What matters to people with multiple long-term conditions and their carers?

BACKGROUND: The number of people living with multiple long-term conditions is increasing worldwide. This presents challenges for health and care systems, which must adapt to meet the needs of this population. This study drew on existing data to understand what matters to people living with multiple long-term conditions and identify priorities for future research. METHODS: Two studies were conducted. (1) A secondary thematic analysis of interview, survey and workshop data collected from the 2017 James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership for Older People with Multiple Conditions, and patient and public involvement workshops; (2) a review of ongoing research and published research priorities, relating to older people (80+) living with multiple long-term conditions. FINDINGS: Older people with multiple long-term conditions identified a number of key concerns: access to care, support for both the patient and their carer, physical and mental health and well-being and identifying opportunities for early prevention. The review identified no published research priorities or ongoing research focusing specifically on populations aged over 80 years with multiple long-term conditions. CONCLUSION: Older people living with multiple long-term conditions experience care that is inadequate for their needs. A holistic approach to care that extends beyond treating single conditions will ensure wide-ranging needs are met. As multimorbidity rises worldwide, this is a critical message for practitioners across health and care settings. We also recommend key areas that should be given greater focus in future research and policy to inform effective and meaningful forms of support for people living with multiple long-term conditions.

Recurrent delirium over 12 months predicts dementia: results of the Delirium and Cognitive Impact in Dementia (DECIDE) study.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common, distressing and associated with poor outcomes. Previous studies investigating the impact of delirium on cognitive outcomes have been limited by incomplete ascertainment of baseline cognition or lack of prospective delirium assessments. This study quantified the association between delirium and cognitive function over time by prospectively ascertaining delirium in a cohort aged ≥ 65 years in whom baseline cognition had previously been established. METHODS: For 12 months, we assessed participants from the Cognitive Function and Ageing Study II-Newcastle for delirium daily during hospital admissions. At 1-year, we assessed cognitive decline and dementia in those with and without delirium. We evaluated the effect of delirium (including its duration and number of episodes) on cognitive function over time, independently of baseline cognition and illness severity. RESULTS: Eighty two of 205 participants recruited developed delirium in hospital (40%). One-year outcome data were available for 173 participants: 18 had a new dementia diagnosis, 38 had died. Delirium was associated with cognitive decline (-1.8 Mini-Mental State Examination points [95% CI -3.5 to -0.2]) and an increased risk of new dementia diagnosis at follow up (OR 8.8 [95% CI 1.9-41.4]). More than one episode and more days with delirium (>5 days) were associated with worse cognitive outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Delirium increases risk of future cognitive decline and dementia, independent of illness severity and baseline cognition, with more episodes associated with worse cognitive outcomes. Given that delirium has been shown to be preventable in some cases, we propose that delirium is a potentially modifiable risk factor for dementia.

Hospitalisation without delirium is not associated with cognitive decline in a population-based sample of older people-results from a nested, longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Acute hospitalisation and delirium have individually been shown to adversely affect trajectories of cognitive decline but have not previously been considered together. This work aimed to explore the impact on cognition of hospital admission with and without delirium, compared to a control group with no hospital admissions. METHODS: The Delirium and Cognitive Impact in Dementia (DECIDE) study was nested within the Cognitive Function and Ageing Study II (CFAS II)-Newcastle cohort. CFAS II participants completed two baseline interviews, including the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). During 2016, surviving participants from CFAS II-Newcastle were recruited to DECIDE on admission to hospital. Participants were reviewed daily to determine delirium status.During 2017, all DECIDE participants and age, sex and years of education matched controls without hospital admissions during 2016 were invited to repeat the CFAS II interview. Delirium was excluded in the control group using the Informant Assessment of Geriatric Delirium Scale (i-AGeD). Linear mixed effects modelling determined predictors of cognitive decline. RESULTS: During 2016, 82 of 205 (40%) DECIDE participants had at least one episode of delirium. At 1 year, 135 of 205 hospitalised participants completed an interview along with 100 controls. No controls experienced delirium (i-AGeD>4). Delirium was associated with a faster rate of cognitive decline compared to those without delirium (ß = -2.2, P < 0.001), but number of hospital admissions was not (P = 0.447). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that delirium during hospitalisation rather than hospitalisation per se is a risk factor for future cognitive decline, emphasising the need for dementia prevention studies that focus on delirium intervention.

