Befriending carers of people with dementia: randomised controlled trial

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of a voluntary sector based befriending scheme in improving psychological wellbeing and quality of life for family carers of people with dementia.Design Single blind randomised controlled trial.Setting Community settings in East Anglia and London.Participants 236 family carers of people with primary progressive dementia.Intervention Contact with a befriender facilitator and offer of match with a trained lay volunteer befriender compared with no befriender facilitator contact; all participants continued to receive “usual care.”Main outcome measures Carers’ mood (hospital anxiety and depression scale—depression) and health related quality of life (EuroQoL) at 15 months post-randomisation.Results The intention to treat analysis showed no benefit for the intervention “access to a befriender facilitator” on the primary outcome measure or on any of the secondary outcome measures.Conclusions In common with many carers’ services, befriending schemes are not taken up by all carers, and providing access to a befriending scheme is not effective in improving wellbeing.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN08130075.     

Multifactorial day hospital intervention to reduce falls in high risk older people in primary care: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN46584556]

Background

There are many barriers to patient participation in randomised controlled trials of cancer treatments. To increase participation in trials, strategies need to be identified to overcome these barriers. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of interventions to overcome barriers to patient participation in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of cancer treatments.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted. Published and unpublished studies in any language were searched for in fifteen electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO, from inception to the end of 2004. Studies of any interventions to improve cancer patient participation in RCTs, which reported the change in recruitment rates, were eligible for inclusion. RCTs and non-randomised controlled trials as well as before and after studies reporting baseline rates specific to the population being investigated were included. Data were extracted by one reviewer into structured summary tables and checked for accuracy by a second reviewer. Each included study was assessed against a checklist for methodological quality by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. A narrative synthesis was conducted.

Results

Eight studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria: three RCTs, two non-randomised controlled trials and three observational studies. Six of the studies had an intervention that had some relevance to the UK. There was no robust evidence that any of the interventions investigated led to an increase in cancer patient participation in RCTs, though one good quality RCT found that urologists and nurses were equally effective at recruiting participants to a treatment trial for prostate cancer. Although there was no evidence of an effect in any of the studies, the evidence was not of sufficient quality to be able to conclude that these interventions therefore do not work.

Conclusion

There is not a strong evidence-base for interventions that increase cancer patient participation in randomised trials. Further research is required to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies to increase participation in cancer treatment trials.     

Cluster randomised trial of a targeted multifactorial intervention to prevent falls among older people in hospital

Objective To determine the efficacy of a targeted multifactorial falls prevention programme in elderly care wards with relatively short lengths of stay.Design Cluster randomised trial.Setting 24 elderly care wards in 12 hospitals in Sydney, Australia.Participants 3999 patients, mean age 79 years, with a median hospital stay of seven days.Interventions A nurse and physiotherapist each worked for 25 hours a week for three months in all intervention wards. They provided a targeted multifactorial intervention that included a risk assessment of falls, staff and patient education, drug review, modification of bedside and ward environments, an exercise programme, and alarms for selected patients.Main outcome measure Falls during hospital stay.Results Intervention and control wards were similar at baseline for previous rates of falls and individual patient characteristics. Overall, 381 falls occurred during the study. No difference was found in fall rates during follow-up between intervention and control wards: respectively, 9.26 falls per 1000 bed days and 9.20 falls per 1000 bed days (P=0.96). The incidence rate ratio adjusted for individual lengths of stay and previous fall rates in the ward was 0.96 (95% confidence interval 0.72 to 1.28).Conclusion A targeted multifactorial falls prevention programme was not effective among older people in hospital wards with relatively short lengths of stay.Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRNO 12605000467639.     

Consequences of assessment and intervention among elderly people: a three year randomised controlled trial.

