The mediating role of reflective functioning and general psychopathology in the relationship between childhood conduct disorder and adult aggression among offenders.

BACKGROUND: The nature of the pathway from conduct disorder (CD) in adolescence to antisocial behavior in adulthood has been debated and the role of certain mediators remains unclear. One perspective is that CD forms part of a general psychopathology dimension, playing a central role in the developmental trajectory. Impairment in reflective functioning (RF), i.e., the capacity to understand one's own and others' mental states, may relate to CD, psychopathology, and aggression. Here, we characterized the structure of psychopathology in adult male-offenders and its role, along with RF, in mediating the relationship between CD in their adolescence and current aggression. METHODS: A secondary analysis of pre-treatment data from 313 probation-supervised offenders was conducted, and measures of CD symptoms, general and specific psychopathology factors, RF, and aggression were evaluated through clinical interviews and questionnaires. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analyses indicated that a bifactor model best fitted the sample's psychopathology structure, including a general psychopathology factor (p factor) and five specific factors: internalizing, disinhibition, detachment, antagonism, and psychoticism. The structure of RF was fitted to the data using a one-factor model. According to our mediation model, CD significantly predicted the p factor, which was positively linked to RF impairments, resulting in increased aggression. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the critical role of a transdiagnostic approach provided by RF and general psychopathology in explaining the link between CD and aggression. Furthermore, they underscore the potential utility of treatments focusing on RF, such as mentalization-based treatment, in mitigating aggression in offenders with diverse psychopathologies.

"I felt like I had been put on the shelf and forgotten about" - lasting lessons about the impact of COVID-19 on people affected by rarer dementias.

BACKGROUND: The public health measures imposed in many countries to contain the spread of COVID-19 resulted in significant suspensions in the provision of support and care for people with dementia. The negative effects of these measures have been extensively reported. However, little is known about the specific impact on people with young onset, non-memory-led and inherited dementias. This group may have experienced different challenges compared to those with late onset dementia given their non-memory phenotypes and younger age. We explored the impact of the first COVID-19 lockdown on people living with familial Alzheimer's disease, behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, familial frontotemporal dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies, posterior cortical atrophy and primary progressive aphasia and their carers in the UK and their self-reported strategies for coping. METHODS: This was a mixed methods study. An online survey was administered to people with dementia and family carers recruited via Rare Dementia Support. Free-text responses were analysed using framework analysis to identify key issues and themes. RESULTS: 184 carers and 24 people with dementia completed the survey. Overall, people with dementia experienced worsening of cognitive symptoms (70%), ability to do things (62%), well-being (57%) and changes to medication (26%) during lockdown. Carers reported a reduction in the support they received (55%) which impacted their own mental health negatively. Qualitative analysis of free-text responses shed light on how the disruption to routines, changes to roles and responsibilities, and widespread disconnection from friends, family and health and social care support varied according to phenotype. These impacts were exacerbated by a more general sense that precious time was being lost, given the progressive nature of dementia. Despite significant challenges, respondents demonstrated resilience and resourcefulness in reporting unexpected positives and strategies for adapting to confinement. CONCLUSIONS: This study has highlighted the specific impacts of the COVID-19 restrictions on people with young onset, non-memory-led and inherited dementias, including behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, primary progressive aphasia and posterior cortical atrophy, and their carers. The specific challenges faced according to diagnosis and the self-reported strategies speak to the importance of - and may inform the development of - tailored support for these underrepresented groups more generally.

WASh multicentre randomised controlled trial: water-assisted sigmoidoscopy in English NHS bowel scope screening.

