Development of the Community-based complex Interventions to sustain Independence in Older People (CII-OP) typology: a qualitative synthesis of interventions in randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Community-based services to sustain independence for older people have varying configurations. A typology of these interventions would improve service provision and research by providing conceptual clarity and enabling the identification of effective configurations. We aimed to produce such a typology. METHOD: We developed our typology by qualitatively synthesising community-based complex interventions to sustain independence in older people, evaluated in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), in four stages: (i) systematically identifying relevant RCTs; (ii) extracting descriptions of interventions (including control) using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication; (iii) generating categories of key intervention features and (iv) grouping the interventions based on these categories. PROSPERO registration: CRD42019162195. RESULTS: Our search identified 129 RCTs involving 266 intervention arms. The Community-based complex Interventions to sustain Independence in Older People (CII-OP) typology comprises 14 action components and 5 tailoring components. Action components include procedures for treating patients or otherwise intended to directly improve their outcomes; regular examples include formal homecare; physical exercise; health education; activities of daily living training; providing aids and adaptations and nutritional support. Tailoring components involve a process that may result in care planning, with multiple action components being planned, recommended or prescribed. Multifactorial action from care planning was the most common tailoring component. It involves individualised, multidomain assessment and management, as in comprehensive geriatric assessment. Sixty-three different intervention types (combinations) were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our typology provides an empirical basis for service planning and evidence synthesis. We recommend better reporting about organisational aspects of interventions and usual care.

Does frailty status predict outcome in major trauma in older people? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of major trauma in older people is increasing. Frailty is likely to be a factor that influences the outcomes of trauma. We conducted a systematic review aiming to investigate whether frailty affects major trauma outcomes in older people and whether it is more predictive than age. METHODS: Observational studies investigating frailty, major trauma severity and outcomes were eligible. We searched electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid EMBASE and CINAHL) from 2010 to 01 January 2023. We used Joanna Briggs Institute software to assess the risk of bias and conduct meta-analyses of the relationships between frailty status and outcomes. We used a narrative synthesis to compare the predictive value of frailty and age. RESULTS: Twelve studies were eligible for meta-analyses. In-hospital mortality (odds ratio (OR) = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05, 1.19), length of stay (OR = 2.04, 95% CI 1.51, 2.56), discharge to home (OR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.53, 0.63) and in-hospital complications (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.10, 1.24) were all associated with frailty. Frailty was found to be a more consistent predictor of adverse outcomes and mortality in older trauma patients than injury severity and age in six studies that reported multivariate regression analysis. DISCUSSION: Older trauma patients with frailty have higher in-hospital mortality rates, prolonged hospital stays, in-hospital complications and adverse discharge disposition. Frailty is a better predictor of adverse outcomes than age in these patients. Frailty status is likely to be a useful prognostic variable in guiding patient management and stratifying clinical benchmarks and research trials.

The effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on hospitalised adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is a treatment to prevent or reverse acquired disability in hospitalised adults. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of its effectiveness. METHOD: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health (CINAHL) and the Cochrane library. Inclusion criteria: randomised controlled trials of hospitalised adult patients comparing NMES to control or usual care. The primary outcome was muscle strength. Secondary outcomes were muscle size, function, hospital length of stay, molecular and cellular biomarkers, and adverse effects. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We used Review Manager (RevMan) software for data extraction, critical appraisal and synthesis. We assessed certainty using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. RESULTS: A total of 42 papers were included involving 1,452 participants. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias. NMES had a small effect on muscle strength (moderate certainty) (standardised mean difference (SMD) = 0.33; P < 0.00001), a moderate effect on muscle size (moderate certainty) (SMD = 0.66; P < 0.005), a small effect on walking performance (moderate certainty) (SMD = 0.48; P < 0.0001) and a small effect on functional mobility (low certainty) (SMD = 0.31; P < 0.05). There was a small and non-significant effect on health-related quality of life (very low certainty) (SMD = 0.35; P > 0.05). In total, 9% of participants reported undesirable experiences. The effects of NMES on length of hospital stay, and molecular and cellular biomarkers were unclear. CONCLUSIONS: NMES is a promising intervention component that might help to reduce or prevent hospital-acquired disability.

