Predictors of primary care psychological therapy outcomes for depression and anxiety in people living with dementia: evidence from national healthcare records in England.

BACKGROUND: Psychological therapies can be effective in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety in people living with dementia (PLWD). However, factors associated with better therapy outcomes in PLWD are currently unknown. AIMS: To investigate whether dementia-specific and non-dementia-specific factors are associated with therapy outcomes in PLWD. METHOD: National linked healthcare records were used to identify 1522 PLWD who attended psychological therapy services across England. Associations between various factors and therapy outcomes were explored. RESULTS: People with frontotemporal dementia were more likely to experience reliable deterioration in depression/anxiety symptoms compared with people with vascular dementia (odds ratio 2.98, 95% CI 1.08-8.22; P = 0.03) or Alzheimer's disease (odds ratio 2.95, 95% CI 1.15-7.55; P = 0.03). Greater depression severity (reliable recovery: odds ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98, P < 0.001; reliable deterioration: odds ratio 1.73, 95% CI 1.04-2.90, P = 0.04), lower work and social functioning (recovery: odds ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.99, P = 0.002), psychotropic medication use (recovery: odds ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.51-0.90, P = 0.01), being of working age (recovery: odds ratio 2.03, 95% CI 1.10-3.73, P = 0.02) and fewer therapy sessions (recovery: odds ratio 1.12, 95% CI 1.09-1.16, P < 0.001) were associated with worse therapy outcomes in PLWD. CONCLUSIONS: Dementia type was generally not associated with outcomes, whereas clinical factors were consistent with those identified for the general population. Additional support and adaptations may be required to improve therapy outcomes in PLWD, particularly in those who are younger and have more severe depression.

A pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial to assess the safety, clinical and cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine and carbamazepine in people with Alzheimer's disease and agitated behaviours: the HTA-SYMBAD trial.

Background: Agitation is common and impacts negatively on people with dementia and carers. Non-drug patient-centred care is first-line treatment, but we need other treatment when this fails. Current evidence is sparse on safer and effective alternatives to antipsychotics. Objectives: To assess clinical and cost-effectiveness and safety of mirtazapine and carbamazepine in treating agitation in dementia. Design: Pragmatic, phase III, multicentre, double-blind, superiority, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness of mirtazapine over 12 weeks (carbamazepine arm discontinued). Setting: Twenty-six UK secondary care centres. Participants: Eligibility: probable or possible Alzheimer's disease, agitation unresponsive to non-drug treatment, Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score ≥ 45. Interventions: Mirtazapine (target 45 mg), carbamazepine (target 300 mg) and placebo. Outcome measures: Primary: Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score 12 weeks post randomisation. Main economic outcome evaluation: incremental cost per six-point difference in Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score at 12 weeks, from health and social care system perspective. Data from participants and informants at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks. Long-term follow-up Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory data collected by telephone from informants at 6 and 12 months. Randomisation and blinding: Participants allocated 1 : 1 : 1 ratio (to discontinuation of the carbamazepine arm, 1 : 1 thereafter) to receive placebo or carbamazepine or mirtazapine, with treatment as usual. Random allocation was block stratified by centre and residence type with random block lengths of three or six (after discontinuation of carbamazepine, two or four). Double-blind, with drug and placebo identically encapsulated. Referring clinicians, participants, trial management team and research workers who did assessments were masked to group allocation. Results: Two hundred and forty-four participants recruited and randomised (102 mirtazapine, 102 placebo, 40 carbamazepine). The carbamazepine arm was discontinued due to slow overall recruitment; carbamazepine/placebo analyses are therefore statistically underpowered and not detailed in the abstract. Mean difference placebo-mirtazapine (-1.74, 95% confidence interval -7.17 to 3.69; p = 0.53). Harms: The number of controls with adverse events (65/102, 64%) was similar to the mirtazapine group (67/102, 66%). However, there were more deaths in the mirtazapine group (n = 7) by week 16 than in the control group (n = 1). Post hoc analysis suggests this was of marginal statistical significance (p = 0.065); this difference did not persist at 6- and 12-month assessments. At 12 weeks, the costs of unpaid care by the dyadic carer were significantly higher in the mirtazapine than placebo group [difference: £1120 (95% confidence interval £56 to £2184)]. In the cost-effectiveness analyses, mean raw and adjusted outcome scores and costs of the complete cases samples showed no differences between groups. Limitations: Our study has four important potential limitations: (1) we dropped the proposed carbamazepine group; (2) the trial was not powered to investigate a mortality difference between the groups; (3) recruitment beyond February 2020, was constrained by the COVID-19 pandemic; and (4) generalisability is limited by recruitment of participants from old-age psychiatry services and care homes. Conclusions: The data suggest mirtazapine is not clinically or cost-effective (compared to placebo) for agitation in dementia. There is little reason to recommend mirtazapine for people with dementia with agitation. Future work: Effective and cost-effective management strategies for agitation in dementia are needed where non-pharmacological approaches are unsuccessful. Study registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN17411897/NCT03031184. 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. 27, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

