Play brick therapy to aid the social skills of children and young people with autism spectrum disorder: the I-SOCIALISE cluster RCT.

Background: Social skills interventions are commonly recommended to help children and young people with autism spectrum disorder develop social skills, but some struggle to engage in these interventions. LEGO® (LEGO System A/S, Billund, Denmark) based therapy, a group social skills intervention, aims to be more interesting and engaging. Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of LEGO® based therapy on the social and emotional skills of children and young people with autism spectrum disorder in school settings compared with usual support. Secondary objectives included evaluations of cost-effectiveness, acceptability and treatment fidelity. Design: A cluster randomised controlled trial randomly allocating participating schools to either LEGO® based therapy and usual support or usual support only. Setting: Mainstream schools in the north of England. Participants: Children and young people (aged 7-15 years) with autism spectrum disorder, their parent/guardian, an associated teacher/teaching assistant and a facilitator teacher/teaching assistant (intervention schools only). Intervention: Schools randomised to the intervention arm delivered 12 weekly sessions of LEGO® based therapy, which promotes collaborative play and encourages social problem-solving in groups of three children and young people with a facilitator (trained teacher or teaching assistant). Participants received usual support from school and community services. Participants in the control arm received usual support only. Research assistants and statisticians were blind to treatment allocation. Main outcome measure: The social skills subscale of the Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS), completed by the children and young people's unblinded teacher pre randomisation and 20 weeks post randomisation. The SSIS social skills subscale measures social skills including social communication, co-operation, empathy, assertion, responsibility and self-control. Participants completed a number of other pre- and post-randomisation measures of emotional health, quality of life, loneliness, problem behaviours, academic competence, service resource utilisation and adverse events. Results: A total of 250 children and young people from 98 schools were randomised: 127 to the intervention arm and 123 to the control arm. Intention-to-treat analysis of the main outcome measure showed a modest positive difference of 3.74 points (95% confidence interval -0.16 to 7.63 points, standardised effect size 0.18; p = 0.06) in favour of the intervention arm. Statistical significance increased in per-protocol analysis, with a modest positive difference (standardised effect size 0.21; p = 0.036). Cost-effectiveness of the intervention was found in reduced service use costs and a small increase in quality-adjusted life-years. Intervention fidelity and acceptability were positive. No intervention-related adverse events or effects were reported. Conclusions: The primary and pre-planned sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome consistently showed a positive clinical difference, with modest standardised effect sizes of between 0.15 and 0.21. There were positive health economics and qualitative findings, corroborated by the difference between arms for the majority of secondary outcomes, which were not statistically significant but favoured the intervention arm. Post hoc additional analysis was exploratory and was not used in drawing this conclusion. Given the small positive change, LEGO® based therapy for children and young people with autism spectrum disorder in schools should be considered. Limitations: The primary outcome measure was completed by an unblinded teacher (rather than by the facilitator). Future work: The study team recommends future research into LEGO® based therapy, particularly in school environments. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN64852382. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme (NIHR award ref: 15/49/32) and is published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 11, No. 12. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Autism spectrum disorder is characterised by difficulties with social relationships and communication, which can make it difficult to make friends. Social skills training is commonly used to help children and young people learn different social skills, but some children and young people do not enjoy these therapies. LEGO^® (LEGO System A/S, Billund, Denmark) based therapy takes a new approach by focusing on making the process interesting and fun. This research investigated the effect of LEGO^® based therapy groups in schools on the social and emotional abilities of children and young people with autism spectrum disorder. It was a randomised controlled trial, so each school that was taking part was randomly chosen to provide either usual support (from the school or NHS services) or 12 sessions of LEGO^® based therapy with a trained school staff member as well as usual support. Children and young people played one of three roles ­ the 'engineer' (gives instructions), the 'supplier' (finds the pieces) or the 'builder' (builds the model) ­ and worked together. Questionnaires completed by children and young people, their parents/guardians and teachers were used to look at the intervention's effects. The main objective was to see if there was a change in social skills measured by a teacher-completed questionnaire. Results showed that the social skills of children and young people in the LEGO^® based therapy groups did improve a little. We found that the intervention is not very costly for schools to run. Many parents/guardians and teachers thought that the intervention was beneficial and that the children and young people enjoyed it.

Appropriate design and reporting of superiority, equivalence and non-inferiority clinical trials incorporating a benefit-risk assessment: the BRAINS study including expert workshop.