Over three years 285 randomly selected subjects aged 75 years or more and living in a suburb of Copenhagen were visited every three months in their own homes (the intervention group) to assess whether scheduled medically and socially preventive intervention would influence the number of admissions to hospitals or nursing homes, the number of contacts with general practice, or mortality. A randomly selected group of 287 people of the same age and sex were visited during the final three months of the study (the control group). Two hundred and nineteen admissions to hospitals (4884 bed days) were registered for the intervention group compared with 271 (6442 bed days) for the control group. Especially during the second half of the study, a significant reduction in the number of admissions to hospitals was seen in the intervention group. Twenty people in the intervention group and 29 in the control group moved into nursing homes (p greater than 0.05). The corresponding numbers of deaths were 56 and 75 (p less than 0.05). No difference was seen in the number of contacts with general practice. Significantly fewer emergency medical calls, however, were registered for the intervention group. Subjects in the intervention group benefited from the regular visits and the increased distribution of aids and modifications to their homes to which these led. The regular visits probably also produced an important increase in confidence.     

Psychosocial group intervention to enhance self-management skills of people with dementia and their caregivers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: After diagnosis of a dementing illness patients and their spouses have many concerns related to the disease and their future. This often leads to poor psychological well-being and reduced health related quality of life (HRQoL) of the family. Support for self-management skills has been proven to be an effective method to improve prognosis of asthma, heart failure and osteoarthritis. However, self-management interventions have not been studied in dementia. Therefore, our aim was to examine in an objective-oriented group intervention the efficacy of self-management support program (SMP) on the HRQoL of dementia patients and their spousal caregivers as well as on the sense of competence and psychological well-being of care-givers. METHODS: During the years 2011-12, 160 dementia patients and their spouses will be recruited from memory clinics and randomized into two arms: 80 patients for group-based SMP sessions including topics selected by the participants, 80 patients will serve as controls in for usual community care. Sessions may include topics on dementia, community services, active lifestyle and prevention for cognitive decline, spousal relationship, future planning and emotional well-being. The patients and spouses will have their separate group sessions (10 participants/group) once a week for 8 weeks. Main outcome measures will be patients' HRQoL (15D) and spousal caregivers' HRQoL (RAND-36), and sense of competence (SCQ). Secondary measures will be caregivers' psychological well-being (GHQ-12) and coping resources, patients' depression, cognition and signs of frailty. Data concerning admissions to institutional care and the use and costs of health and social services will be collected during a two year follow-up. DISCUSSION: This is a "proof -of-concept" study to explore the efficacy of group support for self-management skills among dementia families. It will also provide data on cost-effectiveness of the intervention.     

Impact of assessment and intervention by a health and social care professional team in the emergency department on the quality,safety, and clinical effectiveness of care for older adults: A randomised controlled trial

BackgroundOlder adults frequently attend the emergency department (ED) and experience high rates of adverse events following ED presentation. This randomised controlled trial evaluated the impact of early assessment and intervention by a dedicated team of health and social care professionals (HSCPs) in the ED on the quality, safety, and clinical effectiveness of care of older adults in the ED.Methods and findingsThis single-site randomised controlled trial included a sample of 353 patients aged ≥65 years (mean age = 79.6, SD = 7.01; 59.2% female) who presented with lower urgency complaints to the ED a university hospital in the Mid-West region of Ireland, during HSCP operational hours. The intervention consisted of early assessment and intervention carried out by a HSCP team comprising a senior medical social worker, senior occupational therapist, and senior physiotherapist. The primary outcome was ED length of stay. Secondary outcomes included rates of hospital admissions from the ED; hospital length of stay for admitted patients; patient satisfaction with index visit; ED revisits, mortality, nursing home admission, and unscheduled hospital admission at 30-day and 6-month follow-up; and patient functional status and quality of life (at index visit and follow-up). Demographic information included the patient’s gender, age, marital status, residential status, mode of arrival to the ED, source of referral, index complaint, triage category, falls, and hospitalisation history. Participants in the intervention group (n = 176) experienced a significantly shorter ED stay than the control group (n = 177) (6.4 versus 12.1 median hours, p < 0.001). Other significant differences (intervention versus control) included lower rates of hospital admissions from the ED (19.3% versus 55.9%, p < 0.001), higher levels of satisfaction with the ED visit (p = 0.008), better function at 30-day (p = 0.01) and 6-month follow-up (p = 0.03), better mobility (p = 0.02 at 30 days), and better self-care (p = 0.03 at 30 days; p = 0.009 at 6 months). No differences at follow-up were observed in terms of ED re-presentation or hospital admission. Study limitations include the inability to blind patients or ED staff to allocation due to the nature of the intervention, and a focus on early assessment and intervention in the ED rather than care integration following discharge.ConclusionsEarly assessment and intervention by a dedicated ED-based HSCP team reduced ED length of stay and the risk of hospital admissions among older adults, as well as improving patient satisfaction. Our findings support the effectiveness of an interdisciplinary model of care for key ED outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03739515","term_id":"NCT03739515"}}NCT03739515; registered on 12 November 2018.