OBJECTIVES: The English Bowel Cancer Screening Programme invites 55 year olds for a sigmoidoscopy (Bowel Scope Screening (BSS)), aiming to resect premalignant polyps, thus reducing cancer incidence. A national patient survey indicated higher procedural pain than anticipated, potentially impacting on screening compliance and effectiveness. We aimed to assess whether water-assisted sigmoidoscopy (WAS), as opposed to standard CO2 technique, improved procedural pain and detection of adenomatous polyps. DESIGN: The WASh (Water-Assisted Sigmoidoscopy) trial was a multicentre, single-blind, randomised control trial for people undergoing BSS. Participants were randomised to either receive WAS or CO2 from five sites across England. The primary outcome measure was patient-reported moderate/severe pain, as assessed by patients on a standard Likert scale post procedure prior to discharge. The key secondary outcome was adenoma detection rate (ADR). The costs of each technique were also measured. RESULTS: 1123 participants (50% women, mean age 55) were randomised (561 WAS, 562 CO2). We found no difference in patient-reported moderate/severe pain between WAS and CO2 (14% in WAS, 15% in CO2; p=0.47). ADR was 15% in the CO2 arm and 11% in the WAS arm (p=0.03); however, it remained above the minimum national performance standard in both arms. There was no statistical difference in mean number of adenomas nor overall polyp detection rate. There was negligible cost difference between the two techniques. CONCLUSION: In the context of enema-prepared unsedated screening sigmoidoscopies performed by screening-accredited endoscopists, no difference in patient-reported pain was seen when using either a CO2 or WAS intubation technique. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN81466870.

A longitudinal exploration of mental health resilience, cognitive impairment and loneliness.

OBJECTIVE: There is a growing interest in how people living with dementia may achieve good outcomes and be resilient despite their health challenges. Understanding what might be important for resilience in this population is largely untested theory. METHODS: The analysis draws a subsample with cognitive impairment (N = 579) from two waves of the Cognitive Function and Ageing Studies Wales study, a nationally representative study of community-dwelling people aged 65+ in Wales. We constructed a measure of mental health resilience (MHR) defined as no depression, no anxiety and high well-being. Drawing on a resilience framework, we tested univariate and cumulative effects models of the factors that enable MHR, and then examined whether MHR is important for reducing loneliness over time. RESULTS: Across both waves of data 22% (n = 121) met the criteria for MHR. The cumulative effects model found the odds of MHR were greater for male gender, higher self-esteem, greater social resources and no subjective memory complaints. Controlling for these significant predictors, MHR significantly predicted lower total and sub-scale scores for loneliness at wave 2. Sensitivity analysis shows these effects held at lower levels of cognitive function when the Mini-Mental State Examination score was <25, but not at <23. CONCLUSIONS: This paper addresses a gap in research regarding the conceptualisation and measurement of resilience when facing cognitive impairment. Understanding what aspects of a person's life might enable good mental health despite cognitive impairment-to be resilient-could inform effective strategies for friends and families, along with health, and social policy and practice.

Evaluating the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the 'strengthening families, strengthening communities' group-based parenting programme: study protocol and initial insights.

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% of UK children experience socio-emotional difficulties which can have serious implications for themselves, their families and society. Stark socioeconomic and ethnic inequalities in children's well-being exist. Supporting parents to develop effective parenting skills is an important preventive strategy in reducing inequalities. Parenting interventions have been developed, which aim to reduce the severity and impact of these difficulties. However, most parenting interventions in the UK focus on early childhood (0-10 years) and often fail to engage families from ethnic minority groups and those living in poverty. Strengthening Families, Strengthening Communities (SFSC) is a parenting programme designed by the Race Equality Foundation, which aims to address this gap. Evidence from preliminary studies is encouraging, but no randomised controlled trials have been undertaken so far. METHODS/DESIGN: The TOGETHER study is a multi-centre, waiting list controlled, randomised trial, which aims to test the effectiveness of SFSC in families with children aged 3-18 across seven urban areas in England with ethnically and socially diverse populations. The primary outcome is parental mental well-being (assessed by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale). Secondary outcomes include child socio-emotional well-being, parenting practices, family relationships, self-efficacy, quality of life, and community engagement. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, post intervention, three- and six-months post intervention. Cost effectiveness will be estimated using a cost-utility analysis and cost-consequences analysis. The study is conducted in two stages. Stage 1 comprised a 6-month internal pilot to determine the feasibility of the trial. A set of progression criteria were developed to determine whether the stage 2 main trial should proceed. An embedded process evaluation will assess the fidelity and acceptability of the intervention. DISCUSSION: In this paper we provide details of the study protocol for this trial. We also describe challenges to implementing the protocol and how these were addressed. Once completed, if beneficial effects on both parental and child outcomes are found, the impact, both immediate and longer term, are potentially significant. As the intervention focuses on supporting families living in poverty and those from minority ethnic communities, the intervention should also ultimately have a beneficial impact on reducing health inequalities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered Randomised Controlled Trial ISRCTN15194500 .

BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using Endocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities (the B-ADENOMA Study): a multicentre, randomised controlled flexible sigmoidoscopy trial.

OBJECTIVES: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality marker at lower GI endoscopy. Higher ADRs are associated with lower postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates. The English flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening programme (BowelScope), offers a one-off FS to individuals aged 55 years. However, variation in ADR exists. Large studies have demonstrated improved ADR using Endocuff Vision (EV) within colonoscopy screening, but there are no studies within FS. We sought to test the effect of EV on ADR in a national FS screening population. DESIGN: BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using ENdocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving 16 English BowelScope screening centres. Individuals were randomised to Endocuff Vision-assisted BowelScope (EAB) or Standard BowelScope (SB). ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), mean adenomas per procedure (MAP), polyp characteristics and location, participant experience, procedural time and adverse events were measured. Comparison of ADR within the trial with national BowelScope ADR was also undertaken. RESULTS: 3222 participants were randomised (53% male) to receive EAB (n=1610) or SB (n=1612). Baseline demographics were comparable between arms. ADR in the EAB arm was 13.3% and that in the SB arm was 12.2% (p=0.353). No statistically significant differences were found in PDR, MAP, polyp characteristics or location, participant experience, complications or procedural characteristics. ADR in the SB control arm was 3.1% higher than the national ADR. CONCLUSION: EV did not improve BowelScope ADR when compared with SB. ADR in both arms was higher than the national ADR. Where detection rates are already high, EV is unable to improve detection further. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03072472, ISRCTN30005319 and CPMS ID 33224.

Protocol for the Rare Dementia Support Impact study: RDS Impact.

OBJECTIVES: The Rare Dementia Support (RDS) Impact study will be the first major study of the value of multicomponent support groups for people living with or supporting someone with a rare form of dementia. The multicentre study aims to evaluate the impact of multicomponent support offered and delivered to people living with a rare form of dementia, comprising the following five work packages (WPs): (a) longitudinal cohort interviews, (b) theoretical development, (c) developing measures, (d) novel interventions, and (e) economic analysis. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods design, including a longitudinal cohort study (quantitative and qualitative) and a feasibility randomised control trial (RCT). A cohort of more than 1000 individuals will be invited to participate. The primary and secondary outcomes will be in part determined through a co-design nominal groups technique prestudy involving caregivers to people living with a diagnosis of a rare dementia. Quantitative analyses of differences and predictors will be based on prespecified hypotheses. A variety of quantitative (eg, analysis of variance [ANOVA] and multiple linear regression techniques), qualitative (eg, thematic analysis [TA]), and innovative analytical methods will also be developed and applied by involving the arts as a research method. RESULTS: The UCL Research Ethics Committee have approved this study. Data collection commenced in January 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The study will capture information through a combination of longitudinal interviews, questionnaires and scales, and novel creative data collection methods. The notion of "impact" in the context of support for rare dementias will involve theoretical development, novel measures and methods of support interventions, and health economic analyses.