What matters to people with multiple long-term conditions and their carers?

BACKGROUND: The number of people living with multiple long-term conditions is increasing worldwide. This presents challenges for health and care systems, which must adapt to meet the needs of this population. This study drew on existing data to understand what matters to people living with multiple long-term conditions and identify priorities for future research. METHODS: Two studies were conducted. (1) A secondary thematic analysis of interview, survey and workshop data collected from the 2017 James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership for Older People with Multiple Conditions, and patient and public involvement workshops; (2) a review of ongoing research and published research priorities, relating to older people (80+) living with multiple long-term conditions. FINDINGS: Older people with multiple long-term conditions identified a number of key concerns: access to care, support for both the patient and their carer, physical and mental health and well-being and identifying opportunities for early prevention. The review identified no published research priorities or ongoing research focusing specifically on populations aged over 80 years with multiple long-term conditions. CONCLUSION: Older people living with multiple long-term conditions experience care that is inadequate for their needs. A holistic approach to care that extends beyond treating single conditions will ensure wide-ranging needs are met. As multimorbidity rises worldwide, this is a critical message for practitioners across health and care settings. We also recommend key areas that should be given greater focus in future research and policy to inform effective and meaningful forms of support for people living with multiple long-term conditions.

Development and validation of a Hospital Frailty Risk Score focusing on older people in acute care settings using electronic hospital records: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Older people are increasing users of health care globally. We aimed to establish whether older people with characteristics of frailty and who are at risk of adverse health-care outcomes could be identified using routinely collected data. METHODS: A three-step approach was used to develop and validate a Hospital Frailty Risk Score from International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnostic codes. First, we carried out a cluster analysis to identify a group of older people (≥75 years) admitted to hospital who had high resource use and diagnoses associated with frailty. Second, we created a Hospital Frailty Risk Score based on ICD-10 codes that characterised this group. Third, in separate cohorts, we tested how well the score predicted adverse outcomes and whether it identified similar groups as other frailty tools. FINDINGS: In the development cohort (n=22 139), older people with frailty diagnoses formed a distinct group and had higher non-elective hospital use (33·6 bed-days over 2 years compared with 23·0 bed-days for the group with the next highest number of bed-days). In the national validation cohort (n=1 013 590), compared with the 429 762 (42·4%) patients with the lowest risk scores, the 202 718 (20·0%) patients with the highest Hospital Frailty Risk Scores had increased odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio 1·71, 95% CI 1·68-1·75), long hospital stay (6·03, 5·92-6·10), and 30-day readmission (1·48, 1·46-1·50). The c statistics (ie, model discrimination) between individuals for these three outcomes were 0·60, 0·68, and 0·56, respectively. The Hospital Frailty Risk Score showed fair overlap with dichotomised Fried and Rockwood scales (kappa scores 0·22, 95% CI 0·15-0·30 and 0·30, 0·22-0·38, respectively) and moderate agreement with the Rockwood Frailty Index (Pearson's correlation coefficient 0·41, 95% CI 0·38-0·47). INTERPRETATION: The Hospital Frailty Risk Score provides hospitals and health systems with a low-cost, systematic way to screen for frailty and identify a group of patients who are at greater risk of adverse outcomes and for whom a frailty-attuned approach might be useful. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.

Can comprehensive geriatric assessment be delivered without the need for geriatricians? A formative evaluation in two perioperative surgical settings.