It is common for people with Alzheimer's disease to experience agitation, for example feeling restless or unsettled. If left untreated, agitation can lead to poorer quality of life and increased hospitalisation and strain for family carers. Often these symptoms are treated with medications that are usually used to manage psychosis (antipsychotic drugs), but such medication has limited effectiveness and can cause serious adverse effects to patients, including risk of increased death. Two medications that are already commonly prescribed for other health issues, mirtazapine (an antidepressant) and carbamazepine (a drug used to treat epilepsy), had been identified as a possible alternative way of treating agitation in Alzheimer's disease that might not have the harms associated with antipsychotic medication. In this study, we compared the effects of giving mirtazapine or carbamazepine with a dummy drug (placebo) in people with Alzheimer's disease who were experiencing agitation. The results of the study showed that neither medication was any more effective than the placebo in reducing agitation over 12 weeks in terms of improving symptoms, or in economic terms. Mirtazapine may lead to additional carer costs as compared to placebo. The study findings are stronger for mirtazapine than carbamazepine because the carbamazepine arm was stopped when it had recruited less than half the numbers needed. That was done because the study was not recruiting quickly enough to support both the mirtazapine and the carbamazepine arms. The findings from this study show that mirtazapine should not be recommended to treat agitation in Alzheimer's disease. More work is needed to formulate effective ways and to test new drug and non-drug treatments for agitation in dementia.

Associations between psychological intervention for anxiety disorders and risk of dementia: a prospective cohort study using national health-care records data in England.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses support an association between anxiety in older adulthood and dementia. The aim of this study was to use routinely collected health data to test whether treatment of anxiety disorders through psychological intervention is associated with a lower incidence of dementia. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, data from nationally provided psychological therapy services in England termed Improving Access to Psychological Therapies from 2012 to 2019 were linked to medical records, including dementia diagnoses as defined by the tenth edition of the International Classification of Diseases, up to 8 follow-up years later. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients who were aged 65 years and older; (2) patients with a probable anxiety disorder; and (3) those with no previous or current diagnosis of dementia. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to test whether reliable improvement in anxiety following psychological intervention was associated with future dementia incidence. The primary outcome was all-cause dementia and cases were identified using ICD-10 dementia codes from Hospital Episode Statistics, Mental Health Services Dataset, and mortality data. For main analyses, hazards ratios (HRs) are presented. FINDINGS: Data from 128 077 people aged 65 years and older attending a nationally provided psychological intervention service in England were linked to medical records. 88 019 (69·0%) of 127 064 participants with available gender data were women and 39 585 (31·0%) were men. 111 225 (95·9%) of 115 989 with available ethnicity data were of White ethnicity. The mean age of the sample was 71·55 years (SD 5·69). Fully adjusted models included data from 111 958 people after 16 119 were excluded due to missing data on key variables or covariates. 4510 (4·0%) of 111 958 participants had a dementia diagnosis. The remaining 107 448 (96·0%) were censored either at date of death or when the final follow-up period available for analyses was reached. People who showed reliable improvement in anxiety had lower rates of later dementia diagnosis (3·9%) than those who did not show reliable improvement (5·1%). Reliable improvement in anxiety following psychological intervention was associated with reduced incidence of all-cause dementia (HR 0·83 [95% CI 0·78-0·88]), Alzheimer's disease (HR 0·85 [0·77-0·94]), and vascular dementia (HR 0·80 [0·71-0·90]). Effects did not differ depending on anxiety disorder diagnosis. INTERPRETATION: Results showed that reliable improvement in anxiety from psychological therapy was associated with reduced incidence of future dementia. There are multiple plausible explanations for this finding and further research is needed to distinguish between these possibilities. Missing data in the sample limit reliability of findings. FUNDING: Alzheimer's Society, Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, and UCLH National Institute for Health and Care Research Biomedical Research Centre.