Chronic pain in people living with dementia: challenges to recognising and managing pain, and personalising intervention by phenotype.

Pain is common in people with dementia, and pain can exacerbate the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia. Effective pain management is challenging, not least in people with dementia. Impairments of cognition, communication and abstract thought can make communicating pain unreliable or impossible. It is unclear which biopsychosocial interventions for pain management are effective in people with dementia, and which interventions for behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia are effective in people with pain. The result is that drugs, physical therapies and psychological therapies might be either underused or overused. People with dementia and pain could be helped by assessment processes that characterise an individual's pain experience and dementia behaviours in a mechanistic manner, phenotyping. Chronic pain management has moved from a 'one size fits all' approach, towards personalised medicine, where interventions recommended for an individual depend upon the key mechanisms underlying their pain, and the relative values they place on benefits and adverse effects. Mechanistic phenotyping through careful personalised evaluation would define the mechanisms driving pain and dementia behaviours in an individual, enabling the formulation of a personalised intervention strategy. Central pain processing mechanisms are particularly likely to be important in people with pain and dementia, and interventions to accommodate and address these may be particularly helpful, not only to relieve pain but also the symptoms of dementia.

The facilitators and barriers to improving functional activity and wellbeing in people with dementia: a qualitative study from the process evaluation of Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED).

BACKGROUND: The PRomoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) study delivered an exercise and functional activity programme to participants living with dementia. A Randomised Controlled Trial showed no measurable benefits in activities of daily living, physical activity or quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To explore participants' responses to PrAISED and explain why an intervention that might be expected to have produced measurable health gains did not do so. METHODS: A process evaluation using qualitative methods, comprising interviews and researcher notes. SETTING: Data were collected in participants' homes or remotely by telephone or videoconferencing. SAMPLE: A total of 88 interviews were conducted with 44 participants living with dementia (n = 32 intervention group; n = 12 control group) and 39 caregivers. A total of 69 interviews were conducted with 26 therapists. RESULTS: Participants valued the intervention as proactively addressing health issues that were of concern to them, and as a source of social contact, interaction, information and advice. Facilitators to achieving positive outcomes included perceiving progress towards desired goals, positive expectations, therapists' skills and rapport with participants, and caregiver support. Barriers included: cognitive impairment, which prevented independent engagement and carry-over between sessions; chronic physical health problems and intercurrent acute illness and injury; 'tapering' (progressively infrequent supervision intended to help develop habits and independent activity); and the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Self-directed interventions may not be appropriate in the context of dementia, even in the mild stages of the condition. Dementia-specific factors affected outcomes including caregiver support, rapport with therapists, availability of supervision, motivational factors and the limitations of remote delivery. The effects of cognitive impairment, multimorbidity and frailty overwhelmed any positive impact of the intervention. Maintenance of functional ability is valued, but in the face of inevitable progression of disease, other less tangible outcomes become important, challenging how we frame 'health gain' and trial outcomes.

The bidirectional relationship between chronic joint pain and frailty: data from the Investigating Musculoskeletal Health and Wellbeing cohort.