Marica Cassarino and colleagues evaluate an intervention for early assessment of older patients in emergency care.     

Exercise intervention to prevent falls and enhance mobility in community dwellers after stroke: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background  

Stroke is the most common disabling neurological condition in adults. Falls and poor mobility are major contributors to stroke-related disability. Falls are more frequent and more likely to result in injury among stroke survivors than among the general older population. Currently there is good evidence that exercise can enhance mobility after stroke, yet ongoing exercise programs for general community-based stroke survivors are not routinely available. This randomised controlled trial will investigate whether exercise can reduce fall rates and increase mobility and physical activity levels in stroke survivors.     

Multidisciplinary transmural rehabilitation for older persons with a stroke: the design of a randomised controlled trial

Background

Stroke is one of the major causes of loss of independence, decreased quality of life and mortality among elderly people. About half of the elderly stroke patients discharged after rehabilitation in a nursing home still experience serious impairments in daily functioning one year post stroke, which can lead to difficulties in picking up and managing their social life. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of a new multidisciplinary transmural rehabilitation programme for older stroke patients.

Methods

A two group multicentre randomised controlled trial is used to evaluate the effects of the rehabilitation programme. The programme consists of three care modules: 1) neurorehabilitation treatment for elderly stroke patients; 2) empowerment training for patient and informal caregiver; and 3) stroke education for patient and informal caregiver. The total programme has a duration of between two and six months, depending on the individual problems of the patient and informal caregiver. The control group receives usual care in the nursing home and after discharge.Patients aged 65 years and over are eligible for study participation when they are admitted to a geriatric rehabilitation unit in a nursing home due to a recent stroke and are expected to be able to return to their original home environment after discharge. Data are gathered by face-to-face interviews, self-administered questionnaires, focus groups and registration forms. Primary outcomes for patients are activity level after stroke, functional dependence, perceived quality of life and social participation. Outcomes for informal caregivers are perceived care burden, objective care burden, quality of life and perceived health. Outcome measures of the process evaluation are implementation fidelity, programme deliverance and the opinion of the stroke professionals, patients and informal caregivers about the programme. Outcome measures of the economic evaluation are the healthcare utilisation and associated costs. Data are collected at baseline, and after six and 12 months. The first results of the study will be expected in 2014.

Trial registration

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Register Number ISRCTN62286281, The Dutch Trial Register NTR2412

     

Remedial therapy after stroke: a randomised controlled trial.

Of 1094 patients with a confirmed stroke admitted to Northwick Park, a district general hospital, 364 (33%) died while in hospital, 215 (20%) were fully recovered when discharged, and 329 (30%) were too frail or too ill from diseases other than stroke to be considered for active rehabilitation. Only 121 (11%) were suitable for intensive treatment. They and 12 patients referred direct to outpatients were allocated at random to one of three different courses of rehabilitation. Intensive was compared with conventional rehabilitation and with a third regimen which included no routine rehabilitation, but under which patients were encouraged to continue with exercises taught while in hospital and were regularly seen at home by a health visitor. Progress at three months and 12 months was measured by an index of activities of daily living. Improvement was greatest in those receiving intensive treatment, intermediate in those receiving conventional treatment, and least in those receiving no routine treatment. Decreasing intensity of treatment was associated with a significant increase in the proportions of patients who deteriorated and in the extent to which they deteriorated. Probably only a few stroke patients, mostly men, are suitable for intensive outpatient rehabilitation, but for those patients the treatment is effective and realistic.     