INTRODUCTION: the aim of this study was to design an approach to improving care for frail older patients in hospital services where comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) was not part of the clinical tradition. METHODS: the intervention was based on the principles of CGA, using quality improvement methodology to embed care processes. Qualitative methods and coproduction were used to inform development of the intervention, which was directed towards the health care professionals involved in peri-operative/surgical cancer care pathways in two large UK teaching hospitals. A formative, qualitative evaluation was undertaken; data collection and analysis were guided by normalisation process theory. RESULTS: the clinicians involved agreed to use the toolkit, identifying potential benefits including improved surgical decision making and delivery of interventions pre-operatively. However, sites concluded that pre-operative assessment was not the best place for CGA, and at the end of the 12-month trial, implementation was still nascent. Efforts competed against the dominance of national time-limited targets, and concerns relating to patients' immediate treatment and recovery. Some participants involved in the peri-operative pathway felt that CGA required ongoing specialist input from geriatricians, but it was not clear that this was sustainable. CONCLUSIONS: clinical toolkits designed to empower non-geriatric teams to deliver CGA were received with initial enthusiasm, but did not fully achieve their stated aims due to the need for an extended period of service development with geriatrician support, competing priorities, and divergent views about appropriate professional domains.

Frailty, hospital use and mortality in the older population: findings from the Newcastle 85+ study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a significant determinant of health care utilisation and associated costs, both of which also increase with proximity to death. What is not known is how the relationships between frailty, proximity to death, hospital use and costs develop in a population aged 85 years and over. METHODS: This study used data from a prospective observational cohort, the Newcastle 85+ Study, linked with hospital episode statistics and death registrations. Using the Rockwood frailty index (cut off <0.25), we analysed the relationship between frailty and mortality, proximity to death, hospital use and hospital costs over 2, 5 and 7 years using descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, Cox's proportional hazards and negative binomial regression models. RESULTS: Baseline frailty was associated with a more than two-fold increased risk of mortality after 7 years, compared to people who were non-frail. Participants classified as frail spent more time in hospital over 7 years than the non-frail, but this difference declined over time. Baseline frailty was not associated with increased time spent in hospital during the last 90 days of life. CONCLUSION: Evidence continues to accrue on the impact of frailty on emergency health care use. Hospital and community services need to adapt to meet the challenge of introducing new proactive and preventative approaches, designed to achieve benefits in clinical and/or cost effectiveness of frailty management.

Developing an objective structured clinical examination in comprehensive geriatric assessment - A pilot study.

Background: Acquiring medical competencies alone does not necessarily lead to the delivery of quality clinical care. Many UK training programs are soon to be based on the curricula of entrustable professional capabilities (EPCs). These are tasks carried out in practice requiring proficiency in several competencies for quality practice. Assessments to evaluate EPCs for independent practice are needed. Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is an EPC in geriatric medicine. We describe the development of an assessment of CGA as an example of examining EPCs. Methods: A CGA station was introduced in the Diploma in Geriatric Medicine clinical examination. Candidates rotate through four stations: three single competency-based stations (history, communication/ethics and physical examination) and an EPC-based station in CGA. Results: One hundred and seventy-eight (female: 96 [53.9%]) candidates took it. There was a weak but significantly positive correlation between the score at CGA and the total score in the other stations (r = 0.46; P < 0.001). Most candidates passing the station passed the examination. Correlation with other stations similarly showed weak significant correlations (Station 1: r = 0.38; P < 0.001, Station 3: r = 0.28; P < 0.001, and Station 4: r = 0.37; P < 0.001). There was 61.4% (kappa: 0.61; P = 0.000) agreement between examiners whether a candidate passed or failed. Agreement was higher for the other stations, i.e. Station 1 (kappa: 0.85; P < 0.001), Station 3 (kappa: 0.72; P < 0.001), and Station 4 (kappa: 0.85; P < 0.001). Discussion: Performance on the station correlated positively with overall performance, suggesting that it has discriminatory value in differentiating candidates with varying ability and the more able candidates pass the examination.

New horizons in multimorbidity in older adults.

The concept of multimorbidity has attracted growing interest over recent years, and more latterly with the publication of specific guidelines on multimorbidity by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Increasingly it is recognised that this is of particular relevance to practitioners caring for older adults, where multimorbidity may be more complex due to the overlap of physical and mental health disorders, frailty and polypharmacy. The overlap of frailty and multimorbidity in particular is likely to be due to the widespread health deficit accumulation, leading in some cases to functional impairment. The NICE guidelines identify 'target groups' who may benefit from a tailored approach to care that takes their multimorbidity into account, and make a number of research recommendations. Management includes a proactive individualised assessment and care plan, which improves quality of life by reducing treatment burden, adverse events, and unplanned or uncoordinated care.

