A process evaluation of the NIDUS-Professional dementia training intervention for UK homecare workers.

INTRODUCTION: This process evaluation was conducted in parallel to the randomised controlled feasibility trial of NIDUS-Professional, a manualised remote dementia training intervention for homecare workers (HCWs), delivered alongside an individualised intervention for clients living with dementia and their family carers (NIDUS-Family). The process evaluation reports on: (i) intervention reach, dose and fidelity; (ii) contexts influencing agency engagement and (iii) alignment of findings with theoretical assumptions about how the intervention might produce change. METHODS: We report proportions of eligible HCWs receiving any intervention (reach), number of sessions attended (dose; attending ≥4/6 main sessions was predefined as adhering), intervention fidelity and adherence of clients and carers to NIDUS-Family (attending all 6-8 planned sessions). We interviewed HCWs, managers, family carers and facilitators. We integrated and thematically analysed, at the homecare agency level, qualitative interview and intervention recording data. RESULTS: 32/141 (23%) of eligible HCWs and 7/42 (17%) of family carers received any intervention; most who did adhered to the intervention (89% and 71%). Intervention fidelity was high. We analysed interviews with 20/44 HCWs, 3/4 managers and 3/7 family carers, as well as intervention recordings involving 32/44 HCWs. All agencies reported structural challenges in supporting intervention delivery. Agencies with greater management buy-in had higher dose and reach. HCWs valued NIDUS-Professional for enabling group reflection and peer support, providing practical, actionable care strategies and increasing their confidence as practitioners. CONCLUSION: NIDUS-Professional was valued by HCWs. Agency management, culture and priorities were key barriers to implementation; we discuss how to address these in a future trial.

Feasibility and acceptability of NIDUS-professional, a training and support intervention for homecare workers caring for clients living with dementia: a cluster-randomised feasibility trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the first randomised controlled trial of a dementia training and support intervention in UK homecare agencies, we aimed to assess: acceptability of our co-designed, manualised training, delivered by non-clinical facilitators; outcome completion feasibility; and costs for a future trial. METHODS: This cluster-randomised (2:1) single-blind, feasibility trial involved English homecare agencies. Intervention arm agency staff were offered group videocall sessions: 6 over 3 months, then monthly for 3 months (NIDUS-professional). Family carers (henceforth carers) and clients with dementia (dyads) were offered six to eight complementary, individual intervention sessions (NIDUS-Family). We collected potential trial measures as secondary outcomes remotely at baseline and 6 months: HCW (homecare worker) Work-related Strain Inventory (WRSI), Sense of Competence (SoC); proxy-rated Quality of Life (QOL), Disability Assessment for Dementia scale (DAD), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) and Homecare Satisfaction (HCS). RESULTS: From December 2021 to September 2022, we met agency (4 intervention, 2 control) and HCWs (n = 62) recruitment targets and recruited 16 carers and 16/60 planned clients. We met a priori progression criteria for adherence (≥4/6 sessions: 29/44 [65.9%,95% confidence interval (CI): 50.1,79.5]), HCW or carer proxy-outcome completion (15/16 (93.8% [69.8,99.8]) and proceeding with adaptation for HCWs outcome completion (46/63 (73.0% [CI: 60.3,83.4]). Delivery of NIDUS-Professional costs was £6,423 (£137 per eligible client). WRSI scores decreased and SoC increased at follow-up, with no significant between-group differences. For intervention arm proxy-rated outcomes, carer-rated QOL increased, HCW-rated was unchanged; carer and HCW-rated NPI decreased; DAD decreased (greater disability) and HCS was unchanged. CONCLUSION: A pragmatic trial is warranted; we will consider using aggregated, agency-level client outcomes, including neuropsychiatric symptoms.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of DREAMS START (Dementia RElAted Manual for Sleep; STrAtegies for RelaTives) for people living with dementia and their carers: a study protocol for a parallel multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Many people living with dementia experience sleep disturbance and there are no known effective treatments. Non-pharmacological treatment options should be the first-line sleep management. For family carers, relatives' sleep disturbance leads to interruption of their sleep, low mood and breakdown of care. Our team developed and delivered DREAMS START (Dementia RElAted Manual for Sleep; STrAtegies for RelaTives), a multimodal non-pharmacological intervention, showing it to be feasible and acceptable. The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to establish whether DREAMS START is clinically cost-effective in reducing sleep disturbances in people living with dementia living at home compared with usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will recruit 370 participant dyads (people living with dementia and family carers) from memory services, community mental health teams and the Join Dementia Research Website in England. Those meeting inclusion criteria will be randomised (1:1) either to DREAMS START or to usual treatment. DREAMS START is a six-session (1 hour/session), manualised intervention delivered every 1-2 weeks by supervised, non-clinically trained graduates. Outcomes will be collected at baseline, 4 months and 8 months with the primary outcome being the Sleep Disorders Inventory score at 8 months. Secondary outcomes for the person with dementia (all proxy) include quality of life, daytime sleepiness, neuropsychiatric symptoms and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes for the family carer include quality of life, sleep disturbance, mood, burden and service use and caring/work activity. Analyses will be intention-to-treat and we will conduct a process evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: London-Camden & Kings Cross Ethics Committee (20/LO/0894) approved the study. We will disseminate our findings in high-impact peer-reviewed journals and at national and international conferences. This research has the potential to improve sleep and quality of life for people living with dementia and their carers, in a feasible and scalable intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13072268.

