment was not achieved, although we identified methods to improve recruitment. Conclusions: The Behavioural Activation Therapy for Depression after Stroke trial was feasible with regard to the majority of outcomes. The outstanding issue is whether or not a sufficient number of participants could be recruited within a reasonable time frame for a definitive trial. Future work is required to identify whether or not there are sufficient sites that are able to deliver the services required for a definitive trial. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12715175. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 47. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: People with traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) commonly report memory impairments. These are persistent, debilitating and reduce quality of life, but patients do not routinely receive memory rehabilitation after discharge from hospital. Objective: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group memory rehabilitation programme for people with TBI. Design: Multicentre, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. Qualitative and health economic evaluations were also undertaken. Setting: Community settings in nine sites in England. Participants: Participants were aged 18–69 years, had undergone a TBI > 3 months prior to recruitment, reported memory problems, were able to travel to a site to attend group sessions, could communicate in English and gave informed consent. Randomisation and blinding: Clusters of four to six participants were randomised to the memory rehabilitation arm or the usual-care arm on a 1 : 1 ratio. Randomisation was based on a computer-generated pseudo-random code using random permuted blocks of randomly varying size, stratified by study site. Participants and therapists were aware of the treatment allocation whereas outcome assessors were blinded. Interventions: In the memory rehabilitation arm 10 weekly sessions of a manualised memory rehabilitation programme were provided in addition to usual care. Participants were taught restitution strategies to retrain impaired memory functions and compensation strategies to enable them to cope with memory problems. The usual-care arm received usual care only. Main outcome measures: Outcomes were assessed at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Primary outcome: patient-completed Everyday Memory Questionnaire – patient version (EMQ-p) at 6 months’ follow-up. Secondary outcomes: Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test – third edition (RBMT-3), General Health Questionnaire 30-item version, European Brain Injury Questionnaire, Everyday Memory Questionnaire – relative version and individual goal attainment. Costs (based on a UK NHS and Personal Social Services perspective) were collected using a service use questionnaire, with the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, used to derive quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). A Markov model was developed to explore cost-effectiveness at 5 and 10 years, with a 3.5% discount applied. Results: We randomised 328 participants (memory rehabilitation, n = 171; usual care, n = 157), with 129 in the memory rehabilitation arm and 122 in the usual-care arm included in the primary analysis. We found no clinically important difference on the EMQ-p between the two arms at 6 months’ follow-up (adjusted difference in mean scores –2.1, 95% confidence interval –6.7 to 2.5; p = 0.37). For secondary outcomes, differences favouring the memory rehabilitation arm were observed at 6 months’ follow-up for the RBMT-3 and goal attainment, but remained only for goal attainment at 12 months’ follow-up. There were no differences between arms in mood or quality of life. The qualitative results suggested positive experiences of participating in the trial and of attending the groups. Participants reported that memory rehabilitation was not routinely accessible in usual care. The primary health economics outcome at 12 months found memory rehabilitation to be £26.89 cheaper than usual care but less effective, with an incremental QALY loss of 0.007. Differences in costs and effects were not statistically significant and non-parametric bootstrapping demonstrated considerable uncertainty in these findings. No safety concerns were raised and no deaths were reported. Limitations: As a pragmatic trial, we had broad inclusion criteria and, therefore, there was considerable heterogeneity within the sample. The study was not powered to perform further subgroup analyses. Participants and therapists could not be blinded to treatment allocation. Conclusions: The group memory rehabilitation delivered in this trial is very unlikely to lead to clinical benefits or to be a cost-effective treatment for people with TBI in the community. Future studies should examine the selection of participants who may benefit most from memory rehabilitation. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN65792154. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

ObjectiveTo explore the perceptions of older people with mild dementia and mild cognitive impairment, and their family carers, about falling, falls risk and the acceptability of falls prevention interventions.DesignQualitative study involving thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with patient and relative dyads.Participants and setting20 patient/ relative dyads recruited from Memory Assessment Services and Falls Prevention Services in the United Kingdom.ResultsThe findings are presented under four key themes: attitudes to falls, attitudes to falls prevention interventions, barriers and facilitators, and the role of relatives. Participants' attitudes to falls interventions were varied and sometimes conflicting. Some worried about falls, but many resisted identifying themselves as potential 'fallers', even despite having fallen, and rejected the idea of needing the help that structured interventions signify. Participants preferred to focus on coping in the present rather than anticipating, and preparing for, an uncertain future. Falls prevention interventions were acknowledged to be valuable in principle and if required in the future but often felt to be not necessary or appropriate at present.ConclusionsThis study of how persons with cognitive impairment, and their relatives, view falls risk and prevention mirror findings relating to the wider population of older persons without dementia. Participants did not generally see falls prevention interventions as currently relevant to themselves. The challenge for clinicians is how to present interventions with understanding and respect for the older person's identity. They must identify and address goals that patients and relatives value. Simplistic or paternalistic approaches will likely fail. Individualised interventions which focus on maintaining independence and preserving quality of life are more likely to be acceptable by supporting a positive self-image for patients and their relatives.