Protocol for the Delirium and Cognitive Impact in Dementia (DECIDE) study: A nested prospective longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common, affecting at least 20% of older hospital inpatients. It is widely accepted that delirium is associated with dementia but the degree of causation within this relationship is unclear. Previous studies have been limited by incomplete ascertainment of baseline cognition or a lack of prospective delirium assessments. There is an urgent need for an improved understanding of the relationship between delirium and dementia given that delirium prevention may plausibly impact upon dementia prevention. A well-designed, observational study could also answer fundamental questions of major importance to patients and their families regarding outcomes after delirium. The Delirium and Cognitive Impact in Dementia (DECIDE) study aims to explore the association between delirium and cognitive function over time in older participants. In an existing population based cohort aged 65 years and older, the effect on cognition of an episode of delirium will be measured, independent of baseline cognition and illness severity. The predictive value of clinical parameters including delirium severity, baseline cognition and delirium subtype on cognitive outcomes following an episode of delirium will also be explored. METHODS: Over a 12 month period, surviving participants from the Cognitive Function and Ageing Study II-Newcastle will be screened for delirium on admission to hospital. At the point of presentation, baseline characteristics along with a number of disease relevant clinical parameters will be recorded. The progression/resolution of delirium will be monitored. In those with and without delirium, cognitive decline and dementia will be assessed at one year follow-up. We will evaluate the effect of delirium on cognitive function over time along with the predictive value of clinical parameters. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first to prospectively elucidate the size of the effect of delirium upon cognitive decline and incident dementia. The results will be used to inform future dementia prevention trials that focus on delirium intervention.

Exome-wide analysis of rare coding variation identifies novel associations with COPD and airflow limitation in MOCS3, IFIT3 and SERPINA12.

BACKGROUND: Several regions of the genome have shown to be associated with COPD in genome-wide association studies of common variants. OBJECTIVE: To determine rare and potentially functional single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with the risk of COPD and severity of airflow limitation. METHODS: 3226 current or former smokers of European ancestry with lung function measures indicative of Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2 COPD or worse were genotyped using an exome array. An analysis of risk of COPD was carried out using ever smoking controls (n=4784). Associations with %predicted FEV1 were tested in cases. We followed-up signals of interest (p<10(-5)) in independent samples from a subset of the UK Biobank population and also undertook a more powerful discovery study by meta-analysing the exome array data and UK Biobank data for variants represented on both arrays. RESULTS: Among the associated variants were two in regions previously unreported for COPD; a low frequency non-synonymous SNP in MOCS3 (rs7269297, pdiscovery=3.08×10(-6), preplication=0.019) and a rare SNP in IFIT3, which emerged in the meta-analysis (rs140549288, pmeta=8.56×10(-6)). In the meta-analysis of % predicted FEV1 in cases, the strongest association was shown for a splice variant in a previously unreported region, SERPINA12 (rs140198372, pmeta=5.72×10(-6)). We also confirmed previously reported associations with COPD risk at MMP12, HHIP, GPR126 and CHRNA5. No associations in novel regions reached a stringent exome-wide significance threshold (p<3.7×10(-7)). CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several associations with the risk of COPD and severity of airflow limitation, including novel regions MOCS3, IFIT3 and SERPINA12, which warrant further study.

Genome-wide protein QTL mapping identifies human plasma kallikrein as a post-translational regulator of serum uPAR levels.