Multi-centre parallel arm randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based cognitive behavioural approach to managing fatigue in people with multiple sclerosis

Background  

Fatigue is one of the most commonly reported and debilitating symptoms of multiple sclerosis (MS); approximately two-thirds of people with MS consider it to be one of their three most troubling symptoms. It may limit or prevent participation in everyday activities, work, leisure, and social pursuits, reduce psychological well-being and is one of the key precipitants of early retirement. Energy effectiveness approaches have been shown to be effective in reducing MS-fatigue, increasing self-efficacy and improving quality of life. Cognitive behavioural approaches have been found to be effective for managing fatigue in other conditions, such as chronic fatigue syndrome, and more recently, in MS. The aim of this pragmatic trial is to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a recently developed group-based fatigue management intervention (that blends cognitive behavioural and energy effectiveness approaches) compared with current local practice.     

Multifactorial assessment and targeted intervention for preventing falls and injuries among older people in community and emergency care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of multifactorial assessment and intervention programmes to prevent falls and injuries among older adults recruited to trials in primary care, community, or emergency care settings.Design Systematic review of randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials, and meta-analysis.Data sources Six electronic databases (Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Social Science Citation Index) to 22 March 2007, reference lists of included studies, and previous reviews.Review methods Eligible studies were randomised or quasi-randomised trials that evaluated interventions to prevent falls that were based in emergency departments, primary care, or the community that assessed multiple risk factors for falling and provided or arranged for treatments to address these risk factors.Data extraction Outcomes were number of fallers, fall related injuries, fall rate, death, admission to hospital, contacts with health services, move to institutional care, physical activity, and quality of life. Methodological quality assessment included allocation concealment, blinding, losses and exclusions, intention to treat analysis, and reliability of outcome measurement. Results 19 studies, of variable methodological quality, were included. The combined risk ratio for the number of fallers during follow-up among 18 trials was 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.02) and for fall related injuries (eight trials) was 0.90 (0.68 to 1.20). No differences were found in admissions to hospital, emergency department attendance, death, or move to institutional care. Subgroup analyses found no evidence of different effects between interventions in different locations, populations selected for high risk of falls or unselected, and multidisciplinary teams including a doctor, but interventions that actively provide treatments may be more effective than those that provide only knowledge and referral.Conclusions Evidence that multifactorial fall prevention programmes in primary care, community, or emergency care settings are effective in reducing the number of fallers or fall related injuries is limited. Data were insufficient to assess fall and injury rates.     

Advice to use topical or oral ibuprofen for chronic knee pain in older people: randomised controlled trial and patient preference study

Objective To determine whether older patients with chronic knee pain should be advised to use topical or oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).Design Randomised controlled trial and patient preference study.Setting 26 general practices.Participants People aged ≥50 with knee pain: 282 in randomised trial and 303 in preference study. Interventions Advice to use topical or oral ibuprofen.Primary outcome measures WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) osteoarthritis index, major and minor adverse effects.Results Changes in global WOMAC scores at 12 months were equivalent. In the randomised trial the difference (topical minus oral) was two points (95% confidence interval −2 to 6); in the preference study, it was one point (−4 to 6). There were no differences in major adverse effects in the trial or study. The only significant differences in secondary outcomes were in the randomised trial. The oral group had more respiratory adverse effects (17% v 7%,95% confidence interval for difference −17% to −2%), the change in serum creatinine was 3.7 mmol/l less favourable (0.9 µmol/l to 6.5 µmol/l); and more participants changed treatments because of adverse effects (16% v 1%, −16% to −5%). In the topical group more participants had chronic pain grade III or IV at three months, and more participants changed treatment because of ineffectiveness.Conclusions Advice to use oral or topical preparations has an equivalent effect on knee pain over one year, and there are more minor side effects with oral NSAIDs. Topical NSAIDs may be a useful alternative to oral NSAIDs.Trial registration ISRCTN 79353052.     

Major adverse cardiovascular events in older emergency department patients presenting with non-cardiac medical complaints

Netherlands Heart Journal - The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) for older emergency department (ED) patients presenting with non-cardiac medical complaints is unknown. To apply...     