Improved adenoma detection with Endocuff Vision: the ADENOMA randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Low adenoma detection rates (ADR) are linked to increased postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates and reduced cancer survival. Devices to enhance mucosal visualisation such as Endocuff Vision (EV) may improve ADR. This multicentre randomised controlled trial compared ADR between EV-assisted colonoscopy (EAC) and standard colonoscopy (SC). DESIGN: Patients referred because of symptoms, surveillance or following a positive faecal occult blood test (FOBt) as part of the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme were recruited from seven hospitals. ADR, mean adenomas per procedure, size and location of adenomas, sessile serrated polyps, EV removal rate, caecal intubation rate, procedural time, patient experience, effect of EV on workload and adverse events were measured. RESULTS: 1772 patients (57% male, mean age 62 years) were recruited over 16 months with 45% recruited through screening. EAC increased ADR globally from 36.2% to 40.9% (P=0.02). The increase was driven by a 10.8% increase in FOBt-positive screening patients (50.9% SC vs 61.7% EAC, P<0.001). EV patients had higher detection of mean adenomas per procedure, sessile serrated polyps, left-sided, diminutive, small adenomas and cancers (cancer 4.1% vs 2.3%, P=0.02). EV removal rate was 4.1%. Median intubation was a minute quicker with EAC (P=0.001), with no difference in caecal intubation rate or withdrawal time. EAC was well tolerated but caused a minor increase in discomfort on anal intubation in patients undergoing colonoscopy with no or minimal sedation. There were no significant EV adverse events. CONCLUSION: EV significantly improved ADR in bowel cancer screening patients and should be used to improve colonoscopic detection. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02552017, Results; ISRCTN11821044, Results.

Endoscopic ultrasound staging in patients with gastro-oesophageal cancers: a systematic review of economic evidence.

BACKGROUND: The sensitivity of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in staging gastro-oesophageal cancers (GOCs) has been widely studied. However, the economic evidence of EUS staging in the management of patients with GOCs is scarce. This review aimed to examine all economic evidence (not limited to randomised controlled trials) of the use of EUS staging in the management of GOCs patients, and to offer a review of economic evidence on the costs, benefits (in terms of GOCs patients' health-related quality of life), and economic implications of the use of EUS in staging GOCs patients. METHODS: The protocol was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42016043700; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42016043700 ). MEDLINE (ovid), EMBASE (ovid), The Cochrane Collaboration Register and Library (including the British National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) and Web of Science (Core Collection) as well as reference lists were systematically searched for studies conducted between 1996 and 2018 (search update 28/04/2018). Two authors independently screened the identified articles, assessed study quality, and extracted data. Study characteristics of the included articles, including incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, when available, were summarised narratively. RESULTS: Of the 197 articles retrieved, six studies met the inclusion criteria: three economic studies and three economic modelling studies. Of the three economic studies, one was a cost-effectiveness analysis and two were cost analyses. Of the three economic modelling studies, one was a cost-effectiveness analysis and two were cost-minimisation analyses. Both of the cost-effectiveness analyses reported that use of EUS as an additional staging technique provided, on average, more QALYs (0.0019-0.1969 more QALYs) and saved costs (by £1969-£3364 per patient, 2017 price year) compared to staging strategy without EUS. Of the six studies, only one included GOCs participants and the other five included oesophageal cancer participants. CONCLUSIONS: The data available suggest use of EUS as a complementary staging technique to other staging techniques for GOCs appears to be cost saving and offers greater QALYs. Nevertheless, future studies are necessary because the economic evidence around this EUS staging intervention for GOCs is far from robust. More health economic research and good quality data are needed to judge the economic benefits of EUS staging for GOCs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016043700 .

Individual goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation to improve everyday functioning for people with early-stage dementia: A multicentre randomised controlled trial (the GREAT trial).

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether individual goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation (CR) improves everyday functioning for people with mild-to-moderate dementia. DESIGN AND METHODS: Parallel group multicentre single-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing CR added to usual treatment (CR) with usual treatment alone (TAU) for people with an ICD-10 diagnosis of Alzheimer, vascular or mixed dementia, and mild-to-moderate cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score ≥ 18), and with a family member willing to contribute. Participants allocated to CR received 10 weekly sessions over 3 months and four maintenance sessions over 6 months. Participants were followed up 3 and 9 months post randomisation by blinded researchers. The primary outcome was self-reported goal attainment at 3 months. Secondary outcomes at 3 and 9 months included informant-reported goal attainment, quality of life, mood, self-efficacy, and cognition and study partner stress and quality of life. RESULTS: We randomised (1:1) 475 people with dementia; 445 (CR = 281) were included in the intention to treat analysis at 3 months and 426 (CR = 208) at 9 months. At 3 months, there were statistically significant large positive effects for participant-rated goal attainment (d = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.75-1.19), corroborated by informant ratings (d = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.34). These effects were maintained at 9 months for both participant (d = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.71-1.17) and informant (d = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.73-1.2) ratings. The observed gains related to goals directly targeted in the therapy. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: CR enables people with early-stage dementia to improve their everyday functioning in relation to individual goals targeted in the therapy.