Background: Randomised controlled trials are designed to assess the superiority, equivalence or non-inferiority of a new health technology, but which trial design should be used is not always obvious in practice. In particular, when using equivalence or non-inferiority designs, multiple outcomes of interest may be important for the success of a trial, despite the fact that usually only a single primary outcome is used to design the trial. Benefit-risk methods are used in the regulatory clinical trial setting to assess multiple outcomes and consider the trade-off of the benefits against the risks, but are not regularly implemented in publicly funded trials. Objectives: The aim of the project is to aid the design of clinical trials with multiple outcomes of interest by defining when each trial design is appropriate to use and identifying when to use benefit-risk methods to assess outcome trade-offs (qualitatively or quantitatively) in a publicly funded trial setting. Methods: A range of methods was used to elicit expert opinion to answer the project objectives, including a web-based survey of relevant researchers, a rapid review of current literature and a 2-day consensus workshop of experts (in 2019). Results: We created a list of 19 factors to aid researchers in selecting the most appropriate trial design, containing the following overarching sections: population, intervention, comparator, outcomes, feasibility and perspectives. Six key reasons that indicate a benefit-risk method should be considered within a trial were identified: (1) when the success of the trial depends on more than one outcome; (2) when important outcomes within the trial are in competing directions (i.e. a health technology is better for one outcome, but worse for another); (3) to allow patient preferences to be included and directly influence trial results; (4) to provide transparency on subjective recommendations from a trial; (5) to provide consistency in the approach to presenting results from a trial; and (6) to synthesise multiple outcomes into a single metric. Further information was provided to support the use of benefit-risk methods in appropriate circumstances, including the following: methods identified from the review were collated into different groupings and described to aid the selection of a method; potential implementation of methods throughout the trial process were provided and discussed (with examples); and general considerations were described for those using benefit-risk methods. Finally, a checklist of five pieces of information that should be present when reporting benefit-risk methods was defined, with two additional items specifically for reporting the results. Conclusions: These recommendations will assist research teams in selecting which trial design to use and deciding whether or not a benefit-risk method could be included to ensure research questions are answered appropriately. Additional information is provided to support consistent use and clear reporting of benefit-risk methods in the future. The recommendations can also be used by funding committees to confirm that appropriate considerations of the trial design have been made. Limitations: This research was limited in scope and should be considered in conjunction with other trial design methodologies to assess appropriateness. In addition, further research is needed to provide concrete information about which benefit-risk methods are best to use in publicly funded trials, along with recommendations that are specific to each method. Study registration: The rapid review is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019144882. Funding: Funded by the Medical Research Council UK and the National Institute for Health and Care Research as part of the Medical Research Council-National Institute for Health and Care Research Methodology Research programme.

Randomised controlled trials are considered the best way to gather evidence about potential NHS treatments. They can be designed from different perspectives depending whether the aim is to show that a new treatment is better than, equal to or no worse than the current best available treatment. The selection of this design relates to the single most important outcome; however, often multiple outcomes can be affected by a treatment. For example, a new treatment may improve disease management but increase side effects. Patients want a treatment to work but not at the price of poor quality of life; therefore, a trade-off must be made, and the recommended treatment depends on this trade-off. Benefit­risk methods can assess the trade-off between multiple outcomes and can include patient preference. These methods could improve the way that decisions are made about treatments in the NHS, but there is currently limited research about the use of these methods in publicly funded trials. The aim of this report is to improve the design of clinical trials by helping researchers to select the most appropriate trial design and to decide when to include a benefit­risk method. The recommendations were created using the opinions of experts within the field and consisted of a survey, review of the literature and a workshop. The project created a list of 19 factors that can assist researchers to select the most appropriate trial design. Furthermore, six key areas were identified in which researchers may consider including a benefit­risk method within a trial. Finally, if a benefit­risk assessment is being used, a checklist of items has been created that identifies the information important to include in reports. This report is, however, limited in its applicability and further research should extend this work, as well as provide more detail on individual methods that are available.

I-SOCIALISE: Results from a cluster randomised controlled trial investigating the social competence and isolation of children with autism taking part in LEGO® based therapy ('Play Brick Therapy') clubs in school environments.

LAY ABSTRACT: Autism is characterised by keen interests and differences in social interactions and communication. Activities that help autistic children and young people with social skills are commonly used in UK schools. LEGO® based therapy is a new activity that provides interesting and fun social opportunities for children and young people and involves building LEGO® models together. This study looked at LEGO® based therapy for the social skills of autistic children and young people in schools. It was a randomised controlled trial, meaning each school was randomly chosen (like flipping a coin) to either run LEGO® based therapy groups in school over 12 weeks and have usual support from school or other professionals, or only have usual support from school or other professionals. The effect of the LEGO® based therapy groups was measured by asking children and young people, their parents/guardians, and a teacher at school in both arms of the study to complete some questionnaires. The main objective was to see if the teacher's questionnaire answers about the children and young people's social skills changed between their first and second completions. The social skills of participants in the LEGO® based therapy groups were found to have improved in a small way when compared to usual support only. The study also found that LEGO® based therapy was not very costly for schools to run and parents/guardians and teachers said they thought it was good for their children and young people. We suggest further research into different potential benefits of LEGO® based therapy.