Associations between psychological therapy outcomes for depression and incidence of dementia.

BACKGROUND: Depression is an important, potentially modifiable dementia risk factor. However, it is not known whether effective treatment of depression through psychological therapies is associated with reduced dementia incidence. The aim of this study was to investigate associations between reduction in depressive symptoms following psychological therapy and the subsequent incidence of dementia. METHODS: National psychological therapy data were linked with hospital records of dementia diagnosis for 119808 people aged 65+. Participants received a course of psychological therapy treatment in Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services between 2012 and 2019. Cox proportional hazards models were run to test associations between improvement in depression following psychological therapy and incidence of dementia diagnosis up to eight years later. RESULTS: Improvements in depression following treatment were associated with reduced rates of dementia diagnosis up to 8 years later (HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.94), after adjustment for key covariates. Strongest effects were observed for vascular dementia (HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.97) compared with Alzheimer's disease (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Reliable improvement in depression across psychological therapy was associated with reduced incidence of future dementia. Results are consistent with at least two possibilities. Firstly, psychological interventions to improve symptoms of depression may have the potential to contribute to dementia risk reduction efforts. Secondly, psychological therapies may be less effective in people with underlying dementia pathology or they may be more likely to drop out of therapy (reverse causality). Tackling the under-representation of older people in psychological therapies and optimizing therapy outcomes is an important goal for future research.

Effectiveness of primary care psychological therapy services for the treatment of depression and anxiety in people living with dementia: Evidence from national healthcare records in England.

Background: Depression and anxiety are common and deleterious in people living with dementia (PLWD). It is currently unknown whether routinely provided psychological therapy can help reduce these symptoms in PLWD. This study aimed to investigate improvements in depression and anxiety symptoms over the course of therapy offered in primary care psychological therapy services in PLWD and to compare outcomes to people without dementia. Methods: National data from Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services (IAPT) across England linked with Hospital Episode Statistics data, the Mental Health Services Dataset, and HES-ONS mortality data were used to identify 1,549 PLWD who completed a course of psychological treatment in IAPT between 2012-2019 and a propensity score matched control group without identified dementia. Outcome measures included pre-post intervention changes in depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) symptoms and therapy outcomes (reliable improvement, recovery, deterioration). Findings: Symptoms of depression (t(1548)=31·05, p<·001) and anxiety (t(1548)=30·31, p<·001) improved in PLWD over the course of psychological therapy with large effect sizes (depression: d=-0·83; anxiety: d=-0·80). However, PLWD were less likely to reliably improve (OR=·75, 95%CI[·63,·88], p<·001) or recover (OR=·75, 95%CI[·64,·88], p=·001), and more likely to deteriorate (OR=1·35, 95%CI[1·03,1·78], p=·029) than a matched control sample without dementia. Interpretation: Psychological therapy may be beneficial for PLWD with depression or anxiety, but it is currently not as effective as for people without dementia. More research is needed to improve access to psychological therapies and to understand this discrepancy and how therapies can be adapted to further improve outcomes. Funding: This work was supported by the Alzheimer's Society.

Cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine for agitated behaviors in dementia: findings from a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine compared to placebo over 12-week follow-up. DESIGN: Economic evaluation in a double-blind randomized controlled trial of mirtazapine vs. placebo. SETTING: Community settings and care homes in 26 UK centers. PARTICIPANTS: People with probable or possible Alzheimer's disease and agitation. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome included incremental cost of participants' health and social care per 6-point difference in CMAI score at 12 weeks. Secondary cost-utility analyses examined participants' and unpaid carers' gain in quality-adjusted life years (derived from EQ-5D-5L, DEMQOL-Proxy-U, and DEMQOL-U) from the health and social care and societal perspectives. RESULTS: One hundred and two participants were allocated to each group; 81 mirtazapine and 90 placebo participants completed a 12-week assessment (87 and 95, respectively, completed a 6-week assessment). Mirtazapine and placebo groups did not differ on mean CMAI scores or health and social care costs over the study period, before or after adjustment for center and living arrangement (independent living/care home). On the primary outcome, neither mirtazapine nor placebo could be considered a cost-effective strategy with a high level of confidence. Groups did not differ in terms of participant self- or proxy-rated or carer self-rated quality of life scores, health and social care or societal costs, before or after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: On cost-effectiveness grounds, the use of mirtazapine cannot be recommended for agitated behaviors in people living with dementia. Effective and cost-effective medications for agitation in dementia remain to be identified in cases where non-pharmacological strategies for managing agitation have been unsuccessful.

Salivary cortisol in longitudinal associations between affective symptoms and midlife cognitive function: A British birth cohort study.

Affective disorders are associated with accelerated cognitive ageing. However, current understanding of biological mechanisms which underlie these observed associations is limited. The aim of this study was to test: 1) Whether cortisol acts as a pathway in the association between depressive or anxiety symptoms across adulthood and midlife cognitive function; 2) Whether cortisol is associated with later depressive or anxiety symptoms, and cognitive function. Data were used from the National Child Development Study (NCDS), a sample of infants born in mainland UK during one week of 1958. A measure of the accumulation of affective symptoms was derived from data collected from age 23 to 42 using the Malaise Inventory Scale. Salivary cortisol measures were available at age 44-45. Cognitive function (memory, fluency, information processing) and affective symptoms were assessed at the age of 50. Path models were run to test whether salivary cortisol explained the longitudinal association between depressive or anxiety disorder symptoms and cognitive function. Direct effects of affective symptoms are shown across early to middle adulthood on cognitive function in midlife (memory and information processing errors). However, there were no effects of affective symptoms on cognitive function through cortisol measures. Additionally, cortisol measures were not significantly associated with subsequent affective symptoms or cognitive function at the age of 50. These results do not provide clear evidence to suggest that cortisol plays a role in the association between affective symptoms and cognitive function over this period of time. These findings contribute to our understanding of how the association between affective symptoms and cognitive function operates over time.