The soluble cleaved urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (scuPAR) is a circulating protein detected in multiple diseases, including various cancers, cardiovascular disease, and kidney disease, where elevated levels of scuPAR have been associated with worsening prognosis and increased disease aggressiveness. We aimed to identify novel genetic and biomolecular mechanisms regulating scuPAR levels. Elevated serum scuPAR levels were identified in asthma (n=514) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; n=219) cohorts when compared to controls (n=96). In these cohorts, a genome-wide association study of serum scuPAR levels identified a human plasma kallikrein gene (KLKB1) promoter polymorphism (rs4253238) associated with serum scuPAR levels in a control/asthma population (P=1.17 × 10(-7)), which was also observed in a COPD population (combined P=5.04 × 10(-12)). Using a fluorescent assay, we demonstrated that serum KLKB1 enzymatic activity was driven by rs4253238 and is inverse to scuPAR levels. Biochemical analysis identified that KLKB1 cleaves scuPAR and negates scuPAR's effects on primary human bronchial epithelial cells (HBECs) in vitro. Chymotrypsin was used as a proproteolytic control, while basal HBECs were used as a control to define scuPAR-driven effects. In summary, we reveal a novel post-translational regulatory mechanism for scuPAR using a hypothesis-free approach with implications for multiple human diseases.

Assessing patient preferences for the delivery of different community-based models of care using a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVES: To assess patient preferences for different models of care defined by location of care, frequency of care and principal carer within community-based health-care services for older people. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment administered within a face-to-face interview. SETTING: An intermediate care service in a large city within the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: The projected sample size was calculated to be 200; however, 77 patients were recruited to the study. The subjects had recently been discharged from hospital and were living at home and were receiving short-term care by a publicly funded intermediate care service. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The degree of preference, measured using single utility score, for individual service characteristics presented within a series of potential care packages. RESULTS: Location of care was the dominant service characteristics with care at home being the strongly stated preference when compared with outpatient care (0.003), hospital care (<0.001) and nursing home care (<0.001) relative to home care, although this was less pronounced among less sick patients. Additionally, the respondents indicated a dislike for very frequent care contacts. No particular type of professional carer background was universally preferred but, unsurprisingly, there was evidence that sick patients showed a preference for nurse-led care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients have clear preferences for the location for their care and were able to state preferences between different care packages when their ideal service was not available. Service providers can use this information to assess which models of care are most preferred within resource constraints.

Delirium and Delirium Severity Predict the Trajectory of the Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility in Hospitalized Older People: Findings From the DECIDE Study.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common, distressing, and associated with poor outcomes. Despite this, delirium remains poorly recognized, resulting in worse outcomes. There is an urgent need for methods to objectively assess for delirium. Physical function has been proposed as a potential surrogate marker, but few studies have monitored physical function in the context of delirium. We examined if trajectories of physical function are affected by the presence and severity of delirium in a representative sample of hospitalized participants older than 65 years. METHOD: During hospital admissions in 2016, we assessed participants from the Delirium and Cognitive Impact in Dementia study daily for delirium and physical function, using the Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility (HABAM). We used linear mixed models to assess the effect of delirium and delirium severity during admission on HABAM trajectory. RESULTS: Of 178 participants, 58 experienced delirium during admission. Median HABAM scores in those with delirium were significantly higher (indicating worse mobility) than those without delirium. Modeling HABAM trajectories, HABAM scores at first assessment were worse in those with delirium than those without, by 0.76 (95% CI: 0.49-1.04) points. Participants with severe delirium experienced a much greater perturbance in their physical function, with an even lower value at first assessment and slower subsequent improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Physical function was worse in those with delirium compared to without. This supports the assertion that motor disturbances are a core feature of delirium and monitoring physical function, using a tool such as the HABAM, may have clinical utility as a surrogate marker for delirium and its resolution.

Evaluation of Bedside Tests of Attention and Arousal Assessing Delirium in Parkinson's Disease, Dementia, and Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a serious acute neuropsychiatric condition associated with altered attention and arousal. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate simple bedside tests for attention and arousal to detect delirium in those with and without Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia. METHODS: Participants from two prospective delirium studies were pooled comprising 30 with PD without cognitive impairment, 24 with Lewy body cognitive impairment (PD dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies), 16 with another dementia and 179 PD and dementia-free older adults. Participants completed standardised delirium assessments including tests of attention: digit span, Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) attention and months of the year backwards; and arousal: Glasgow Coma Scale (GSC), Observational Scale of Level of Arousal (OSLA), Modified Richmond Agitation Scale and MDAS consciousness. Delirium was diagnosed using the DSM-5 criteria. RESULTS: On their first admission, 21.7%participants had prevalent delirium. Arousal measures accurately detected delirium in all participants (p < 0.01 for all), but only selected attention measures detected delirium in PD and dementia. In PD and dementia-free older adults, impaired digit span and OSLA were the optimal tests to detect delirium (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.838, p < 0.001) while in PD and dementia the optimal tests were MDAS attention and GCS (AUC=0.90 and 0.84, respectively, p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSION: Simple bedside tests of attention and arousal at a single visit could accurately detect delirium in PD, dementia and PD and dementia-free older adults; however, the optimal tests differed between groups. Combined attention and arousal scores increased accuracy, which could have clinical utility to aid the identification of delirium neurodegenerative disorders.