A psychosocial goal-setting and manualised support intervention for independence in dementia (NIDUS-Family) versus goal setting and routine care: a single-masked, phase 3, superiority, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although national guidelines recommend that everyone with dementia receives personalised post-diagnostic support, few do. Unlike previous interventions that improved personalised outcomes in people with dementia, the NIDUS-Family intervention is fully manualised and deliverable by trained and supervised, non-clinical facilitators. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of home-based goal setting plus NIDUS-Family in supporting the attainment of personalised goals set by people with dementia and their carers. METHODS: We did a two-arm, single-masked, multi-site, randomised, clinical trial recruiting patient-carer dyads from community settings. We randomly assigned dyads to either home-based goal setting plus NIDUS-Family or goal setting and routine care (control). Randomisation was blocked and stratified by site (2:1; intervention to control), with allocations assigned via a remote web-based system. NIDUS-Family is tailored to goals set by dyads by selecting modules involving behavioural interventions, carer support, psychoeducation, communication and coping skills, enablement, and environmental adaptations. The intervention involved six to eight video-call or telephone sessions (or in person when COVID-19-related restrictions allowed) over 6 months, then telephone follow-ups every 2-3 months for 6 months. The primary outcome was carer-rated goal attainment scaling (GAS) score at 12 months. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN11425138. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2020, and May 9, 2021, we assessed 1083 potential dyads for eligibility, 781 (72·1%) of whom were excluded. Of 302 eligible dyads, we randomly assigned 98 (32·4%) to the control group and 204 (67·5%) to the intervention group. The mean age of participants with dementia was 79·9 years (SD 8·2), 169 (56%) were women, and 133 (44%) were men. 247 (82%) dyads completed the primary outcome, which favoured the intervention (mean GAS score at 12 months 58·7 [SD 13·0; n=163] vs 49·0 [14·1; n=84]; adjusted difference in means 10·23 [95% CI 5·75-14·71]; p<0·001). 31 (15·2%) participants in the intervention group and 14 (14·3%) in the control group experienced serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, NIDUS-Family is the first readily scalable intervention for people with dementia and their family carers that improves attainment of personalised goals. We therefore recommend that it be implemented in health and care services. FUNDING: UK Alzheimer's Society.

The Impact of Specialist Care on Teenage and Young Adult Patient-Reported Outcomes in England: A BRIGHTLIGHT Study.