Study of mirtazapine for agitated behaviours in dementia (SYMBAD): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Agitation is common in people with dementia and negatively affects the quality of life of both people with dementia and carers. Non-drug patient-centred care is the first-line treatment, but there is a need for other treatment when this care is not effective. Current evidence is sparse on safer and effective alternatives to antipsychotics. We assessed the efficacy and safety of mirtazapine, an antidepressant prescribed for agitation in dementia. METHODS: This parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial-the Study of Mirtazapine for Agitated Behaviours in Dementia trial (SYMBAD)-was done in 26 UK centres. Participants had probable or possible Alzheimer's disease, agitation unresponsive to non-drug treatment, and a Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) score of 45 or more. They were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either mirtazapine (titrated to 45 mg) or placebo. The primary outcome was reduction in CMAI score at 12 weeks. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03031184, and ISRCTN17411897. FINDINGS: Between Jan 26, 2017, and March 6, 2020, 204 participants were recruited and randomised. Mean CMAI scores at 12 weeks were not significantly different between participants receiving mirtazapine and participants receiving placebo (adjusted mean difference -1·74, 95% CI -7·17 to 3·69; p=0·53). The number of controls with adverse events (65 [64%] of 102 controls) was similar to that in the mirtazapine group (67 [66%] of 102 participants receiving mirtazapine). However, there were more deaths in the mirtazapine group (n=7) by week 16 than in the control group (n=1), with post-hoc analysis suggesting this difference was of marginal statistical significance (p=0·065). INTERPRETATION: This trial found no benefit of mirtazapine compared with placebo, and we observed a potentially higher mortality with use of mirtazapine. The data from this study do not support using mirtazapine as a treatment for agitation in dementia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Implementation of START (STrAtegies for RelaTives) for dementia carers in the third sector: Widening access to evidence-based interventions.

Family members remain the main care providers for the increasing numbers of people with dementia, and often become depressed or anxious. In an implementation research project, we aimed to widen access to Strategies for RelaTives (START), a clinically and cost-effective intervention for the mental health of family carers, by laying the foundations for its implementation in the third sector. We used the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework to guide implementation of START, a manual-based, individually-delivered, multicomponent eight-session coping strategy intervention. We interviewed a maximum variation sample of twenty-seven stakeholders from the English Alzheimer's Society (AS), about possible difficulties in management, training, and delivery of START. We trained and supervised three AS dementia support workers in different locations, to each deliver START to three family carers. Two researchers independently coded pre-intervention interviews for themes. We assessed intervention feasibility through monitoring delivery fidelity, rating audio-recordings from 1-5 (5 being high) and interviewing facilitators, family carers and AS managers about their experiences. We assessed effectiveness on family carers' mental health using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) before and after receiving START (scores 0-42). We changed START's format by reflecting carer diversity more and increasing carer stories prominence, but core content or delivery processes were unchanged. All carers received START and attended every session. The mean fidelity score was 4.2. Mean HADS-total score reduced from baseline 18.4 (standard deviation 7.4) to follow-up 15.8 (9.7). Six (67%) carers scored as clinically depressed on baseline HADS and 2 (22%) at follow-up. Facilitators and carers rated START positively. Appropriately experienced third sector workers can be trained and supervised to deliver START and it remains effective. This has the potential for widened access at scale.

Pilot cluster randomised trial of an evidence-based intervention to reduce avoidable hospital admissions in nursing home residents (Better Health in Residents of Care Homes with Nursing-BHiRCH-NH Study).

OBJECTIVES: To pilot a complex intervention to support healthcare and improve early detection and treatment for common health conditions experienced by nursing home (NH) residents. DESIGN: Pilot cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 14 NHs (7 intervention, 7 control) in London and West Yorkshire. PARTICIPANTS: NH residents, their family carers and staff. INTERVENTION: Complex intervention to support healthcare and improve early detection and treatment of urinary tract and respiratory infections, chronic heart failure and dehydration, comprising: (1) 'Stop and Watch (S&W)' early warning tool for changes in physical health, (2) condition-specific care pathway and (3) Situation, Background, Assessment and Recommendation tool to enhance communication with primary care. Implementation was supported by Practice Development Champions, a Practice Development Support Group and regular telephone coaching with external facilitators. OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on NH (quality ratings, size, ownership), residents, family carers and staff demographics during the month prior to intervention and subsequently, numbers of admissions, accident and emergency visits, and unscheduled general practitioner visits monthly for 6 months during intervention. We collected data on how the intervention was used, healthcare resource use and quality of life data for economic evaluation. We assessed recruitment and retention, and whether a full trial was warranted. RESULTS: We recruited 14 NHs, 148 staff, 95 family carers and 245 residents. We retained the majority of participants recruited (95%). 15% of residents had an unplanned hospital admission for one of the four study conditions. We were able to collect sufficient questionnaire data (all over 96% complete). No NH implemented intervention tools as planned. Only 16 S&W forms and 8 care pathways were completed. There was no evidence of harm. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment, retention and data collection processes were effective but the intervention not implemented. A full trial is not warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN74109734 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN74109734). ORIGINAL PROTOCOL: BMJ Open. 2019;9(5):e026510. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026510.