Process Evaluation of a Collaborative Social Media Health Campaign: An Analysis of Partner and User Engagement.

Collaborative health promotion campaigns are advantageous because they extend the resources and reach of any single organization. Yet, they can be challenging because they require partner commitment and compromise. On social media, however, these campaigns are especially beneficial due to the high demand for ongoing content that facilitates user engagement. This study is a content analysis of an annual collaborative campaign, Preteen Vaccine Week, conducted by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to promote preteen immunizations. Campaign partners are encouraged to use creative assets provided by CDPH and to follow a themed content calendar. Message characteristics and audience engagement were evaluated for 2 years of the campaign (2019-2020). Results indicate that when there was a specific health issue scheduled as the daily theme, 85% of posts reflected that health topic. However, when the theme was general awareness, only 15% of posts aligned. Furthermore, the majority of posts included supplemental audiovisual assets of which nearly half were provided by CDPH. These findings suggest partners attempted to work together. Analyses of message characteristics indicate there was little effort to encourage online user engagement; however, a majority of messages included a call-to-action. These findings indicate that health organizations continue to use social media much like they use mass media: for information dissemination and behavioral recommendations.

Patient, carer and healthcare professional perspectives on increasing calorie intake in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.

OBJECTIVES: Research suggests that higher Body Mass Index is associated with improved survival in people with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (pwALS). Yet, understanding of the barriers and enablers to increasing calorie intake is limited. This study sought to explore these issues from the perspective of pwALS, informal carers, and healthcare professionals. METHODS: Interviews with 18 pwALS and 16 informal carers, and focus groups with 51 healthcare professionals. Data were analysed using template analysis and mapped to the COM-B model and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: All three COM-B components (Capability, Opportunity and Motivation) are important to achieving high calorie diets in pwALS. Eleven TDF domains were identified: Physical skills (ALS symptoms); Knowledge (about high calorie diets and healthy eating); Memory, attention, and decision processes (reflecting cognitive difficulties); Environmental context/resources (availability of informal and formal carers); Social influences (social aspects of eating); Beliefs about consequences (healthy eating vs. high calorie diets); Identity (interest in health lifestyles); Goals (sense of control); Reinforcement (eating habits); and Optimism and Emotion (low mood, poor appetite). DISCUSSION: To promote high calorie diets for pwALS, greater clarity around the rationale and content of recommended diets is needed. Interventions should be tailored to patient symptoms, preferences, motivations, and opportunities.