Promoting activity, Independence and stability in early dementia (PrAISED): a, multisite, randomised controlled, feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: We tested the feasibility of delivering and evaluating a complex therapy intervention which aimed to promote activity and independence for people with early dementia (PrAISED). Feasibility questions were on: recruitment, randomisation, intervention delivery, adherence and withdrawals, level of supervision required, adverse events, data collection and sample size assumptions. METHODS: We conducted a three-arm, multi-site, single-blind, randomised controlled feasibility trial. Eligibility criteria were aged 65 years or older, diagnosed mild dementia or mild cognitive impairment, able to walk without human help, and communicate in English, no co-morbidities that prevented participation in cognitive assessment and capacity to give consent. Participants were recruited from Memory Assessment Service clinics and the 'Join Dementia Research' register. Patient participants were randomised 1:1:1 to a high intensity supervision PrAISED intervention, moderate intensity supervision PrAISED intervention or brief falls prevention assessment and advice (control). The PrAISED intervention aimed for participants to complete three hours of PrAISED exercises a week for 12 months. It included individualised activity and exercise plans and supervised exercises with regular re-assessment and progression, and was delivered by occupational therapists, physiotherapists and rehabilitation support workers. Primary efficacy outcome was the Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD), measured after 12 months. Secondary outcomes included physical activity, quality of life, mood, cognition, strength, balance, rate of falls, frailty and carer strain. Falls and activity were ascertained by monthly diary. RESULTS: Between September 2016 and March 2017 we recruited 60 patient participants and 54 carer participants from two sites. Forty-nine patient participants completed a follow-up interview. Feasibility outcomes were mostly satisfactory, including recruitment and retention, intervention delivery and data completeness for most scales used. We could not maintain blinding of researchers at follow-up and experienced difficulties collecting data using some questionnaires and devices. Participants only completed a mean 77 (moderate supervision) and 71 (high supervision) minutes per week of PrAISED exercises over 12 months. We recorded 19 adverse events, none serious and related to the intervention. CONCLUSION: We conclude that with some adjustments to the trial protocol, it is feasible to deliver the PrAISED intervention and conduct a trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02874300 (first posted 22nd August 2016), ISRCTN: 10550694 (date assigned 31st August 2016).

Trial of personalised care after treatment-Prostate cancer: A randomised feasibility trial of a nurse-led psycho-educational intervention.

OBJECTIVE: The present parallel randomised control trial evaluated the feasibility of a nurse-led psycho-educational intervention aimed at improving the self-management of prostate cancer survivors. METHODS: We identified 305 eligible patients from a district general hospital, diagnosed 9-48 months previously, who completed radical treatment, or were monitored clinically (ineligible for treatment). Ninety-five patients were recruited by blinded selection and randomised to Intervention (N = 48) and Control (N = 47) groups. Participant allocation was revealed to patients and researchers after recruitment was completed. For 36 weeks, participants received augmented usual care (Control) or augmented usual care and additional nurse support (Intervention) provided in two community hospitals and a university clinic, or by telephone. RESULTS: Data from 91 participants (Intervention, N = 45; Control, N = 46) were analysed. All feasibility metrics met predefined targets: recruitment rate (31.15%; 95% CI: 25.95%-36.35%), attrition rate (9.47%; 95% CI: 3.58%-15.36%) and outcome measures completion rates (77%-92%). Forty-five patients received the intervention, with no adverse events. The Extended Prostate Cancer Index Composite can inform the minimum sample size for a future effectiveness trial. The net intervention cost was £317 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The results supported the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, suggesting that it should be evaluated in a fully powered trial to assess its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Goal-orientated cognitive rehabilitation for dementias associated with Parkinson's disease-A pilot randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the appropriateness and feasibility of cognitive rehabilitation for people with dementias associated with Parkinson's in a pilot randomised controlled study. METHODS: This was a single-blind pilot randomised controlled trial of goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation for dementias associated with Parkinson's. After goal setting, participants were randomised to cognitive rehabilitation (n = 10), relaxation therapy (n = 10), or treatment-as-usual (n = 9). Primary outcomes were ratings of goal attainment and satisfaction with goal attainment. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, mood, cognition, health status, everyday functioning, and carers' ratings of goal attainment and their own quality of life and stress levels. Assessments were at 2 and 6 months following randomisation. RESULTS: At 2 months, cognitive rehabilitation was superior to treatment-as-usual and relaxation therapy for the primary outcomes of self-rated goal attainment (d = 1.63 and d = 1.82, respectively) and self-rated satisfaction with goal attainment (d = 2.04 and d = 1.84). At 6 months, cognitive rehabilitation remained superior to treatment-as-usual (d = 1.36) and relaxation therapy (d = 1.77) for self-rated goal attainment. Cognitive rehabilitation was superior to treatment as usual and/or relaxation therapy in a number of secondary outcomes at 2 months (mood, self-efficacy, social domain of quality of life, carers' ratings of participants' goal attainment) and at 6 months (delayed recall, health status, quality of life, carer ratings of participants' goal attainment). Carers receiving cognitive rehabilitation reported better quality of life, health status, and lower stress than those allocated to treatment-as-usual. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation is feasible and potentially effective for dementias associated with Parkinson's disease.