Evidence-based intervention to reduce avoidable hospital admissions in care home residents (the Better Health in Residents in Care Homes (BHiRCH) study): protocol for a pilot cluster randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Acute hospital admission is distressing for care home residents. Ambulatory care sensitive conditions, such as respiratory and urinary tract infections, are conditions that can cause unplanned hospital admission but may have been avoidable with timely detection and intervention in the community. The Better Health in Residents in Care Homes (BHiRCH) programme has feasibility tested and will pilot a multicomponent intervention to reduce these avoidable hospital admissions. The BHiRCH intervention comprises an early warning tool for noting changes in resident health, a care pathway (clinical guidance and decision support system) and a structured method for communicating with primary care, adapted for use in the care home. We use practice development champions to support implementation and embed changes in care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Cluster randomised pilot trial to test study procedures and indicate whether a further definitive trial is warranted. Fourteen care homes with nursing (nursing homes) will be randomly allocated to intervention (delivered at nursing home level) or control groups. Two nurses from each home become Practice Development Champions trained to implement the intervention, supported by a practice development support group. Data will be collected for 3 months preintervention, monthly during the 12-month intervention and 1 month after. Individual-level data includes resident, care partner and staff demographics, resident functional status, service use and quality of life (for health economic analysis) and the extent to which staff perceive the organisation supports person centred care. System-level data includes primary and secondary health services contacts (ie, general practitioner and hospital admissions). Process evaluation assesses intervention acceptability, feasibility, fidelity, ease of implementation in practice and study procedures (ie, consent and recruitment rates). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by Research Ethics Committee and the UK Health Research Authority. Findings will be disseminated via academic and policy conferences, peer-reviewed publications and social media (eg, Twitter). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN74109734; Pre-results.

Ticking boxes or meaningful partnership - The experience of lay representation, participant and study partner involvement in Brains for Dementia Research.

Brains for Dementia Research is a planned brain donation project with serial assessments during life. Lay input helped conceive and shape Brains for Dementia Research and over time a growing number of lay volunteers have engaged with the project in almost all areas of activity. Lay representatives serve on the management and tissue banking committees, have spoken at recruitment and team events, and have reviewed all public and participant facing communications. Recruitment and retention has been greatly facilitated through lay involvement with community organisations and creating regional/national media opportunities. The experience of Brains for Dementia Research has been that involvement of the public and study participants has the greatest positive impact on study outcomes when the relationship is a genuine partnership. Purposeful inclusivity allows lay people to contribute in situations where professionals might otherwise dominate. Maintaining an environment where both lay and professional staff can think creatively, express ideas and opinions, problem-solve and work well together has had a synergistic effect on project outcomes. Ensuring good communication between the various professionals and lay representatives has also been part of the success in keeping the cohort flexible and able to respond to the changing landscape of clinical trials, the emergence of 'big data' and to maximise the future potential of the cohort. Our lay representatives may also be study participants, study partners, or have personal experience of dementia and bring an energy, enthusiasm and commitment to what they do, that in turn encourages the professional team.