Patient preferences and current practice for adults with steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis: POPSTER mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are a mainstay of the treatment of moderately severe relapses of ulcerative colitis, yet almost 50% of patients do not respond fully to these and risk prolonged steroid use and side effects. There is a lack of clarity about the definitions of steroid resistance, the optimum choice of treatment, and patient and health-care professional treatment preferences. OBJECTIVES: The overall aim of this research was to understand how steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis is managed in adult secondary care and how current practice compares with patient and health-care professional preferences. DESIGN: A mixed-methods study, including an online survey, qualitative interviews and discrete choice experiments. SETTING: NHS inflammatory bowel disease services in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with ulcerative colitis and health-care professionals treating inflammatory bowel disease. RESULTS: We carried out a survey of health-care professionals (n = 168), qualitative interviews with health-care professionals (n = 20) and patients (n = 33), discrete choice experiments with health-care professionals (n = 116) and patients (n = 115), and a multistakeholder workshop (n = 9). The interviews with and survey of health-care professionals showed that most health-care professionals define steroid resistance as an incomplete response to 40 mg per day of prednisolone after 2 weeks. The survey also found that anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs (particularly infliximab) are the most frequently offered drugs across most steroid-resistant (and steroid-dependent) patient scenarios, but they are less frequently offered to thiopurine-naive patients. Patient interviews identified several factors influencing their treatment choices, including effectiveness of treatment, recommendations from health-care professionals, route of administration and side effects. Over time, depending on the severity and duration of symptoms and, crucially, as medical treatment options become exhausted, patients are willing to try alternative treatments and, eventually, to undergo surgery. The discrete choice experiments found that the probability of remission and of side effects strongly influences the treatment choices of both patients and health-care professionals. Patients are less likely to choose a treatment that takes longer to improve symptoms. Health-care professionals are willing to make difficult compromises by tolerating greater safety risks in exchange for therapeutic benefits. The treatments ranked most positively by patients were infliximab and tofacitinib (each preferred by 38% of patients), and the predicted probability of uptake by health-care professionals was greatest for infliximab (62%). LIMITATIONS: The survey and the discrete choice experiments with patients and health-care professionals are limited by their relatively small sample sizes. The qualitative studies are subject to selection bias. The timing of the different substudies, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, is a potential limitation. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified factors influencing treatment decisions for steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis and the characteristics to consider when choosing treatments to evaluate in future randomised controlled trials. The findings may be used to improve discussions between patients and health-care professionals when they review treatment options for steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis. FUTURE WORK: This research highlights the need for consensus work to establish an agreed definition of steroid resistance in ulcerative colitis and a greater understanding of the optimal use of tofacitinib and surgery for this patient group. A randomised controlled trial comparing infliximab with tofacitinib is also recommended. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 41. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Steroids are one of the main treatments for ulcerative colitis; however, steroids work well for only about 50% of people who take them. There are many other treatments that can be given when steroids do not work, but evidence is limited about how these treatments are best used. To carry out better research about the best treatment options and to improve clinical practice in the future, this study aimed to find out how adults with steroid-resistant ulcerative colitis are managed in hospital and why patients and health-care professionals prefer different treatments. The study combined various methods of research, including an online survey of health-care professionals (n = 168), interviews with health-care professionals (n = 20) and patients (n = 33), a survey of health-care professionals (n = 116) and patients (n = 115) to ask them about treatment preferences, and a multistakeholder workshop (n = 9). The interviews with and survey of health-care professionals found that most health-care professionals define steroid resistance as an incomplete response to 40 mg per day of prednisolone after 2 weeks. The survey also found that the most frequently offered drugs are anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs (particularly infliximab). Patient interviews found that several factors influenced treatment choices, including effectiveness of treament, guidance from health-care professionals, route of administration and side effects. Patients were willing to try alternative treatments and surgery over time. The survey found that a higher level of remission and a lower chance of side effects strongly influenced treatment choices. Patients are less likely to choose a treatment that takes longer to improve symptoms. Health-care professionals are willing to make difficult compromises by tolerating greater safety risks in exchange for therapeutic benefits. Infliximab and tofacitinib were ranked most positively by patients, and the predicted uptake by health-care professionals was greatest for infliximab. The results of this study help improve understanding of why people choose certain treatments, improve decision-making in partnership and inform the design of future research.

Co-design of digital learning resources for care workers: reflections on the neurocare knowhow project.

Neurocare Knowhow is an online learning platform for care workers who support people with neurological conditions. Care workers often do not receive specialist training around neurological conditions and can experience anxiety and apprehension about caring for this group. Neurocare Knowhow aims to increase care workers' knowledge and confidence. Featuring flexible and personalisable digital features, in combination with documentary video and audio, it offers an alternative to traditional e-learning, moving away from longform didactic courses to flexible on-the-go learning. This co-design project worked closely with people with neurological conditions, their families, care workers and care organisation managers to validate the need and develop a proof of concept pilot. Co-design activity took place across multiple workshops in person and online. These gathered detailed insights into preferred features that support engaging online learning. The platform offers learning across diverse neurological conditions as a whole, with a focus on shared symptoms and challenges encountered by people with neurological conditions. Ongoing development to scale the pilot up to meet an anticipated national audience includes a focus on artificial intelligence to support searches at a moment of need and a range of personalisable features for individual and team learning.

The use of co-production, co-design and co-creation to mobilise knowledge in the management of health conditions: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge mobilisation is a term used in healthcare research to describe the process of generating, sharing and using evidence. 'Co'approaches, such as co-production, co-design and co-creation, have been proposed as a way of overcoming the knowledge to practice gap. There is a need to understand why researchers choose to adopt these approaches, how they achieve knowledge mobilisation in the management of health conditions, and the extent to which knowledge mobilisation is accomplished. METHODS: Studies that explicitly used the terms co-production, co-design or co-creation to mobilise knowledge in the management of health conditions were included. Web of Science, EMBASE via OvidSP, MEDLINE via OvidSP and CINHAL via EBSCO databases were searched up to April 2021. Quality assessment was carried out using the Joanna Briggs Institute qualitative quality assessment checklist. Pluye and Hong's seven steps for mixed studies reviews were followed. Data were synthesised using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Twenty four international studies were included. These were qualitative studies, case studies and study protocols. Key aspects of 'co'approaches were bringing people together as active and equal partners, valuing all types of knowledge, using creative approaches to understand and solve problems, and using iterative prototyping techniques. Authors articulated mechanisms of action that included developing a shared understanding, identifying and meeting needs, giving everyone a voice and sense of ownership, and creating trust and confidence. They believed these mechanisms could produce interventions that were relevant and acceptable to stakeholders, more useable and more likely to be implemented in healthcare. Varied activities were used to promote these mechanisms such as interviews and creative workshops. There appeared to be a lack of robust evaluation of the interventions produced so little evidence in this review that 'co'approaches improved the management of health conditions. CONCLUSION: Those using 'co'approaches believed that they could achieve knowledge mobilisation through a number of mechanisms, but there was no evidence that these led to improved health. The framework of key aspects and mechanisms of 'co'approaches developed here may help researchers to meet the principles of these approaches. There is a need for robust evaluation to identify whether 'co'approaches produce improved health outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020187463 .