Purpose: In England, health care policy promotes specialized age-appropriate cancer services for teenagers and young adults (TYA), for those aged 13-24 years at diagnosis. Specialist Principal Treatment Centers (PTCs) provide enhanced age-specific care for TYA, although many still receive all or some of their care in adult or children's cancer services. Our aim was to determine the patient-reported outcomes associated with TYA-PTC based care. Methods: We conducted a multicenter cohort study, recruiting 1114 TYA aged 13-24 years at diagnosis. Data collection involved a bespoke survey at 6,12,18, 24, and 36 months after diagnosis. Confounder adjusted analyses of perceived social support, illness perception, anxiety and depression, and health status, compared patients receiving NO-TYA-PTC care with those receiving ALL-TYA-PTC and SOME-TYA-PTC care. Results: Eight hundred and thirty completed the first survey. There was no difference in perceived social support, anxiety, or depression between the three categories of care. Significantly higher illness perception was observed in the ALL-TYA-PTC and SOME-TYA-PTC group compared to the NO-TYA-PTC group, (adjusted difference in mean (ADM) score on Brief Illness Perception scale 2.28 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.48-4.09) and 2.93 [1.27-4.59], respectively, p = 0.002). Similarly, health status was significantly better in the NO-TYA-PTC (ALL-TYA-PTC: ADM -0.011 [95%CI -0.046 to 0.024] and SOME-TYA-PTC: -0.054 [-0.086 to -0.023]; p = 0.006). Conclusion: The reason for the difference in perceived health status is unclear. TYA who accessed a TYA-PTC (all or some care) had higher perceived illness. This may reflect greater education and promotion of self-care by health care professionals in TYA units.

Salivary Electrostimulation in the Treatment of Radiation Therapy-Induced Xerostomia (LEONIDAS-2): A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Masked, Sham-Controlled, Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy-induced xerostomia significantly affects quality of life in head and neck cancer survivors. Neuro-electrostimulation of the salivary glands may safely increase natural salivation and reduce dry mouth symptoms. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This multicenter, double-masked, randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial assessed the long-term effects of a commercially available intraoral neuro-electrostimulating device in lessening xerostomia symptoms, increasing salivary flow, and improving quality of life in individuals with radiation therapy-induced xerostomia. Using a computer-generated randomization list, participants were assigned (1:1) to an active intraoral custom-made removable electrostimulating device or a sham device to be used for 12 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients reporting a 30% improvement on the xerostomia visual analog scale at 12 months. A number of secondary and exploratory outcomes were also assessed through validated measurements (sialometry and visual analog scale) and quality-of-life questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-H&N35, OH-QoL16, and SF-36). RESULTS: As per protocol, 86 participants were recruited. Intention-to-treat analyses showed no statistical evidence of a difference between the study groups with respect to the primary outcome or for any of the secondary clinical or quality-of-life outcomes. Exploratory analyses showed a statistically significant difference in the changes over time of the dry mouth subscale score of the EORTC QLQ-H&N35 in favor of the active intervention. CONCLUSIONS: LEONIDAS-2 did not meet the primary and secondary outcomes.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Self-Management in Three Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Pilot Randomized Trial.

Objectives: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries. Health systems are ill prepared to manage the increase in COPD cases. Methods: We performed a pilot effectiveness-implementation randomized field trial of a community health worker (CHW)-supported, 1-year self-management intervention in individuals with COPD grades B-D. The study took place in low-resource settings of Nepal, Peru, and Uganda. The primary outcome was the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score at 1 year. We evaluated differences in moderate to severe exacerbations, all-cause hospitalizations, and the EuroQol score (EQ-5D-3 L) at 12 months. Measurements and Main Results: We randomly assigned 239 participants (119 control arm, 120 intervention arm) with grades B-D COPD to a multicomponent, CHW-supported intervention or standard of care and COPD education. Twenty-five participants (21%) died or were lost to follow-up in the control arm compared with 11 (9%) in the intervention arm. At 12 months, there was no difference in mean total SGRQ score between the intervention and control arms (34.7 vs. 34.0 points; adjusted mean difference, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, -4.2, 6.1; P = 0.71). The intervention arm had a higher proportion of hospitalizations than the control arm (10% vs. 5.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.8, 7.5; P = 0.15) at 12 months. Conclusions: A CHW-based intervention to support self-management of acute exacerbations of COPD in three resource-poor settings did not result in differences in SGRQ scores at 1 year. Fidelity was high, and intervention engagement was moderate. Although these results cannot differentiate between a failed intervention or implementation, they nonetheless suggest that we need to revisit our strategy. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03359915).