A pilot study of potential brain donor satisfaction and attitudes towards telephone assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Test the feasibility of assessing cognition, psychiatric symptoms and daily living skills of potential brain donors by telephone and compare satisfaction and attitudes across telephone and face-to-face assessment. METHOD: Data were collected from 108 healthy participants from the Brains for Dementia Research cohort. Purposive sampling was used to assess feasibility and a randomised control trial design compared satisfaction and attitudes towards telephone and face-to-face assessment. Non-parametric tests were conducted to compare groups, and logistic regression was performed to assess the relationship between satisfaction and participant characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 80 participants offered telephone assessment, 67 (83.8%) agreed, 2 (2.5%) had a significant hearing impairment, 4 (5.0%) had potential memory problems and 7 (8.7%) declined. On average, telephone assessments lasted 38 min and duration was negatively associated with Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status-Modified scores (p = 0.001) and positively associated with age (p = 0.040), Neuropsychiatric Inventory scores (p = 0.019), Geriatric Depression Scale (p = 0.035) and Global Deterioration Scale (p = 0.022). Satisfaction was high in respect to organisational and personal aspects; ratings did not differ significantly across telephone and face-to-face assessment groups and were not related to socio-demographic characteristics. Participants undergoing telephone assessment were significantly more likely to hold positive attitudes towards this mode of assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone assessment is feasible, time-efficient and acceptable to healthy, potential brain donors. When used with other assessment modes and within the context of established contact, telephone assessment offers greater flexibility to researchers and participants and represents an effective mechanism for overcoming the challenges of growing, ageing cohorts and uncertain resources. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in dementia: A qualitative study of the views of former dementia carers.

BACKGROUND: Despite media and academic interest on assisted dying in dementia, little is known of the views of those directly affected. AIM: This study explored the views of former carers on assisted dying in dementia. DESIGN: This was a qualitative study using thematic analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16 former carers of people with dementia were recruited through national dementia charities and participated in semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: While many supported the individual's right to die, the complexity of assisted dying in dementia was emphasized. Existential, physical, psychological and psychosocial aspects of suffering were identified as potential reasons to desire an assisted death. Most believed it would help to talk with a trained health professional if contemplating an assisted death. CONCLUSION: Health workers should be mindful of the holistic experience of dementia at the end of life. The psychological and existential aspects of suffering should be addressed, as well as relief of physical pain. Further research is required.

Cost-effectiveness analyses for mirtazapine and sertraline in dementia: randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Depression is a common and costly comorbidity in dementia. There are very few data on the cost-effectiveness of antidepressants for depression in dementia and their effects on carer outcomes. AIMS: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sertraline and mirtazapine compared with placebo for depression in dementia. METHOD: A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial with a parallel cost-effectiveness analysis (trial registration: ISRCTN88882979 and EudraCT 2006-000105-38). The primary cost-effectiveness analysis compared differences in treatment costs for patients receiving sertraline, mirtazapine or placebo with differences in effectiveness measured by the primary outcome, total Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD) score, over two time periods: 0-13 weeks and 0-39 weeks. The secondary evaluation was a cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) computed from the Euro-Qual (EQ-5D) and societal weights over those same periods. RESULTS: There were 339 participants randomised and 326 with costs data (111 placebo, 107 sertraline, 108 mirtazapine). For the primary outcome, decrease in depression, mirtazapine and sertraline were not cost-effective compared with placebo. However, examining secondary outcomes, the time spent by unpaid carers caring for participants in the mirtazapine group was almost half that for patients receiving placebo (6.74 v. 12.27 hours per week) or sertraline (6.74 v. 12.32 hours per week). Informal care costs over 39 weeks were £1510 and £1522 less for the mirtazapine group compared with placebo and sertraline respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of reducing depression, mirtazapine and sertraline were not cost-effective for treating depression in dementia. However, mirtazapine does appear likely to have been cost-effective if costing includes the impact on unpaid carers and with quality of life included in the outcome. Unpaid (family) carer costs were lower with mirtazapine than sertraline or placebo. This may have been mediated via the putative ability of mirtazapine to ameliorate sleep disturbances and anxiety. Given the priority and the potential value of supporting family carers of people with dementia, further research is warranted to investigate the potential of mirtazapine to help with behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia and in supporting carers.