Understanding the current nutritional management for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis - A mapping review.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Poor nutritional outcomes are observed in people with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (pwALS) including weight loss and poor dietary intake. Surveys of healthcare professionals have highlighted the lack of evidence and knowledge regarding nutritional management of ALS throughout the disease course. Furthermore, national evidence-based guidance is lacking. This mapping review aims to understand the structure and input of nutritional management services for pwALS. METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted across eight electronic databases to identify qualitative and quantitative research on structure and input of nutritional care in ALS. Supplementary searches included grey literature, citation and reference list searching of included studies and key reviews, web searching and contacting experts and organisations that provide ALS services to identify guidelines. Study selection and data extraction were undertaken independently by at least two reviewers. Data was synthesised using a narrative approach. RESULTS: One hundred and nine documents were identified. These consisted of journal articles, guidelines and related documents that contributed evidence towards mapping of nutritional management of pwALS. No evidence on commissioning of nutritional care was identified. Guidelines provided high-level overviews and gave general guidance or recommendations for care; however, these typically focused on gastrostomy with limited guidance on broader aspects, including oral nutrition support. Evidence from primary studies found nutritional care delivery in ALS consisted of multiple types of nutritional management, at different time points during the disease course and involving a range of professionals. There was little evidence relating to proactive nutritional care. Details of healthcare setting, number of professionals involved in care, team composition and how services were delivered in community settings were sparse. Although the role of the speech and language therapist in swallowing assessment and provision of advice on the management of swallowing difficulties was consistent; there was limited evidence on care provided by dietitians. In addition, a small number of studies reported on the use of screening tools. Overall, evidence was consistent that weight management, including monitoring of weight change by professionals and patients, was central and recommended that this should be part of nutritional assessment and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence identified in this mapping review has highlighted the requirement for further primary research providing specific details on how nutritional management of pwALS is structured and delivered.

A mixed methods evaluation of the acceptability of therapy using LEGO® bricks (LEGO® based therapy) in mainstream primary and secondary education.

Many autistic children and young people need extra support with social skills. Social skills programmes, such as LEGO® based therapy (LBT), are commonly used to help with these difficulties. The aim of this study was to examine the acceptability of LBT using qualitative interviews and questionnaires with facilitators and parents/guardians on behalf of autistic children and young people. Acceptability was measured in line with constructs of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Questionnaires were analyzed descriptively and between group comparisons were undertaken using the Mann-Whitney U Test. Telephone interviews were undertaken with a sub-sample of facilitators. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and framework analysis was performed by two researchers supported by NVivo. The questionnaire response rate was 80% for facilitators and 77% for parents/guardians. Overall acceptability, measured on a 1-5 (minimum-maximum) scale, was high for both facilitators and parents/guardians with a median (range) of 5 (4-5) and 4 (3-5), respectively. Facilitators rated the acceptability of the programme significantly higher overall than parents (p < 0.001). Facilitators reported that participants and wider school staff viewed the programme positively. They observed improvements in communication and social skills during the sessions. Potential barriers to programme delivery, such as resources and staff schedules, were identified but facilitators reported that these challenges did not outweigh the benefits. There is increasing emphasis on the role of schools in seeking to improve social outcomes for autistic children therefore this high degree of acceptability makes this an attractive school-based programme for schools, autistic children and their families. LAY SUMMARY: Social skills programmes, such as LEGO® based therapy (LBT), are often used to help autistic children and young people with their social skills. The acceptability of LBT with school staff and parents/guardians on behalf of children and young people was explored using interviews and questionnaires. Our results show that LBT is viewed as a highly acceptable programme that can help autistic children and young people improve their communication and social skills.