Unmet Diagnostic and Therapeutic Opportunities for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Rationale: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent and burdensome condition in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Challenges to better care include more effective diagnosis and access to affordable interventions. There are no previous reports describing therapeutic needs of populations with COPD in LMICs who were identified through screening. Objectives: To describe unmet therapeutic need in screening-detected COPD in LMIC settings. Methods: We compared interventions recommended by the international Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease COPD strategy document, with that received in 1,000 people with COPD identified by population screening at three LMIC sites in Nepal, Peru, and Uganda. We calculated costs using data on the availability and affordability of medicines. Measurement and Main Results: The greatest unmet need for nonpharmacological interventions was for education and vaccinations (applicable to all), pulmonary rehabilitation (49%), smoking cessation (30%), and advice on biomass smoke exposure (26%). Ninety-five percent of the cases were previously undiagnosed, and few were receiving therapy (4.5% had short-acting ß-agonists). Only three of 47 people (6%) with a previous COPD diagnosis had access to drugs consistent with recommendations. None of those with more severe COPD were accessing appropriate maintenance inhalers. Even when available, maintenance treatments were unaffordable, with 30 days of treatment costing more than a low-skilled worker's daily average wage. Conclusions: We found a significant missed opportunity to reduce the burden of COPD in LMIC settings, with most cases undiagnosed. Although there is unmet need in developing novel therapies, in LMICs where the burden is greatest, better diagnosis combined with access to affordable interventions could translate to immediate benefit.

Point-of-care Analysis for Non-invasive Diagnosis of Oral cancer (PANDORA): A technology-development proof of concept diagnostic accuracy study of dielectrophoresis in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma and dysplasia.

BACKGROUND: Delays in the identification and referral of oral cancer remain frequent. An accurate and non-invasive diagnostic test to be performed in primary care may help identifying oral cancer at an early stage and reduce mortality. Point-of-care Analysis for Non-invasive Diagnosis of Oral cancer (PANDORA) was a proof-of-concept prospective diagnostic accuracy study aimed at advancing the development of a dielectrophoresis-based diagnostic platform for oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and epithelial dysplasia (OED) using a novel automated DEPtech 3DEP analyser. METHODS: The aim of PANDORA was to identify the set-up of the DEPtech 3DEP analyser associated with the highest diagnostic accuracy in identifying OSCC and OED from non-invasive brush biopsy samples, as compared to the gold standard test (histopathology). Measures of accuracy included sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value. Brush biopsies were collected from individuals with histologically proven OSCC and OED, histologically proven benign mucosal disease, and healthy mucosa (standard test), and analysed via dielectrophoresis (index test). RESULTS: 40 individuals with OSCC/OED and 79 with benign oral mucosal disease/healthy mucosa were recruited. Sensitivity and specificity of the index test was 86.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.9%-95.6%) and 83.6% (95% CI, 73.0%-91.2%). Analysing OSCC samples separately led to higher diagnostic accuracy, with 92.0% (95% CI, 74.0%-99.0%) sensitivity and 94.5% (95% CI, 86.6%-98.5%) specificity. CONCLUSION: The DEPtech 3DEP analyser has the potential to identify OSCC and OED with notable diagnostic accuracy and warrants further investigation as a potential triage test in the primary care setting for patients who may need to progress along the diagnostic pathway and be offered a surgical biopsy.