BACKGROUND: Pain and frailty are associated, but this relationship is insufficiently understood. We aimed to test whether there is a unidirectional or bidirectional relationship between joint pain and frailty. METHODS: Data were from Investigating Musculoskeletal Health and Wellbeing, a UK-based cohort. Average joint pain severity over the previous month was assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). Frailty was classified as present/absent using the FRAIL questionnaire. Multivariable regression assessed the association between joint pain and frailty, adjusted for age, sex, and BMI class. Two-wave cross-lagged path modelling permitted simultaneous exploration of plausible causal pathways between pain intensity and frailty at baseline and 1-year. Transitions were assessed using t-tests. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred seventy-nine participants were studied, 53% female, with a median age of 73 (range 60 to 95) years. FRAIL classified 176 (15%) participants as frail at baseline. Mean (SD) baseline pain score was 5.2 (2.5). Pain NRS ≥ 4 was observed in 172 (99%) of frail participants. Pain severity was associated with frailty at baseline (aOR 1.72 (95%CI 1.56 to 1.92)). In cross-lagged path analysis, higher baseline pain predicted 1-year frailty [ß = 0.25, (95%CI 0.14 to 0.36), p < 0.001] and baseline frailty predicted higher 1-year pain [ß = 0.06, (95%CI 0.003 to 0.11), p = 0.040]. Participants transitioning to frailty over one year had higher mean pain scores (6.4 (95%CI 5.8 to 7.1)) at baseline than those who remained non-frail (4.7 (95%CI 4.5 to 4.8)), p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: The bidirectional relationship between pain and frailty could lead to a vicious cycle in which each accelerates the other's progression. This justifies attempts to prevent frailty by addressing pain and to include pain measures as an outcome in frailty studies.

Advance care plans in UK care home residents: a service evaluation using a stepped wedge design.

INTRODUCTION: advance care planning (ACP) in care homes has high acceptance, increases the proportion of residents dying in place and reduces hospital admissions in research. We investigated whether ACP had similar outcomes when introduced during real-world service implementation. METHODS: a service undertaking ACP in Lincoln, UK care homes was evaluated using routine data. Outcomes were proportion of care homes and residents participating in ACP; characteristics of residents choosing/declining ACP and place of death for those with/without ACP. Hospital admissions were analysed using mixed-effects Poisson regression for number of admissions, and a mixed-effects negative binomial model for number of occupied hospital bed days. RESULTS: About 15/24 (63%) eligible homes supported the service, in which 404/508 (79.5%) participants chose ACP. Residents choosing ACP were older, frailer, more cognitively impaired and malnourished; 384/404 (95%) residents choosing ACP recorded their care home as their preferred place of death: 380/404 (94%) declined cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Among deceased residents, 219/248 (88%) and 33/49 (67%) with and without advance care plan respectively died in their care home (relative risk 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.6, P < 0.001). Hospital admission rates and bed occupancy did not differ after implementation. DISCUSSION: About 79.5% participants chose ACP. Those doing so were more likely to die at home. Many homes were unwilling or unable to support the service. Hospital admissions were not reduced. Further research should consider how to enlist the support of all homes and to explore why hospital admissions were not reduced.

A realist evaluation of a multifactorial falls prevention programme in care homes.

BACKGROUND: falls in care homes are common, costly and hard to prevent.Multifactorial falls programmes demonstrate clinical and cost-effectiveness, but the heterogeneity of the care home sector is a barrier to their implementation. A fuller appreciation of the relationship between care home context and falls programme delivery will guide development and support implementation. METHODS: this is a multi-method process evaluation informed by a realist approach.Data include fidelity observations, stakeholder interviews, focus groups, documentary review and falls-rate data. Thematic analysis of qualitative data and descriptive statistics are synthesised to generate care home case studies. RESULTS: data were collected in six care homes where a falls programme was trialled. Forty-four interviews and 11 focus groups complemented observations and document review.The impact of the programme varied. Five factors were identified: (i) prior practice and (ii) training may inhibit new ways of working; (iii) some staff may be reluctant to take responsibility for falls; (iv) some may feel that residents living with dementia cannot be prevented from falling; and, (v) changes to management may disturb local innovation.In some care homes, training and improved awareness generated a reduction in falls without formal assessments being carried out. CONCLUSIONS: different aspects of the falls programme sparked different mechanisms in different settings, with differing impact upon falls.The evaluation has shown that elements of a multifactorial falls programme can work independently of each other and that it is the local context (and local challenges faced), which should shape how a falls programme is implemented.