Patient preferences for treatment in steroid resistant ulcerative colitis - a discrete-choice experiment.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Understanding treatment preferences in those patients who are not responding to corticosteroids for ulcerative colitis is important in informing treatment choices. This study aimed to assess the relative importance of treatment characteristics to patients by conducting a discrete-choice experiment. METHODS: Patients completed the questionnaire online. All data were collected between September and December 2020. Participants were shown 13 discrete-choice experiment tasks - a series of side-by-side comparisons of competing, hypothetical treatment characteristics and asked to select a preferred treatment. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and regression analyses. RESULTS: 115 patients completed the study. Patient preferences were strongest for treatments with a lower chance of side effects, this attribute had the most influence on the choice of treatment patients preferred. The second most important attribute was an improvement in maintaining remission. Conversely, route and frequency of administration were least important on the choice of treatment patients preferred. Respondents were willing to make trade offs and accept treatment benefits to compensate them for receiving a treatment with a less desirable attribute level. Participants were willing to accept a larger benefit of 45% improvement in maintenance of remission to accept a treatment with a higher probability of side effects. The benefit required was smaller with a 10% improvement in remission required to accept a treatment with a lower probability of side effects. CONCLUSION: Quantifying preferences helps to identify and prioritise treatment characteristics that are important to patients. The results highlight the importance of careful discussion of side effects, including the magnitude of risk, using visualisation tools during a patient consultation to support decisions.

What influences uptake of psychosocial interventions by people living with early dementia? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Health policy promotes post-diagnostic support for people affected by dementia. Evidence suggests psychosocial interventions can effectively support people living with dementia after diagnosis. Yet, what influences uptake of psychosocial interventions by people with early dementia is poorly understood. This research aimed to identify influences on uptake of psychosocial interventions by people with early dementia. METHODS: Sixteen face-to-face semi-structured interviews with people with early dementia, either alone or with a family member(s), were completed. Twelve staff participated in semi-structured interviews or a focus group. Thematic analysis and triangulation enabled identification of overall themes across different participant groups and interview types. MAIN FINDINGS: Four overarching themes influencing uptake were identified: (1) adjusting to a diagnosis, (2) appeal of activities and perception of benefit, (3) service and societal context, and (4) relationships and communication. Individual responses to diagnosis, experiences of dementia and dementia services influenced uptake. Group interventions were discussed the most by all participants. Group interventions offering social contact, peer support, information, enjoyable activities and mental stimulation were valued. However, group interventions specifically aimed at people with dementia did not appeal to all. Ability to travel and convenience of locations were important. Continuing with community activities not focused on dementia was valued. Stigma around dementia appeared to discourage uptake. Emotional and practical support from family was key to facilitating uptake as were the relationships between people with dementia and staff. CONCLUSION: A complex interplay of individual, service and societal influences affect uptake of psychosocial interventions by people with early dementia. How interventions and which services can enable people with early dementia remain engaged in their everyday lives needs consideration. Further research examining uptake of specific interventions commonly offered to people living with early dementia is needed. Involving people with early dementia in designing interventions aiming to support them is paramount.

The nutritional management of people living with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A national survey of dietitians.

BACKGROUND: People living with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) face many challenges with respect to taking adequate nutrition. Growing evidence links weight loss with negative prognostic outcomes. We aimed to explore the practice of dietitians in the UK with regard to the nutritional management of ALS. METHODS: A national online survey was disseminated via professional groups, social media and newsletters to UK healthcare professionals between September and November 2018. The survey examined the nutritional management of ALS. Dietitian responses are reported in the present study. RESULTS: In total, 130 dietitians responded to the survey. Two-thirds reported that ALS comprised less than 20% of their total patient caseload. Forty-two percent reported that nutritional screening took place in their organisation. One-half of dietitians reported that patients were referred for dietetic assessment at 'about the right time', although 44% reported referrals were made too late. The majority (83%) of dietitians used resting energy expenditure predictive equations not validated in ALS. When setting weight goals, dietitians reported most frequently recommending weight maintenance if the patient's body mass index was 18.5-25 kg m-2 (72%), 25-30 kg m-2 (98%), and > 30 kg m-2 (79%). In addition, 43% reported that people with ALS were not weighed sufficiently frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Although the importance of early nutritional assessment is recognised, the timeliness of dietetic input and on-going monitoring of nutritional status in ALS care might not currently be ideal. Dietitians report using energy requirement predictive equations and setting weight goals that may not promote positive outcomes. Further research is required to understand the optimal nutritional management of ALS.

Adverse event recording failed to reflect potential harms: a review of trial protocols of behavioral, lifestyle and psychological therapy interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how potential harms are assessed in trials of behavioral, lifestyle and psychological therapy interventions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This study was a review of protocols from the National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment and Public Health Research programmes. Protocols were included if the study was a randomized controlled trial and the intervention intended to change lifestyle or behavior to improve health or improve psychological outcomes. RESULTS: 95 of 151 protocols planned to record adverse events (AEs). Definitions of AEs were often not given and varied widely. Serious AEs were mostly defined using standards originally devised for pharmacological trials. Twenty-two protocols listed expected AEs. Few protocols described assessment of causation between AEs and intervention. Examples of useful AE recording practice were identified. CONCLUSION: Monitoring and recording AEs in behavioral intervention trials was variable and frequently based on reporting guidelines for pharmacological trials. This may mean potential harms are being missed. Future trials should consider: 1) Potential harms posed by the intervention 2) How to define serious AEs 3) What are expected AEs. Further research to achieve consensus on AE recording is required, including identification of core adverse outcomes in clinical areas or caused by interventions.