Background People who have had a stroke or a Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) can experience psychological and/or cognitive difficulties. The body of research for psychological and neuropsychological interventions after stroke is growing, however, published systematic reviews vary in scope and methodology, with different types and severity of strokes included, and at times, diverse conclusions drawn about the effectiveness of the interventions evaluated. In this umbrella review, we aim to systematically summarise the existing systematic reviews evaluating psychological interventions for mood and cognition post-stroke/TIA. Methods We will conduct this umbrella review according to the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The following databases will be searched from inception: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Epistemonikos. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published until the search date will be included. Reviews including psychological interventions addressing mood and/or cognition outcomes for any stroke type or severity will be screened for eligibility. A narrative synthesis, including content analysis, will be used. Each stage of the review will be processed by two independent reviewers and a third reviewer will be considered to resolve disagreements. The methodological quality of the included reviews will be assessed using AMSTAR 2. Discussion Existing systematic reviews provide varied evidence on the effectiveness of psychological interventions post-stroke/TIA. This umbrella review aims to summarise knowledge and evidence on different types of psychological and neuropsychological interventions targeting mood and cognition. Findings will highlight important knowledge gaps and help prioritise future research questions. Systematic Review Registration This protocol was prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on November 15, 2022; PROSPERO CRD42022375947.

Background People who have had a stroke or a Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) can experience psychological and/or cognitive difficulties. The body of research for psychological and neuropsychological interventions after stroke is growing, however, published systematic reviews vary in scope and methodology, with different types and severity of strokes included, and at times, diverse conclusions drawn about the effectiveness of the interventions evaluated. In this umbrella review, we aim to systematically summarise the existing systematic reviews evaluating psychological interventions for mood and cognition post-stroke/TIA. Methods We will conduct this umbrella review according to the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The following databases will be searched from inception: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Epistemonikos. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published until the search date will be included. Reviews including psychological interventions addressing mood and/or cognition outcomes for any stroke type or severity will be screened for eligibility. A narrative synthesis, including content analysis, will be used. Each stage of the review will be processed by two independent reviewers and a third reviewer will be considered to resolve disagreements. The methodological quality of the included reviews will be assessed using AMSTAR 2. Discussion Existing systematic reviews provide varied evidence on the effectiveness of psychological interventions post-stroke/TIA. This umbrella review aims to summarise knowledge and evidence on different types of psychological and neuropsychological interventions targeting mood and cognition. Findings will highlight important knowledge gaps and help prioritise future research questions. Systematic Review Registration This protocol was prospectively registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on November 15, 2022; PROSPERO CRD42022375947.

Background: Post-stroke fatigue (PSF) is one of the most common and frustrating outcomes of stroke. It has a high prevalence and it can persist for many years after stroke. PSF itself contributes to a wider range of undesirable outcomes that affect all aspects of daily life. The aim of this review was to identify and summarise the most recent research on PSF, in order to update the evidence base. Methods: We updated an existing review (Hinkle et al. 2017) systematically searching CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and PubMed to cover new research studies between 1 st March 2016 and the search date (19 th January 2020). We included interventional and observational research, and clinical practice guidelines that were not covered in the original review. After duplicate removal in EndNote, two reviewers screened the search results in Rayyan, and data from eligible full texts were extracted onto an Excel spreadsheet. Finally, we used RobotReviewer and a human reviewer to assess the risk of bias of randomised trials for this scoping review. Results: We identified 45 records for 30 studies (14 observational, 10 interventional studies, and 6 guidelines). Apart from one, the interventional studies were single-centred, had high risk of bias and small sample size (median 50). They investigated exercise, pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, education, and light therapy. Observational studies mainly reported the factors related to PSF including co-morbidities, depression and anxiety, quality of life, activities of daily living, stroke severity, medication use and polypharmacy, polymorphism, pain, apathy, limb heaviness, neuroticism, mobility, and thyroid-stimulating hormone. Guidelines either did not report on PSF or, when reported, their recommendations were supported by little or low level of evidence. Conclusion: Although we identified a number of recent studies which have added to our current knowledge on PSF, none are robust enough to change current clinical practice.