New horizons in evidence-based care for older people: individual participant data meta-analysis.

Evidence-based decisions on clinical and cost-effectiveness of interventions are ideally informed by meta-analyses of intervention trial data. However, when undertaken, such meta-analyses in ageing research have typically been conducted using standard methods whereby summary (aggregate) data are extracted from published trial reports. Although meta-analysis of aggregate data can provide useful insights into the average effect of interventions within a selected trial population, it has limitations regarding robust conclusions on which subgroups of people stand to gain the greatest benefit from an intervention or are at risk of experiencing harm. Future evidence synthesis using individual participant data from ageing research trials for meta-analysis could transform understanding of the effectiveness of interventions for older people, supporting evidence-based and sustainable commissioning. A major advantage of individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) is that it enables examination of characteristics that predict treatment effects, such as frailty, disability, cognitive impairment, ethnicity, gender and other wider determinants of health. Key challenges of IPDMA relate to the complexity and resources needed for obtaining, managing and preparing datasets, requiring a meticulous approach involving experienced researchers, frequently with expertise in designing and analysing clinical trials. In anticipation of future IPDMA work in ageing research, we are establishing an international Ageing Research Trialists collective, to bring together trialists with a common focus on transforming care for older people as a shared ambition across nations.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on physical exercise among participants receiving the Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) intervention: a repeated measure study.

BACKGROUND: The potential decrease in daily physical activity associated with the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns may have a negative impact on people living with dementia. Given the limited literature around the effects of home confinement in people living with dementia, this study investigated changes in physical exercise levels of participants in the intervention arm of the Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) Randomised Controlled Trial during the first COVID-19 national lockdown. It hypothesised that participants would maintain physical exercise levels. METHODS: A repeated measure (three time points) study involving 30 participants (mean age = 78.0 years, 15 male and 15 female, 22 (73.0%) living with their primary caregiver), from four regions in England receiving the PrAISED intervention. PrAISED is an individually tailored intervention of physical exercises and functional activities. Trained therapists deliver therapy sessions over a period of 52 weeks. Study participants received therapy sessions via phone or video calling during the COVID-19 lockdown. This study investigated self-reported minutes of physical exercise recorded on study calendars for the months of February (i.e., baseline - pre-lockdown), May (i.e., T1 - during lockdown), and August (i.e., T2-post-lockdown) 2020. RESULTS: Participants reported a statistically significant increase in activity levels between February and May (Wilcoxon Z = -2.013, p = 0.044) and a statistically significant decrease between May and August (Wilcoxon Z = -2.726, p = 0.004). No significant difference was found in the physical activity levels from pre- to post-lockdown (Wilcoxon Z = 0.485, p = 0.620). CONCLUSION: Despite concerns that the restrictions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic might lead to reductions in physical exercise, participants in receipt of the PrAISED intervention increased their amount of physical exercise during lockdown. Our findings support the potential of remote support for people living with dementia to help them maintain physical exercise levels in circumstances where face-to-face service provision is not possible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PrAISED trial and process evaluation have received ethical approval number 18/YH/0059 from the Bradford/Leeds Ethics Committee. The Clinical Trial Identifier for PrAISED is: ISRCTN15320670 ( https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN15320670 ). Registration was made on 04/09/2018.