Feasibility and acceptability of NIDUS-Professional, a training and support intervention for homecare workers caring for clients living with dementia: a cluster-randomised feasibility trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Most people living with dementia want to remain living in their own homes, and are supported to do so by family carers and homecare workers. There are concerns that homecare is often unable to meet the needs of this client group, with limited evidence regarding effective interventions to improve it for people living with dementia. We have developed a training and support programme for homecare workers (NIDUS-Professional) to be delivered alongside support sessions for people living with dementia and their family carers (NIDUS-Family). We aim to assess (1) its acceptability among homecare workers and employing agencies, and (2) the feasibility of homecare workers, people living with dementia and their family carers completing the outcomes of intervention in a future randomised controlled trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a cluster-randomised (2:1) single-blind, multisite feasibility trial. We aim to recruit 60-90 homecare workers, 30-60 clients living with dementia and their family carers through 6-9 English homecare agencies. In the intervention arm, homecare staff will be offered six group sessions on video call over three months, followed by monthly group sessions over the subsequent three-month period. Outcome measures will be collected at baseline and at six months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study received ethical approval on 7 January 2020 from the Camden & King's Cross Research Ethics Committee. Study reference: 19/LO/1667. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal, conference presentation and blog to research and clinical audiences; we will attend forums to present findings to participating homecare agencies and their clients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN15757555.

Process evaluation of the New Interventions for independence in Dementia Study (NIDUS) Family stream randomised controlled trial: protocol.

INTRODUCTION: New Interventions for independence in Dementia Study (NIDUS)-Family is an Alzheimer's Society funded new manualised, multimodal psychosocial intervention to support people living with dementia (PLWD) to achieve goals that they and their family carers set, towards living as independently and as well as possible at home for longer. This process evaluation will be embedded within the NIDUS-Family Randomised Controlled Trial intervention-arm (n=199), testing how the intervention influences change, as measured by goal attainment. The evaluation will test, refine and develop the NIDUS-Family theoretical model, associated causal assumptions and logic model to identify key mechanisms of impact, implementation and contextual factors influencing the intervention's effectiveness. Findings will inform how the programme is implemented in practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The process evaluation will be theory driven and apply a convergent mixed-methods design. Dyads (PLWD and family carer) will be purposively sampled based on high or low Goal Attainment Scaling scores (trial primary outcome). Qualitative interviews with dyads (approx. n=30) and their respective facilitators post-trial will explore their experiences of receiving and delivering the intervention. Interviews will be iteratively thematically analysed. Matching observational quantitative data will be collected concurrently from videorecordings and/or audiorecordings of NIDUS-Family dyad trial sessions. Further quantitative data will be collected through an acceptability questionnaire for all intervention-arm dyads (n=199). Mixed-method integration will use an interactive analysis strategy, considering qualitative and quantitative findings through mixed-method matrix for dyadic level 'case studies', and a joint display for 'population' level analysis and interpretation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was received from Camden & Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee (REC). Study reference: 19/LO/1667. IRAS project ID: 271 363. This work is carried out within the UCL Alzheimer's Society Centre of Excellence (grant 300) for Independence at home, NIDUS programme.Findings will be disseminated through publications and conferences, and as recommendations for the implementation study and strategy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11425138.

Care home residents with dementia: Prevalence, incidence, and associations with sleep disturbance in an English cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: People living with dementia in care homes often have sleep disturbances, but little is known about incidence and importance. METHODS: We interviewed 1483 participants in 97 care homes and report prevalence, 1-year incidence, and baseline associations of clinically significant sleep disturbance in people with dementia. RESULTS: Baseline prevalence of clinically significant sleep disturbance was 13.7% (200/1460); 31.3% (457/1462) had them at least once over 16 months. One-year incidence was 25.2%. At baseline, residents with sleep disturbance had lower quality of life (mean difference -4.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.53 to -3.16) and were more frequently prescribed sleep medications (odds ratio 1.75; CI 1.17 to 2.61) than other residents. DISCUSSION: Approximately one-third of care home residents with dementia have or develop sleep disturbances over 1 year. These are associated with lower quality of life and prescription of sedatives, which may have negative outcomes; therefore, it is important to develop effective treatments.