The role of ALOX5AP, LTA4H and LTB4R polymorphisms in determining baseline lung function and COPD susceptibility in UK smokers.

BACKGROUND: We have previously shown evidence that polymorphisms within genes controlling leukotriene B4 (LTB4) production (ALOX5AP and LTA4H) are associated with asthma susceptibility in children. Evidence also suggests a potential role of LTB4 in COPD disease mechanisms including recruitment of neutrophils to the lung. The aim of the current study was to see if these SNPs and those spanning the receptor genes for LTB4 (LTB4R1 and LTB4R2) influence baseline lung function and COPD susceptibility/severity in smokers. METHODS: Eight ALOX5AP, six LTA4H and six LTB4R single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in a UK Smoking Cohort (n = 992). Association with baseline lung function (FEV1 and FEV1/FVC ratio) was determined by linear regression. Logistic regression was used to compare smoking controls (n = 176) with spirometry-defined COPD cases (n = 599) and to more severe COPD cases (GOLD stage 3 and 4, n = 389). RESULTS: No association with ALOX5AP, LTA4H or LTB4R survived correction for multiple testing. However, we showed modest association with LTA4H rs1978331C (intron 11) with increased FEV1 (p = 0.029) and with increased FEV1/FVC ratio (p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that polymorphisms spanning ALOX5AP, LTA4H and the LTB4R locus are not major determinants of baseline lung function in smokers, but provide tentative evidence for LTA4H rs1978331C (intron 11) in determining baseline FEV1 and FEV1/FVC ratio in Caucasian Smokers in addition to our previously identified role in asthma susceptibility.

A systematic review of comprehensive geriatric assessment to improve outcomes for frail older people being rapidly discharged from acute hospital: 'interface geriatrics'.

BACKGROUND: many frail older people who attend acute hospital settings and who are discharged home within short periods (up to 72 h) have poor outcomes. This review assessed the role of comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) for such people. METHODS: standard bibliographic databases were searched for high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CGA in this setting. When appropriate, intervention effects were presented as rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: five trials of sufficient quality were included. There was no clear evidence of benefit for CGA interventions in this population in terms of mortality [RR 0.92 (95% CI 0.55-1.52)] or readmissions [RR 0.95 (95% CI 0.83-1.08)] or for subsequent institutionalisation, functional ability, quality-of-life or cognition. CONCLUSIONS: there is no clear evidence of benefit for CGA interventions in frail older people being discharged from emergency departments or acute medical units. However, few such trials have been carried out and their overall quality was poor. Further well designed trials are justified.

Improving recruitment of older people to research through good practice.

There is widespread evidence both of the exclusion of older people from clinical research, and of under-recruitment to clinical trials. This review and opinion piece provides practical advice to assist researchers both to adopt realistic, achievable recruitment rates and to increase the number of older people taking part in research. It analyses 14 consecutive recently published trials, providing the number needed to be screened to recruit one older participant (around 3:1), numbers excluded (up to 49%), drop out rates (5-37%) and whether the planned power was achieved. The value of planning and logistics are outlined, and approaches to optimising recruitment in hospital, primary care and care home settings are discussed, together with the challenges of involving older adults with mental incapacity and those from minority groups in research. The increasingly important task of engaging older members of the public and older patients in research is also discussed. Increasing the participation of older people in research will improve the generalisability of research findings and inform best practice in the clinical management of the growing older population.

Rehabilitation of older patients: day hospital compared with rehabilitation at home. Clinical outcomes.

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