Management of patients admitted to hospital with acute vertebral fragility fractures: a modified Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute vertebral fragility fracture requiring hospital admission is common, painful and disabling. No comprehensive clinical guideline for their care exists. To support the development of such a guideline, we sought the views of experts in the field. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was used. A total of 70 statements were presented, using an online platform, over three consensus-seeking rounds, to participants with experience in the hospital care of patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures from UK-based specialist societies. Participants rated the level of their agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined at 70% of respondents choosing either agree/strongly agree or disagree/strong disagree. Over the first two rounds, statements not reaching consensus were modified in subsequent rounds, and new statements proposed by participants and agreed by the research team could be added. RESULTS: There were 71 participants in the first round, 37 in the second round and 28 (most of whom were geriatricians) in the third round. Consensus was reached in 52 statements covering fracture diagnosis, second-line imaging, organisation of hospital care, pain management and falls and bone health assessment. Consensus was not achieved for whether vertebral fragility fractures should be managed in a specific clinical area. DISCUSSION: These findings provide the basis for the development of clinical guidelines and quality improvement initiatives. They also help to justify research into the merits of managing acute vertebral fragility fracture patients in a specific clinical area.

Interventions to ameliorate reductions in muscle quantity and function in hospitalised older adults: a systematic review towards acute sarcopenia treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Assimilate evidence for interventions to ameliorate negative changes in physical performance, muscle strength and muscle quantity in hospitalised older adults. METHODS: We searched for articles using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane library using terms for randomised controlled trials, older adults, hospitalisation and change in muscle quantity, strength or physical performance. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated standardised mean differences for changes in muscle function/quantity pre- and post-intervention. RESULTS: We identified 9,805 articles; 9,614 were excluded on title/abstract; 147 full texts were excluded. We included 44 studies including 4,522 participants; mean age 79.1. Twenty-seven studies (n = 3,417) involved physical activity interventions; a variety were trialled. Eleven studies involved nutritional interventions (n = 676). One trial involved testosterone (n = 39), two involved Growth Hormone (n = 53), one involved nandrolone (n = 29), and another involved erythropoietin (n = 141). Three studies (n = 206) tested Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation. Evidence for effectiveness/efficacy was limited. Strongest evidence was for multi-component physical activity interventions. However, all studies exhibited at least some concerns for overall risk of bias, and considering inconsistencies of effect sizes across studies, certainty around true effect sizes is limited. CONCLUSION: There is currently insufficient evidence for effective interventions to ameliorate changes in muscle function/quantity in hospitalised older adults. Multiple interventions have been safely trialled in heterogeneous populations across different settings. Treatment may need to be stratified to individual need. Larger scale studies testing combinations of interventions are warranted. Research aimed at understanding pathophysiology of acute sarcopenia will enable careful risk stratification and targeted interventions.

The clinical usefulness of muscle mass and strength measures in older people: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: sarcopenia is the loss of muscle mass and quality and is diagnosed using measures of muscle strength, size and mass. We evaluated the literature on whether sarcopenia measures are predictive of motor outcomes in older people in clinical settings. METHODS: electronic databases (MEDLINE Ovid, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science) were searched for articles on measures of muscle mass, volume, thickness or strength, in older people in clinical settings, which reported cross-sectional or longitudinal associations with motor outcomes. Clinical cohorts included geriatric medical inpatients and outpatients, patients with hip fracture, geriatric rehabilitation and care home residents. Motor outcomes were mobility, falls, balance and activities of daily living (ADL). Due to high study heterogeneity, standardised mean differences were used to compare strength of associations. RESULTS: in total, 83 articles were identified. The most frequently studied measures were grip strength (47 studies), knee extension strength (21 studies) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (18 studies). Handgrip strength (HGS) had evidence for cross-sectional associations with mobility (14 of 16 studies, 2,088 participants), balance (6 of 6 studies, 1,177 participants) and ADL independence (10 of 11 studies, 3,228 participants), and evidence of longitudinal associations with mobility (3 of 3 studies, 883 participants) and ADL independence (7 of 10 studies, 1,511 participants). There was no conclusive evidence for association with falls. CONCLUSIONS: HS was the most studied measure and was associated with mobility, balance and ADL outcomes. There was a paucity of studies, particularly with longitudinal follow-up, measuring muscle mass, volume or thickness using gold-standard approaches.

'Real world' effectiveness of the Falls Management Exercise (FaME) programme: an implementation study.