Trial of Optimal Personalised Care After Treatment-Gynaecological Cancer (TOPCAT-G): A Randomized Feasibility Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of completing a parallel-group randomized controlled trial to compare usual follow-up care for women who have completed treatment of gynecological cancer against a nurse-led telephone intervention, known as Optimal Personalised Care After Treatment-Gynaecological. METHODS: The unblinded trial aimed to recruit patients who had completed treatment of cervical, endometrial, epithelial ovarian, or vulval cancer within the previous 3 months at 3 North Wales hospitals. We randomized participants to either usual hospital-based follow-up or specialist nurse-led telephone education, empowerment, and structured needs assessment follow-up. The primary outcomes assessed the feasibility of running a larger trial including patient eligibility, recruitment and retention rates, and outcome measure completion. Secondary outcomes were generic and health-related quality of life and a patient self-report health service use (Client Service Receipt Inventory) data collected at 3 time points (baseline, 3 months, and 6 months). RESULTS: Of the 58 women screened, 44 were eligible (76%) and 24 (55%) were recruited and randomized (12:12 to control and intervention, respectively). One participant was lost to follow-up. Recruited participants had a mean (SD) age of 60 (11.2) years and were approximately 5 months from their initial diagnosis (mean [SD], 159 [58] days). Seventeen (71%) of the participants had an endometrial cancer diagnosis. All outcome measure completion rates exceeded 96%. Although not a core feasibility objective, analyses of outcome measures indicated positive changes in quality of life and well-being within the Optimal Personalised Care After Treatment-Gynaecological group; exploratory cost consequence analysis indicated that the nurse-led intervention had a mean total service use cost of £27 per patient (bootstrapped 95% confidence interval, -£290 to £240) lower than did the standard care group. CONCLUSION: Eligibility, recruitment, and retention rates as well as outcome measure completion showed that the trial is feasible.

