Real-World Evaluation of the Feasibility, Acceptability and Safety of a Remote, Self-Management Parkinson's Disease Care Pathway: A Healthcare Improvement Initiative.

BACKGROUND: There is significant unmet need for effective and efficiently delivered care for people with Parkinson's disease (PwP). We undertook a service improvement initiative to co-develop and implement a new care pathway, Home Based Care (HBC), based on supported self-management, remote monitoring and the ability to trigger a healthcare contact when needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feasibility, acceptability and safety of Home Based Care. METHODS: We evaluated data from the first 100 patients on HBC for 6 months. Patient monitoring, performed at baseline and 6-monthly, comprised motor (MDS-UPDRS II and accelerometer), non-motor (NMSQ, PDSS-2, HADS) and quality of life (PDQ) measures. Care quality was audited against Parkinson's UK national audit standards. Process measures captured feasibility. Acceptability was assessed using a mixed-methods approach comprising questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Between October 2019 and January 2021, 108 PwP were enrolled onto HBC, with data from 100 being available at 6 months. Over 90% of all questionnaires were returned, 97% were complete or had < 3 missing items. Reporting and communications occurred within agreed timeframes. Compared with baseline, after 6m on HBC, PD symptoms were stable; more PwP felt listened to (90% vs. 79%) and able to seek help (79% vs. 68%). HBC met 93% of national audit criteria. Key themes from the interviews included autonomy and empowerment. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated acceptability, feasibility and safety of our novel remotely delivered Parkinson's care pathway. Ensuring scalability will widen its reach and realize its benefits for underserved communities, enabling formal comparisons with standard care and cost-effectiveness evaluation.

Assessment and Diagnosis of Down Syndrome Regression Disorder: International Expert Consensus.

Objective: To develop standardization for nomenclature, diagnostic work up and diagnostic criteria for cases of neurocognitive regression in Down syndrome. Background: There are no consensus criteria for the evaluation or diagnosis of neurocognitive regression in persons with Down syndrome. As such, previously published data on this condition is relegated to smaller case series with heterogenous data sets. Lack of standardized assessment tools has slowed research in this clinical area. Methods: The authors performed a two-round traditional Delphi method survey of an international group of clinicians with experience in treating Down syndrome to develop a standardized approach to clinical care and research in this area. Thirty-eight potential panelists who had either previously published on neurocognitive regression in Down syndrome or were involved in national or international working groups on this condition were invited to participate. In total, 27 panelists (71%) represented nine medical specialties and six different countries reached agreement on preliminary standards in this disease area. Moderators developed a proposed nomenclature, diagnostic work up and diagnostic criteria based on previously published reports of regression in persons with Down syndrome. Results: During the first round of survey, agreement on nomenclature for the condition was reached with 78% of panelists agreeing to use the term Down Syndrome Regression Disorder (DSRD). Agreement on diagnostic work up and diagnostic criteria was not reach on the first round due to low agreement amongst panelists with regards to the need for neurodiagnostic testing. Following incorporation of panelist feedback, diagnostic criteria were agreed upon (96% agreement on neuroimaging, 100% agreement on bloodwork, 88% agreement on lumbar puncture, 100% agreement on urine studies, and 96% agreement on "other" studies) as were diagnostic criteria (96% agreement). Conclusions: The authors present international consensus agreement on the nomenclature, diagnostic work up, and diagnostic criteria for DSRD, providing an initial practical framework that can advance both research and clinical practices for this condition.

'Function First-Be Active, Stay Independent'-promoting physical activity and physical function in people with long-term conditions by primary care: a protocol for a realist synthesis with embedded co-production and co-design.

INTRODUCTION: People with long-term conditions typically have reduced physical functioning, are less physically active and therefore become less able to live independently and do the things they enjoy. However, assessment and promotion of physical function and physical activity is not part of routine management in primary care. This project aims to develop evidence-based recommendations about how primary care can best help people to become more physically active in order to maintain and improve their physical function, thus promoting independence. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study takes a realist synthesis approach, following RAMESES guidance, with embedded co-production and co-design. Stage 1 will develop initial programme theories about physical activity and physical function for people with long-term conditions, based on a review of the scientific and grey literature, and two multisector stakeholder workshops using LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY®. Stage 2 will involve focused literature searching, data extraction and synthesis to provide evidence to support or refute the initial programme theories. Searches for evidence will focus on physical activity interventions involving the assessment of physical function which are relevant to primary care. We will describe 'what works', 'for whom' and 'in what circumstances' and develop conjectured programme theories using context, mechanism and outcome configurations. Stage 3 will test and refine these theories through individual stakeholder interviews. The resulting theory-driven recommendations will feed into Stage 4 which will involve three sequential co-design stakeholder workshops in which practical ideas for service innovation in primary care will be developed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Healthcare and Medical Sciences Academic Ethics Committee (Reference 2018-16308) and NHS Wales Research Ethics Committee 5 approval (References 256 729 and 262726) have been obtained. A knowledge mobilisation event will address issues relevant to wider implementation of the intervention and study findings. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications, conference presentations and formal and informal reports. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018103027.

The Simulation Team Assessment Tool (STAT): development, reliability and validation.

INTRODUCTION: Simulation sessions prepare medical professionals for pediatric emergencies. No validated tools exist to evaluate overall team performance. Our objective was to develop and evaluate the inter-rater reliability and validity of a team performance assessment tool during simulated pediatric resuscitations. METHODS: We developed the Simulation Team Assessment Tool (STAT) which evaluated 4 domains: basic assessment skills, airway/breathing, circulation, and human factors. Scoring of each element was behaviorally anchored from 0 to 2 points. Two teams of resuscitation experts and two teams of pediatric residents performed the same simulated pediatric resuscitation. Each team was scored by six raters using the STAT. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to assess inter-rater reliability. Overall performance and domain scores between expert and resident teams were compared using repeated measures of analysis of variance to assess construct validity. RESULTS: ICCs for overall performance were 0.81. Domain ICCs were: basic skills 0.73, airway/breathing skills 0.30, circulation skills 0.76, human factors 0.68. Expert versus resident average scores were: overall performance 84% vs. 66% (p=0.02), basic skills 73% vs. 55% (p<0.01); airway 80% vs. 75% (p=0.25), circulation 90% vs. 69% (p=0.02), human factors 89% vs. 66% (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The STAT's overall performance, basic skills, circulation, and human factors domains had good to excellent inter-rater reliability, discriminating well between expert and resident teams. Similar performance in the airway/breathing domain among all teams magnified the impact of a small number of rater disagreements on the ICC. Additional study is needed to better assess the airway/breathing domain.