RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Teams working in the community to manage crisis in dementia currently exist, but with widely varying models of practice, it is difficult to determine the effectiveness of such teams. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to develop a "best practice model" for dementia services managing crisis, as well as a set of resources to help teams implement this model to measure and improve practice delivery. These will be the best practice tool and toolkit to be utilized by teams to improve the effectiveness of crisis teams working with older people with dementia and their caregivers. This paper describes the protocol for a prospective study using qualitative methods to establish an understanding of the current practice to develop a "best practice model." METHODS: Participants (people with dementia, caregivers, staff members, and stakeholders) from a variety of geographical areas, with a broad experience of crisis and noncrisis work, will be purposively selected to participate in qualitative approaches including interviews, focus groups, a consensus workshop, and development and field testing of both the best practice tool and toolkit. RESULTS: Data were collected between October 2016 and August 2018. Thematic analysis will be utilized to establish the current working of teams managing crisis in dementia in order to draw together elements of the best practice. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to systematically explore the requirements needed to fulfill effective and appropriate home management for people with dementia and their caregivers at the time of mental health crisis, as delivered by teams managing crisis in dementia. This systematic approach to development will support greater acceptability and validity of the best practice tool and toolkit and lay the foundation for a large scale trial with teams managing crisis in dementia across England to investigate the effects on practice and impact on service provision, as well as the associated experiences of people with dementia and their caregivers. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/14781.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To determine if low-cost air-quality monitors providing personalised feedback of household second-hand smoke (SHS) concentrations plus standard health service advice on SHS were more effective than standard advice in helping parents protect their child from SHS. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial of a personalised intervention delivered to disadvantaged mothers who were exposed to SHS at home. Changes in household concentrations of fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) were the primary outcome. METHODS: Air-quality monitors measured household PM2.5 concentrations over approximately 6â¯days at baseline and at one-month and six-months post-intervention. Data on smoking and smoking-rules were gathered. Participants were randomised to either Group A (standard health service advice on SHS) or Group B (standard advice plus personalised air-quality feedback). Group B participants received personalised air-quality feedback after the baseline measurement and at 1-month. Both groups received air-quality feedback at 6-months. RESULTS: 120 mothers were recruited of whom 117 were randomised. Follow up was completed after 1-month in 102 and at 6-months in 78 participants. There was no statistically significant reduction in PM2.5 concentrations by either intervention type at 1-month or 6-months, nor significant differences between the two groups at 1-month (pâ¯=â¯0.76) and 6-month follow-up (pâ¯=â¯0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Neither standard advice nor standard advice plus personalised air-quality feedback were effective in reducing PM2.5 concentrations in deprived households where smoking occurred. Finding ways of identifying homes where air-quality feedback can be a useful tool to change household smoking behaviour is important to ensure resources are targeted successfully.