BACKGROUND: Falls incidence increases with age alongside declines in strength and balance. Clinical trials show that the Falls Management Exercise (FaME) programme improves strength and balance, which can reduce falls and improve physical functioning. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the clinical trial efficacy of FaME translates into effectiveness in non-research settings. DESIGN AND SETTING: An implementation study of FaME in 10 local authorities across the East Midlands region of England. SUBJECTS: Adults aged 65 and over enrolled on a FaME programme. METHOD: Anonymised outcome data collected by the FaME providers were compared at baseline, end of programme and 6 months follow-up using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: For 348 adults enrolled in programmes and analysed, the mean age was 76.8, 73% were female and 143 (41%) completed ≥75% of classes. Overall confidence in balance, fear of falling, functional reach and timed-up-and-go (all P < 0.001), and turn 180° (P = 0.008) improved significantly at programme completion versus baseline, but improvements were not maintained 6 months later. Falls risk (FRAT score) and total minutes of physical activity did not change significantly though minutes of strength and balance activity increased by 55% at programme completion and was maintained at 6 months. The falls incidence rate ratio (IRR) was non-significantly lower at programme completion (IRR 0.76, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.48,1.21) and follow-up (IRR 0.82 95% CI 0.48,1.39) versus baseline. CONCLUSIONS: There is modest translation of FaME efficacy into effectiveness, but not all effects persist after completion. Strategies to aid adherence and exercise maintenance are important to maximise benefits.

How quality improvement collaboratives work to improve healthcare in care homes: a realist evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) bring together multidisciplinary teams in a structured process to improve care quality. How QICs can be used to support healthcare improvement in care homes is not fully understood. METHODS: A realist evaluation to develop and test a programme theory of how QICs work to improve healthcare in care homes. A multiple case study design considered implementation across 4 sites and 29 care homes. Observations, interviews and focus groups captured contexts and mechanisms operating within QICs. Data analysis classified emerging themes using context-mechanism-outcome configurations to explain how NHS and care home staff work together to design and implement improvement. RESULTS: QICs will be able to implement and iterate improvements in care homes where they have a broad and easily understandable remit; recruit staff with established partnership working between the NHS and care homes; use strategies to build relationships and minimise hierarchy; protect and pay for staff time; enable staff to implement improvements aligned with existing work; help members develop plans in manageable chunks through QI coaching; encourage QIC members to recruit multidisciplinary support through existing networks; facilitate meetings in care homes and use shared learning events to build multidisciplinary interventions stepwise. Teams did not use measurement for change, citing difficulties integrating this into pre-existing and QI-related workload. CONCLUSIONS: These findings outline what needs to be in place for health and social care staff to work together to effect change. Further research needs to consider ways to work alongside staff to incorporate measurement for change into QI.

Care homes, their communities, and resilience in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic: interim findings from a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: From late February 2020, English care homes rapidly adapted their practices in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to accommodating new guidelines and policies, staff had to adjust to rapid reconfiguration of services external to the home that they would normally depend upon for support. This study examined the complex interdependencies of support as staff responded to COVID-19. The aim was to inform more effective responses to the ongoing pandemic, and to improve understanding of how to work with care home staff and organisations after the pandemic has passed. METHODS: Ten managers of registered care homes in the East Midlands of England were interviewed by videoconference or phone about their experiences of the crisis from a structured organisational perspective. Analysis used an adapted organisational framework analysis approach with a focus on social ties and interdependencies between organisations and individuals. RESULTS: Three key groups of interdependencies were identified: care processes and practice; resources; and governance. Care home staff had to deliver care in innovative ways, making high stakes decisions in circumstances defined by: fluid ties to organisations outside the care home; multiple, sometimes conflicting, sources of expertise and information; and a sense of deprioritisation by authorities. Organisational responses to the pandemic by central government resulted in resource constraints and additional work, and sometimes impaired the ability of staff and managers to make decisions. Local communities, including businesses, third-sector organisations and individuals, were key in helping care homes overcome challenges. Care homes, rather than competing, were found to work together to provide mutual support. Resilience in the system was a consequence of dedicated and resourceful staff using existing local networks, or forging new ones, to overcome barriers to care. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified how interdependency between care home organisations, the surrounding community, and key statutory and non-statutory organisations beyond their locality, shaped decision making and care delivery during the pandemic. Recognising these interdependencies, and the expertise shown by care home managers and staff as they navigate them, is key to providing effective healthcare in care homes as the pandemic progresses, and as the sector recovers afterwards.