Time to reflect is a rare and valued opportunity; a pilot of the NIDUS-professional dementia training intervention for homecare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Most people living with dementia want to continue living in their own home for as long as possible and many rely on support from homecare services to do so. There are concerns that homecare often fails to meet the needs of clients with dementia, but there is limited evidence regarding effective interventions to improve its delivery for this client group. We aimed to assess whether a co-designed, 6-session dementia training intervention for homecare workers (NIDUS-professional) was acceptable and feasible. Facilitated training sessions were delivered over 3 months, followed by 3, monthly implementation meetings to embed changes in practice. Two trained and supervised facilitators without clinical qualifications delivered the intervention via group video-calls during Oct 2020-March 2021 to a group of seven homecare workers from one agency in England. Participants provided qualitative feedback 3- and 6-months post intervention. Qualitative interview data and facilitator notes were integrated in a thematic analysis. Adherence to the intervention and fidelity of delivery were high, indicating that it was acceptable and feasible to deliver in practice. Thirty of a possible 42 (71.4%) group sessions were attended. In our thematic analysis we report one over-arching theme: 'Having time and space to reflect is a rare opportunity'. Within this we identified four subthemes (Having time to reflect is a rare opportunity; Reflecting with peers enhances learning; Reflection and perspective taking can improve care; Recognising skills and building confidence) through which we explored how participants valued the intervention to discuss their work and learn new skills. Attendance was lower for the implementation sessions, perhaps reflecting participants' lack of clarity about their purpose. We used our findings to consider how we can maintain positive impacts of the manualised sessions, so that these are translated into tangible, scalable benefits for people living with dementia and the homecare workforce. A randomised feasibility trial is underway.

Discriminative Accuracy of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Screening Instruments in 3 Low- and Middle-Income Country Settings.

Importance: Most of the global morbidity and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with significant economic effects. Objective: To assess the discriminative accuracy of 3 instruments using questionnaires and peak expiratory flow (PEF) to screen for COPD in 3 LMIC settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional analysis of discriminative accuracy, conducted between January 2018 and March 2020 in semiurban Bhaktapur, Nepal; urban Lima, Peru; and rural Nakaseke, Uganda, using a random age- and sex-stratified sample of the population 40 years or older. Exposures: Three screening tools, the COPD Assessment in Primary Care to Identify Undiagnosed Respiratory Disease and Exacerbation Risk (CAPTURE; range, 0-6; high risk indicated by a score of 5 or more or score 2-5 with low PEF [<250 L/min for females and <350 L/min for males]), the COPD in LMICs Assessment questionnaire (COLA-6; range, 0-5; high risk indicated by a score of 4 or more), and the Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ; range, 0-25; high risk indicated by a score of 18 or less) were assessed against a reference standard diagnosis of COPD using quality-assured postbronchodilator spirometry. CAPTURE and COLA-6 include a measure of PEF. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was discriminative accuracy of the tools in identifying COPD as measured by area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) with 95% CIs. Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Results: Among 10 709 adults who consented to participate in the study (mean age, 56.3 years (SD, 11.7); 50% female), 35% had ever smoked, and 30% were currently exposed to biomass smoke. The unweighted prevalence of COPD at the 3 sites was 18.2% (642/3534 participants) in Nepal, 2.7% (97/3550) in Peru, and 7.4% (264/3580) in Uganda. Among 1000 COPD cases, 49.3% had clinically important disease (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease classification B-D), 16.4% had severe or very severe airflow obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second <50% predicted), and 95.3% of cases were previously undiagnosed. The AUC for the screening instruments ranged from 0.717 (95% CI, 0.677-0.774) for LFQ in Peru to 0.791 (95% CI, 0.770-0.809) for COLA-6 in Nepal. The sensitivity ranged from 34.8% (95% CI, 25.3%-45.2%) for COLA-6 in Nepal to 64.2% (95% CI, 60.3%-67.9%) for CAPTURE in Nepal. The mean time to administer the instruments was 7.6 minutes (SD 1.11), and data completeness was 99.5%. Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrated that screening instruments for COPD were feasible to administer in 3 low- and middle-income settings. Further research is needed to assess instrument performance in other low- and middle-income settings and to determine whether implementation is associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Multicentre evaluation of two multiplex PCR platforms for the rapid microbiological investigation of nosocomial pneumonia in UK ICUs: the INHALE WP1 study.