Behavioural activation to prevent depression and loneliness among socially isolated older people with long-term conditions: The BASIL COVID-19 pilot randomised controlled trial

BackgroundOlder adults, including those with long-term conditions (LTCs), are vulnerable to social isolation. They are likely to have become more socially isolated during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, often due to advice to “shield” to protect them from infection. This places them at particular risk of depression and loneliness. There is a need for brief scalable psychosocial interventions to mitigate the psychological impacts of social isolation. Behavioural activation (BA) is a credible candidate intervention, but a trial is needed.Methods and findingsWe undertook an external pilot parallel randomised trial (ISRCTN94091479) designed to test recruitment, retention and engagement with, and the acceptability and preliminary effects of the intervention. Participants aged ≥65 years with 2 or more LTCs were recruited in primary care and randomised by computer and with concealed allocation between June and October 2020. BA was offered to intervention participants (n = 47), and control participants received usual primary care (n = 49). Assessment of outcome was made blind to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was depression severity (measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9)). We also measured health-related quality of life (measured by the Short Form (SF)-12v2 mental component scale (MCS) and physical component scale (PCS)), anxiety (measured by the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD-7)), perceived social and emotional loneliness (measured by the De Jong Gierveld Scale: 11-item loneliness scale). Outcome was measured at 1 and 3 months. The mean age of participants was aged 74 years (standard deviation (SD) 5.5) and they were mostly White (n = 92, 95.8%), and approximately two-thirds of the sample were female (n = 59, 61.5%). Remote recruitment was possible, and 45/47 (95.7%) randomised to the intervention completed 1 or more sessions (median 6 sessions) out of 8. A total of 90 (93.8%) completed the 1-month follow-up, and 86 (89.6%) completed the 3-month follow-up, with similar rates for control (1 month: 45/49 and 3 months 44/49) and intervention (1 month: 45/47and 3 months: 42/47) follow-up. Between-group comparisons were made using a confidence interval (CI) approach, and by adjusting for the covariate of interest at baseline. At 1 month (the primary clinical outcome point), the median number of completed sessions for people receiving the BA intervention was 3, and almost all participants were still receiving the BA intervention. The between-group comparison for the primary clinical outcome at 1 month was an adjusted between-group mean difference of −0.50 PHQ-9 points (95% CI −2.01 to 1.01), but only a small number of participants had completed the intervention at this point. At 3 months, the PHQ-9 adjusted mean difference (AMD) was 0.19 (95% CI −1.36 to 1.75). When we examined loneliness, the adjusted between-group difference in the De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale at 1 month was 0.28 (95% CI −0.51 to 1.06) and at 3 months −0.87 (95% CI −1.56 to −0.18), suggesting evidence of benefit of the intervention at this time point. For anxiety, the GAD adjusted between-group difference at 1 month was 0.20 (−1.33, 1.73) and at 3 months 0.31 (−1.08, 1.70). For the SF-12 (physical component score), the adjusted between-group difference at 1 month was 0.34 (−4.17, 4.85) and at 3 months 0.11 (−4.46, 4.67). For the SF-12 (mental component score), the adjusted between-group difference at 1 month was 1.91 (−2.64, 5.15) and at 3 months 1.26 (−2.64, 5.15). Participants who withdrew had minimal depressive symptoms at entry. There were no adverse events. The Behavioural Activation in Social Isolation (BASIL) study had 2 main limitations. First, we found that the intervention was still being delivered at the prespecified primary outcome point, and this fed into the design of the main trial where a primary outcome of 3 months is now collected. Second, this was a pilot trial and was not designed to test between-group differences with high levels of statistical power. Type 2 errors are likely to have occurred, and a larger trial is now underway to test for robust effects and replicate signals of effectiveness in important secondary outcomes such as loneliness.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that BA is a credible intervention to mitigate the psychological impacts of COVID-19 isolation for older adults. We demonstrated that it is feasible to undertake a trial of BA. The intervention can be delivered remotely and at scale, but should be reserved for older adults with evidence of depressive symptoms. The significant reduction in loneliness is unlikely to be a chance finding, and replication will be explored in a fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT).Trial registrationISRCTN94091479.

In a pilot randomised controlled trial, Simon Gilbody and colleagues present preliminary findings from a telephone delivered intervention (behavioural activation) designed to prevent depression and loneliness among socially isolated older people with long term conditions.