Deconditioning in people living with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic: qualitative study from the Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Restrictions introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic led to increased risk of deconditioning in the general population. No empirical evidence of this effect however has been gathered in people living with dementia. This study aims to identify the causes and effects of COVID-19-related deconditioning in people living with dementia. METHODS: This is a longitudinal phenomenological qualitative study. Participants living with dementia, their caregivers and therapists involved in the Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) process evaluation during the COVID-19 pandemic were qualitatively interviewed at two time points: the baseline 2 months after the national lockdown was imposed in England (i.e., May 2020), the follow up 2 months after the first set (i.e. July 2020). The data were analysed through deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-four participants living with dementia, 19 caregivers and 15 therapists took part in the study. Two themes were identified: Causes of deconditioning in people living with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic and effects of deconditioning in people living with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic. A self-reinforcing pattern was common, whereby lockdown made the person apathetic, demotivated, socially disengaged, and frailer. This reduced activity levels, which in turn reinforced the effects of deconditioning over time. Without external supporters, most participants lacked the motivation / cognitive abilities to keep active. Provided the proper infrastructure and support, some participants could use tele-rehabilitation to combat deconditioning. CONCLUSION: The added risks and effects of deconditioning on people with dementia require considerable efforts from policy makers and clinicians to ensure that they initiate and maintain physical activity in prolonged periods of social distancing. Delivering rehabilitation in the same way as before the pandemic might not be feasible or sustainable and innovative approaches must be found. Digital support for this population has shown promising results but remains a challenge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PrAISED trial and process evaluation have received ethical approval number 18/YH/0059 from the Bradford/Leeds Ethics Committee. The ISRCTN Registration Number for PrAISED is  15320670 .

Ethnic disparity in access to the memory assessment service between South Asian and white British older adults in the United Kingdom: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Equality of access to memory assessment services by older adults from ethnic minorities is both an ethical imperative and a public health priority. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether timeliness of access to memory assessment service differs between older people of white British and South Asian ethnicity. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort. SETTING: Nottingham Memory Study; outpatient secondary mental healthcare. SUBJECTS: Our cohort comprised 3654 white British and 32 South Asian older outpatients. METHODS: The criterion for timely access to memory assessment service was set at 90 days from referral. Relationships between ethnicity and likelihood of timely access to memory assessment service were analysed using binary logistic regression. Analyses were adjusted for socio-demographic factors, deprivation and previous access to rapid response mental health services. RESULTS: Among white British outpatients, 2272 people (62.2%) achieved timely access to memory assessment service. Among South Asian outpatients, fourteen people (43.8%) achieved timely access to memory assessment service. After full adjustment, South Asian outpatients had a 0.47-fold reduced likelihood of timely access, compared to white British outpatients (odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.95, P value = .035). The difference became non-significant when restricting analyses to outpatients reporting British nationality or English as first language. Older age, lower index of deprivation and previous access to rapid response mental health services were associated with reduced likelihood of timely access, while gender was not. CONCLUSIONS: In a UK mental healthcare service, older South Asian outpatients are less likely to access dementia diagnostic services in a timely way, compared to white British outpatients.