BACKGROUND: Culture-based microbiological investigation of hospital-acquired or ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP or VAP) is insensitive, with aetiological agents often unidentified. This can lead to excess antimicrobial treatment of patients with susceptible pathogens, while those with resistant bacteria are treated inadequately for prolonged periods. Using PCR to seek pathogens and their resistance genes directly from clinical samples may improve therapy and stewardship. METHODS: Surplus routine lower respiratory tract samples were collected from intensive care unit patients about to receive new or changed antibiotics for hospital-onset lower respiratory tract infections at 15 UK hospitals. Testing was performed using the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (bioMérieux) and Unyvero Pneumonia Panel (Curetis). Concordance analysis compared machine and routine microbiology results, while Bayesian latent class (BLC) analysis estimated the sensitivity and specificity of each test, incorporating information from both PCR panels and routine microbiology. FINDINGS: In 652 eligible samples; PCR identified pathogens in considerably more samples compared with routine microbiology: 60.4% and 74.2% for Unyvero and FilmArray respectively vs 44.2% by routine microbiology. PCR tests also detected more pathogens per sample than routine microbiology. For common HAP/VAP pathogens, FilmArray had sensitivity of 91.7%-100.0% and specificity of 87.5%-99.5%; Unyvero had sensitivity of 50.0%-100.0%%, and specificity of 89.4%-99.0%. BLC analysis indicated that, compared with PCR, routine microbiology had low sensitivity, ranging from 27.0% to 69.4%. INTERPRETATION: Conventional and BLC analysis demonstrated that both platforms performed similarly and were considerably more sensitive than routine microbiology, detecting potential pathogens in patient samples reported as culture negative. The increased sensitivity of detection realised by PCR offers potential for improved antimicrobial prescribing.

A proof of concept pilot trial of probiotics in symptomatic oral lichen planus (CABRIO).