The impact of individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (iCST) on cognition, quality of life, caregiver health, and family relationships in dementia: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a well-established group psychosocial intervention for people with dementia. There is evidence that home-based programmes of cognitive stimulation delivered by family caregivers may benefit both the person and the caregiver. However, no previous studies have evaluated caregiver-delivered CST. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based, caregiver-led individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) program in (i) improving cognition and quality of life (QoL) for the person with dementia and (ii) mental and physical health (well-being) for the caregiver. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A single-blind, pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at eight study sites across the United Kingdom. The intervention and blinded assessment of outcomes were conducted in participants' homes. Three hundred fifty-six people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers were recruited from memory services and community mental health teams (CMHTs). Participants were randomly assigned to iCST (75, 30-min sessions) or treatment as usual (TAU) control over 25 wk. iCST sessions consisted of themed activities designed to be mentally stimulating and enjoyable. Caregivers delivering iCST received training and support from an unblind researcher. Primary outcomes were cognition (Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive [ADAS-Cog]) and self-reported QoL (Quality of Life Alzheimer's Disease [QoL-AD]) for the person with dementia and general health status (Short Form-12 health survey [SF-12]) for the caregiver. Secondary outcomes included quality of the caregiving relationship from the perspectives of the person and of the caregiver (Quality of the Carer Patient Relationship Scale) and health-related QoL (European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions [EQ-5D]) for the caregiver. Intention to treat (ITT) analyses were conducted. At the post-test (26 wk), there were no differences between the iCST and TAU groups in the outcomes of cognition (mean difference [MD] = -0.55, 95% CI -2.00-0.90; p = 0.45) and self-reported QoL (MD = -0.02, 95% CI -1.22-0.82; p = 0.97) for people with dementia, or caregivers' general health status (MD = 0.13, 95% CI -1.65-1.91; p = 0.89). However, people with dementia receiving iCST rated the relationship with their caregiver more positively (MD = 1.77, 95% CI 0.26-3.28; p = 0.02), and iCST improved QoL for caregivers (EQ-5D, MD = 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.10; p = 0.01). Forty percent (72/180) of dyads allocated to iCST completed at least two sessions per week, with 22% (39/180) completing no sessions at all. Study limitations include low adherence to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that iCST has an effect on cognition or QoL for people with dementia. However, participating in iCST appeared to enhance the quality of the caregiving relationship and caregivers' QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The iCST trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (identified ISRCTN 65945963, URL: DOI 10.1186/ISRCTN65945963).

Staff training and outreach support for Cognitive Stimulation Therapy and its implementation in practice: a cluster randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: There is evidence that Cognitive Stimulation Therapy and maintenance Cognitive Stimulation Therapy are effective in mild to moderate dementia. There is, however, little evidence available for its implementation in practice and the impact of outreach support on the sustainability of the programme. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-one staff members were randomised from 63 dementia care settings between outreach support including an online forum, email, and telephone support, compared to usual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy control group. The primary outcome was average number of attendees to the Cognitive Stimulation Therapy and maintenance Cognitive Stimulation Therapy programmes. RESULTS: There was no difference in average number of attendees between the intervention and usual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy control groups for the Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (p = 0.82) or the maintenance Cognitive Stimulation Therapy programme (p = 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Outreach support does not affect the average number of people with dementia attending the Cognitive Stimulation Therapy or maintenance Cognitive Stimulation Therapy programme. Irrespective of outreach support, the programmes remain widely implemented and yield perceived benefits for people with dementia. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Effectiveness of portable electronic and optical magnifiers for near vision activities in low vision: a randomised crossover trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the performance of near vision activities using additional portable electronic vision enhancement systems (p-EVES), to using optical magnifiers alone, by individuals with visual impairment. METHODS: A total of 100 experienced optical aid users were recruited from low vision clinics at Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester, UK, to a prospective two-arm cross-over randomised controlled trial. Reading, performance of near vision activities, and device usage were evaluated at baseline; and at the end of each study arm (Intervention A: existing optical aids plus p-EVES; Intervention B: optical aids only) which was after 2 and 4 months. RESULTS: A total of 82 participants completed the study. Overall, maximum reading speed for high contrast sentences was not statistically significantly different for optical aids and p-EVES, although the critical print size and threshold print size which could be accessed with p-EVES were statistically significantly smaller (p < 0.001 in both cases). The optical aids were used for a larger number of tasks (p < 0.001), and used more frequently (p < 0.001). However p-EVES were preferred for leisure reading by 70% of participants, and allowed longer duration of reading (p < 0.001). During the study arm when they had a p-EVES device, participants were able to carry out more tasks independently (p < 0.001), and reported less difficulty with a range of near vision activities (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study provides evidence that p-EVES devices can play a useful role in supplementing the range of low vision aids used to reduce activity limitation for near vision tasks.