The DAFNEplus programme for sustained type 1 diabetes self management: Intervention development using the Behaviour Change Wheel.

AIMS: Self-management programmes for type 1 diabetes, such as the UK's Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE), improve short-term clinical outcomes but difficulties maintaining behavioural changes attenuate long-term impact. This study used the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) framework to revise the DAFNE intervention to support sustained behaviour change. METHODS: A four-step method was based on the BCW intervention development approach: (1) Identifying self-management behaviours and barriers/enablers to maintain them via stakeholder consultation and evidence synthesis, and mapping barriers/enablers to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model. (2) Specifying behaviour change techniques (BCTs) in the existing DAFNE intervention using the Behaviour Change Techniques Taxonomy (BCTTv1). (3) Identifying additional BCTs to target the barriers/enablers using the BCW and BCTTv1. (4) Parallel stakeholder consultation to generate recommendations for intervention revision. Revised materials were co-designed by stakeholders (diabetologists, psychologists, specialist nurses and dieticians). RESULTS: In all, 34 barriers and 5 enablers to sustaining self-management post-DAFNE were identified. The existing DAFNE intervention contained 24 BCTs, which partially addressed the enablers. In all, 27 BCTs were added, including 'Habit formation', 'Credible source' and 'Conserving mental resources'. In total, 15 stakeholder-agreed recommendations for content and delivery were incorporated into the final DAFNEplus intervention, comprising three co-designed components: (1) face-to-face group learning course, (2) individual structured follow-up sessions and (3) technological support, including blood glucose data management. CONCLUSIONS: This method provided a systematic approach to specifying and revising a behaviour change intervention incorporating stakeholder input. The revised DAFNEplus intervention aims to support the maintenance of behavioural changes by targeting barriers and enablers to sustaining self-management behaviours.

A comparison of the acceptability and psychometric properties of scales assessing the impact of type 1 diabetes on quality of life-Results of 'YourSAY: Quality of Life'.

AIMS: To compare the acceptability, reliability and validity of five contemporary diabetes-specific quality of life (QoL) scales among adults with type 1 diabetes in the United Kingdom and Australia. METHODS: Adults with type 1 diabetes (UK = 1139, Australia = 439) completed a cross-sectional, online survey including ADDQoL-19, DCP, DIDP, DSQOLS and Diabetes QoL-Q, presented in randomised order. After completing each scale, participants rated it for clarity, relevance, ease of completion, length and comprehensiveness. We examined scale acceptability (scale completion and user ratings), response patterns, structure (exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses) and validity (convergent, concurrent, divergent and known groups). To assess cross-country reproducibility, analyses conducted on the UK dataset were replicated in the Australian dataset. RESULTS: Findings were largely consistent between countries. All scales were acceptable to participants: ≥90% completing all items, and ≥80% positive user ratings, except for DSQOLS' length. Scale structure was not supported for the DCP. Overall, in terms of acceptability and psychometric evaluation, the DIDP was the strongest performing scale while the ADDQoL-19 and Diabetes QoL-Q scales also performed well. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the recently developed brief (7 items), neutrally worded DIDP scale is acceptable to adults with type 1 diabetes and has the strongest psychometric performance. However, questionnaire selection should always be considered in the context of the research aims, study design and population, as well as the wider published evidence regarding both the development and responsiveness of the scales.

Delivery of nutritional management services to people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate how nutritional management services for people with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (pwALS) are structured in the UK, in order to gain insight into current practice and identify key barriers and enablers to delivering and providing services. Methods: A three-part, sequential mixed-methods study was conducted that comprised (i) a thematic analysis of data from five focus groups (with 47 ALS health professionals from 41 UK organizations and four service user representatives), (ii) a nationwide cross-sectional survey (281 ALS healthcare professionals) and (iii) a freedom of information request (251 organizations). Results: UK nutritional management services for pwALS are coordinated from specialist (n = 22) and non-specialist care centers (n = 89), with national variability in the organization and delivery of services. Multidisciplinary working was highlighted to facilitate the coordination of nutritional care. However, the need to provide evidence-based continuing education for HCPs was evident. Overall, the lack of clear guidelines on the nutritional management of people with ALS was identified as a key barrier to the delivery of effective nutritional care, as was the lack of transparency and consistency in the commissioning of nutritional services. Further concerns over the timeliness of the dietetic intervention and equity of access and provision were raised. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that development of guidelines for nutritional management, particularly at diagnosis and pre-gastrostomy, could drive standardization of high quality nutritional care for pwALS. Such guidance has the potential to reduce inequalities in geographical provision by providing clarity for those commissioning specialist nutrition services.

Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of the DAFNEplus (Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating) intervention compared with 5x1 DAFNE: a lifelong approach to promote effective self-management in adults with type 1 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: The successful treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) requires those affected to employ insulin therapy to maintain their blood glucose levels as close to normal to avoid complications in the long-term. The Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating (DAFNE) intervention is a group education course designed to help adults with T1D develop and sustain the complex self-management skills needed to adjust insulin in everyday life. It leads to improved glucose levels in the short term (manifest by falls in glycated haemoglobin, HbA1c), reduced rates of hypoglycaemia and sustained improvements in quality of life but overall glucose levels remain well above national targets. The DAFNEplus intervention is a development of DAFNE designed to incorporate behavioural change techniques, technology and longer-term structured support from healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in adults with T1D, delivered in diabetes centres in National Health Service secondary care hospitals in the UK. Centres will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to standard DAFNE or DAFNEplus. Primary clinical outcome is the change in HbA1c and the primary endpoint is HbA1c at 12 months, in those entering the trial with HbA1c >7.5% (58 mmol/mol), and HbA1c at 6 months is the secondary endpoint. Sample size is 662 participants (approximately 47 per centre); 92% power to detect a 0.5% difference in the primary outcome of HbA1c between treatment groups. The trial also measures rates of hypoglycaemia, psychological outcomes, an economic evaluation and process evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by South West-Exeter Research Ethics Committee (REC ref: 18/SW/0100) on 14 May 2018. The results of the trial will be published in a National Institute for Health Research monograph and relevant high-impact journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN42908016.

The adaptive designs CONSORT extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design.

Adaptive designs (ADs) allow pre-planned changes to an ongoing trial without compromising the validity of conclusions and it is essential to distinguish pre-planned from unplanned changes that may also occur. The reporting of ADs in randomised trials is inconsistent and needs improving. Incompletely reported AD randomised trials are difficult to reproduce and are hard to interpret and synthesise. This consequently hampers their ability to inform practice as well as future research and contributes to research waste. Better transparency and adequate reporting will enable the potential benefits of ADs to be realised.This extension to the Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement was developed to enhance the reporting of randomised AD clinical trials. We developed an Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) guideline through a two-stage Delphi process with input from multidisciplinary key stakeholders in clinical trials research in the public and private sectors from 21 countries, followed by a consensus meeting. Members of the CONSORT Group were involved during the development process.The paper presents the ACE checklists for AD randomised trial reports and abstracts, as well as an explanation with examples to aid the application of the guideline. The ACE checklist comprises seven new items, nine modified items, six unchanged items for which additional explanatory text clarifies further considerations for ADs, and 20 unchanged items not requiring further explanatory text. The ACE abstract checklist has one new item, one modified item, one unchanged item with additional explanatory text for ADs, and 15 unchanged items not requiring further explanatory text.The intention is to enhance transparency and improve reporting of AD randomised trials to improve the interpretability of their results and reproducibility of their methods, results and inference. We also hope indirectly to facilitate the much-needed knowledge transfer of innovative trial designs to maximise their potential benefits. In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the BMJ and Trials journal websites."To maximise the benefit to society, you need to not just do research but do it well" Douglas G Altman.

The Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design.

Adaptive designs (ADs) allow pre-planned changes to an ongoing trial without compromising the validity of conclusions and it is essential to distinguish pre-planned from unplanned changes that may also occur. The reporting of ADs in randomised trials is inconsistent and needs improving. Incompletely reported AD randomised trials are difficult to reproduce and are hard to interpret and synthesise. This consequently hampers their ability to inform practice as well as future research and contributes to research waste. Better transparency and adequate reporting will enable the potential benefits of ADs to be realised.This extension to the Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement was developed to enhance the reporting of randomised AD clinical trials. We developed an Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) guideline through a two-stage Delphi process with input from multidisciplinary key stakeholders in clinical trials research in the public and private sectors from 21 countries, followed by a consensus meeting. Members of the CONSORT Group were involved during the development process.The paper presents the ACE checklists for AD randomised trial reports and abstracts, as well as an explanation with examples to aid the application of the guideline. The ACE checklist comprises seven new items, nine modified items, six unchanged items for which additional explanatory text clarifies further considerations for ADs, and 20 unchanged items not requiring further explanatory text. The ACE abstract checklist has one new item, one modified item, one unchanged item with additional explanatory text for ADs, and 15 unchanged items not requiring further explanatory text.The intention is to enhance transparency and improve reporting of AD randomised trials to improve the interpretability of their results and reproducibility of their methods, results and inference. We also hope indirectly to facilitate the much-needed knowledge transfer of innovative trial designs to maximise their potential benefits.