OBJECTIVE: To preliminary evaluate the clinical effects of probiotics in individuals with symptomatic oral lichen planus and the possible mechanisms of action. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A group of 30 individuals with symptomatic oral lichen planus were recruited in a randomised double-blind parallel group controlled (1:1) proof-of-concept pilot trial of probiotic VSL#3 vs placebo. Efficacy outcomes included changes in pain numeric rating scale, oral disease severity score and the chronic oral mucosal disease questionnaire. Adverse effects, home diary and withdrawals were assessed as feasibility outcomes. Mechanistic outcomes included changes in salivary and serum levels of CXCL10 and IFN-γ and in oral microbial composition. RESULTS: The probiotic VSL#3 was safe and well tolerated. We observed no statistically significant change in pain, disease activity, quality of life, serum/salivary CXCL10 or oral microbial composition with respect to placebo. Salivary IFN-γ levels demonstrate a trend for a reduced level in the active group (p = 0.082) after 30 days of probiotic consumption. CONCLUSIONS: The present proof-of-concept study provides some weak not convincing indication of biological and clinical effects of probiotic VSL#3 in individuals with painful oral lichen planus. Further research in this field is needed, with the current study providing useful information to the design of future clinical trials.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of a New psychosocial intervention to support Independence in Dementia (NIDUS-family) for family carers and people living with dementia in their own homes: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most people living with dementia want to remain living in their own homes and are supported to do so by family carers. No interventions have consistently demonstrated improvements to people with dementia's life quality, functioning, or other indices of living as well as possible with dementia. We have co-produced, with health and social care professionals and family carers of people with dementia, a new intervention (NIDUS-family). To our knowledge, NIDUS-family is the first manualised intervention that can be tailored to personal goals of people living with dementia and their families and is delivered by facilitators without clinical training. The intervention utilizes components of behavioural management, carer support, psychoeducation, communication and coping skills training, enablement, and environmental adaptations, with modules selected to address dyads' selected goals. We will evaluate the effect of NIDUS-family and usual care on goal attainment, as measured by Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) rated by family carers, compared to usual care alone at 12-month follow-up. We will also determine whether NIDUS-family and usual care is more cost-effective than usual care alone over 12 months. METHODS: A randomised, two-arm, single-masked, multi-site clinical trial involving 297 people living with dementia-family carer dyads. Dyads will be randomised 2:1 to receive the NIDUS-family intervention with usual care (n = 199) or usual care alone (n = 98). The intervention group will be offered, over 1 year, via 6-8 video call or telephone sessions (or face to face if COVID-19 restrictions allow in the recruitment period) in the initial 6 months, followed by telephone follow-ups every 1-2 months to support implementation, with a trained facilitator. DISCUSSION: Increasing the time lived at home by people living with dementia is likely to benefit lives now and in the future. Our intervention, which we adapted to include remote delivery prior to trial commencement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, aims to address barriers to living as well and as independently as possible that distress people living with dementia, exacerbate family carer(s) stress, negatively affect relationships, lead to safety risks, and frequently precipitate avoidable moves to a care home. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number ISRCTN11425138 . Registered on 7 October 2019.

INHALE: the impact of using FilmArray Pneumonia Panel molecular diagnostics for hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia on antimicrobial stewardship and patient outcomes in UK Critical Care-study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonias (HAP and VAP) are common in critical care and can be life-threatening. Rapid microbiological diagnostics, linked to an algorithm to translate their results into antibiotic choices, could simultaneously improve patient outcomes and antimicrobial stewardship. METHODS: The INHALE Randomised Controlled Trial is a multi-centre, parallel study exploring the potential of the BioFire FilmArray molecular diagnostic to guide antibiotic treatment of HAP/VAP in intensive care units (ICU); it identifies pathogens and key antibiotic resistance in around 90 min. The comparator is standard care whereby the patient receives empirical antibiotics until microbiological culture results become available, typically after 48-72 h. Adult and paediatric ICU patients are eligible if they are about to receive antibiotics for a suspected lower respiratory infection (including HAP/VAP) for the first time or a change in antibiotic because of a deteriorating clinical condition. Breathing spontaneously or intubated, they must have been hospitalised for 48 h or more. Patients are randomised 1:1 to receive either antibiotics guided by the FilmArray molecular diagnostic and its trial-based prescribing algorithm or standard care, meaning empirical antibiotics based on local policy, adapted subsequently based upon local microbiology culture results. Co-primary outcomes are (i) non-inferiority in clinical cure of pneumonia at 14 days post-randomisation and (ii) superiority in antimicrobial stewardship at 24 h post-randomisation (defined as % of patients on active and proportionate antibiotics). Secondary outcomes include further stewardship reviews; length of ICU stay; co-morbidity indicators, including septic shock, change in sequential organ failure assessment scores, and secondary pneumonias; ventilator-free days; adverse events over 21 days; all-cause mortality; and total antibiotic usage. Both cost-effectiveness of the molecular diagnostic-guided therapy and behavioural aspects determining antibiotic prescribing are being explored. A sample size of 552 will be required to detect clinically significant results with 90% power and 5% significance for the co-primary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This trial will test whether the potential merits of rapid molecular diagnostics for pathogen and resistance detection in HAP/VAP are realised in patient outcomes and/or improved antibiotic stewardship. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN16483855 . Retrospectively registered on 15 July 2019.