Peer support and reminiscence therapy for people with dementia and their family carers: a factorial pragmatic randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate peer support and reminiscence therapy, separately and together, in comparison with usual care for people with dementia and their family carers. DESIGN: Factorial pragmatic randomised trial, analysed by treatment allocated, was used for this study. SETTING: The trial ran in Community settings in England. PARTICIPANTS: People with dementia and their family carers were the participants. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment as usual (TAU) plus one of the following: one-to-one peer support to family carers from experienced carers (Carer Supporter Programme; CSP), group reminiscence therapy (Remembering Yesterday, Caring Today; RYCT) for people with dementia and carers, both or neither. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included health-related quality of life (SF-12) for carers and quality of life (QoL-AD) for people with dementia; secondary outcomes included quality of relationship for carers and people with dementia; both were collected by blinded assessors at baseline, 5 and 12 months (primary end point). RESULTS: Of 291 pairs recruited, we randomised 145 (50%) to CSP (71% uptake) and 194 (67%) to RYCT (61% uptake). CSP and RYCT, separately or together, were not effective in improving primary outcomes or most secondary outcomes. For CSP versus 'no CSP', adjusted difference in means was 0.52 points on the SF-12 (95% CI -1.28 to 2.32) and -0.08 points on the QoL-AD (95% CI -1.70 to 1.56). For RYCT versus 'no RYCT', the difference was 0.10 points on the SF-12 (95% CI -1.72 to 1.93) and 0.51 points on the QoL-AD (95% CI -1.17 to 2.08). However, carers reported better relationships with the people with dementia (difference 1.11, 95% CI 0.00 to 2.21, p=0.05). Comparison of combined intervention with TAU, and of intervention received, suggested differential impacts for carers and persons with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from the trial that either peer support or reminiscence is effective in improving the quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN37956201; Results.

Identifying the causes, prevention and management of crises in dementia. An online survey of stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: Crisis situations in dementia can lead to hospital admission or institutionalisation. Offering immediate interventions may help avoid admission, whilst stabilising measures can help prevent future crises. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to identify the main causes of crisis and interventions to treat or prevent crisis in persons with dementia based on different stakeholder perspectives. METHODS: An online questionnaire was developed to identify the causes of crisis and appropriate interventions in a crisis. Participants included people with dementia, family carers and staff working in health and social care, including emergency and voluntary sectors, and academia. RESULTS: The results ranked the main causes of crisis, interventions that can prevent a crisis and interventions that can be useful in a crisis. Wandering, falls and infection were highly rated as risk factors for crises across all stakeholder groups. Consumers rated aggression as less important but severity of memory impairment as much more important than the other groups did. Education and support for family carers and home care staff were highly valued for preventing crises. Well-trained home care staff, communication equipment, emergency contacts and access to respite were highly valued for managing crises. CONCLUSIONS: We identified triggers and interventions that different stakeholders see as important for crisis in dementia. Recognition of these may be critical to planning effective and accepted support and care for people with dementia.

How does the EQ-5D perform when measuring quality of life in dementia against two other dementia-specific outcome measures?

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess and compare the psychometric performance of the EQ-5D in relation to other dementia-specific measures, the QoL-AD and DEMQoL, within a psychosocial intervention study. METHODS: Two hundred and seventy-two people with dementia completed the EQ-5D, DEMQoL and QoL-AD. Convergent and discriminant validity of the measures were assessed, and inter-rater reliability was tested by comparing the self-reported and proxy scores of the measures. Internal consistency was tested using Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS: Results satisfy convergent validity amongst the three outcome measures. EQ-5D, DEMQoL and QoL-AD total scores were shown to be significantly correlated with each other (p < 0.001) in both participants with dementia and proxy reports. Results also satisfied discriminant validity for participant EQ-5D, DEMQoL and QoL-AD total scores. In relation to reliability between self and proxy scores, the EQ-5D showed higher reliability scores between participant and proxy total scores for mild and moderate level of cognitive impairment and performed better than the dementia-specific measures. Reliability assessed through Cronbach's alpha was satisfactory, indicating adequate internal consistency of all three measures. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the EQ-5D might have advantages over other dementia-specific measures, and it could be used routinely and as a stand-alone measure of quality of life in dementia research.