The modified functional comorbidity index performed better than the Charlson index and original functional comorbidity index in predicting functional outcome in geriatric rehabilitation: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: In the inpatient rehabilitation of older patients, estimating to what extent the patient may functionally recover (functional prognosis), is important to plan the rehabilitation programme and aid discharge planning. Comorbidity is very common in older patients. However, the role of comorbidity in making a functional prognosis is not clearly defined. The aim of this study was to investigate a modified and weighted Functional Comorbidity Index (w-FCI) in relation to functional recovery and compare its predictive performance with that of the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the original Functional Comorbidity Index (FCI). METHODS: The COOPERATION study (Comorbidity and Outcomes of Older Patients Evaluated in RehabilitATION) is a prospective observational cohort study. Data of patients that were admitted in an inpatient geriatric rehabilitation facility in the UK between January and September 2017, were collected. The outcome measures were: the Elderly Mobility Scale (EMS) and Barthel index (BI) at discharge, EMS gain/day and BI gain/day. Baseline comorbidity was assessed using the CCI, the FCI and the w-FCI. Correlations, receiver operating curves (ROC), and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. The models were adjusted for age, gender and EMS or BI on admission. RESULTS: In total, 98 patients (mean age 82 years; 37% male) were included. The areas under the ROC curves of the w-FCI (EMS at discharge: 0.72, EMS gain/day: 0.72, BI at discharge: 0.66 and BI gain/day: 0.60) were higher than for the CCI (0.50, 0.53, 0.49, 0.44 respectively) and FCI (0.65, 0.55, 0.60, 0.49 respectively). The w-FCI was independently associated with EMS at discharge (20.7% of variance explained (PVE), p < 0.001), EMS gain/day (11.2PVE, p < 0.001), and BI at discharge (18.3 PVE, p < 0.001). The FCI was only associated with EMS gain/day (3.9 PVE, p < 0.05). None of the comorbidity indices contributed significantly to BI gain/day (w-FCI: 2.4 PVE, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The w-FCI was predictive of mobility & function at discharge and mobility gain per day, and outperformed the original FCI and the CCI. The w-FCI could be useful in assessing comorbidity in a personalised way and aid functional prognosis at the start of rehabilitation.

Investigating musculoskeletal health and wellbeing; a cohort study protocol.

BACKGROUND: In an ageing population, pain, frailty and disability frequently coexist across a wide range of musculoskeletal diagnoses, but their associations remain incompletely understood. The Investigating Musculoskeletal Health and Wellbeing (IMH&W) study aims to measure and characterise the development and progression of pain, frailty and disability, and to identify discrete subgroups and their associations. The survey will form a longitudinal context for nested research, permitting targeted recruitment of participants for qualitative, observational and interventional studies; helping to understand recruitment bias in clinical studies; and providing a source cohort for cohort randomised controlled trials. METHODS: IMH&W will comprise a prospective cohort of 10,000 adults recruited through primary and secondary care, and through non-clinical settings. Data collection will be at baseline, and then through annual follow-ups for 4 years. Questionnaires will address demographic characteristics, pain severity (0-10 Numerical Rating Scale), pain distribution (reported on a body Manikin), pain quality (McGill Pain Questionnaire), central aspects of pain (CAP-Knee), frailty and disability (based on Fried criteria and the FRAIL questionnaire), and fracture risk. Baseline characteristics, progression and associations of frailty, pain and disability will be determined. Discrete subgroups and trajectories will be sought by latent class analysis. Recruitment bias will be explored by comparing participants in nested studies with the eligible IMH&W population. DISCUSSION: IMH&W will elucidate associations and progression of pain, frailty and disability. It will enable identification of people at risk of poor musculoskeletal health and wellbeing outcomes who might be suitable for specific interventions, and facilitate generalisation and comparison of research outcomes between target populations. The study will benefit from a large sample size and will recruit from diverse regions across the UK. Purposive recruitment will enrich the cohort with people with MSK problems with high representation of elderly and unwell people. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03696134. Date of Registration: 04 October 2018.