Sertraline or mirtazapine for depression in dementia (HTA-SADD): a randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Depression is common in dementia but the evidence base for appropriate drug treatment is sparse and equivocal. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of two of the most commonly prescribed drugs, sertraline and mirtazapine, compared with placebo. METHODS: We undertook the parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Health Technology Assessment Study of the Use of Antidepressants for Depression in Dementia (HTA-SADD) trial in participants from old-age psychiatry services in nine centres in England. Participants were eligible if they had probable or possible Alzheimer's disease, depression (lasting ≥4 weeks), and a Cornell scale for depression in dementia (CSDD) score of 8 or more. Participants were ineligible if they were clinically critical (eg, suicide risk), contraindicated to study drugs, on antidepressants, in another trial, or had no carer. The clinical trials unit at King's College London (UK) randomly allocated participants with a computer-generated block randomisation sequence, stratified by centre, with varying block sizes, in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive sertraline (target dose 150 mg per day), mirtazapine (45 mg), or placebo (control group), all with standard care. The primary outcome was reduction in depression (CSDD score) at 13 weeks (outcomes to 39 weeks were also assessed), assessed with a mixed linear-regression model adjusted for baseline CSDD, time, and treatment centre. This study is registered, number ISRCTN88882979 and EudraCT 2006-000105-38. FINDINGS: Decreases in depression scores at 13 weeks did not differ between 111 controls and 107 participants allocated to receive sertraline (mean difference 1·17, 95% CI -0·23 to 2·58; p=0·10) or mirtazapine (0·01, -1·37 to 1·38; p=0·99), or between participants in the mirtazapine and sertraline groups (1·16, -0·25 to 2·57; p=0·11); these findings persisted to 39 weeks. Fewer controls had adverse reactions (29 of 111 [26%]) than did participants in the sertraline group (46 of 107, 43%; p=0·010) or mirtazapine group (44 of 108, 41%; p=0·031), and fewer serious adverse events rated as severe (p=0·003). Five patients in every group died by week 39. INTERPRETATION: Because of the absence of benefit compared with placebo and increased risk of adverse events, the present practice of use of these antidepressants, with usual care, for first-line treatment of depression in Alzheimer's disease should be reconsidered. FUNDING: UK National Institute of Health Research HTA Programme.

What real outcomes matter to caregivers?

Two surveys of caregivers of people with dementia were conducted in the U.K. and Poland. Among 64 U.K. carers, cognition, early diagnosis and general practitioner support were of particular concern to those caring for people with early dementia, while former carers were more concerned with pain, comfort and palliative issues. There was very strong support for better workforce training. In Poland, restoration of health and more time off from caring were the most desired outcomes.

A qualitative study of the views of residents with dementia, their relatives and staff about work practice in long-term care settings.

BACKGROUND: Most people living in 24-hour care settings have dementia, and little is known about what makes long-term care a positive experience for them. METHOD: This carer-led qualitative study examined working practices in 24-hour long-term care-settings, including hospitals, nursing and residential homes, with the aim of finding out and making recommendations about such settings. Using semi-structured interviews, managers, nurses and care assistants were asked about work practices, such as how they coped with difficult behavior, about shifts, staffing levels, staff retention and training. Relatives of residents with dementia were asked about their role and perceptions of the care provided, and residents were asked for their opinions of their care. RESULTS: Staff reported that residents presented with increasingly challenging behavior compared to the past, and that sometimes staffing levels and skills were inadequate. Of all the settings, hospitals had the most problems with staffing levels and retention, staff-relative relationships and staff support systems. Relatives saw their own role as positive. People with dementia of varying severity could usefully evaluate some of the services they received. DISCUSSION: Dementia-specific training and education of staff in all long-term care-settings, including induction, should address the management of problem behavior in dementia and thereby improve staff fulfilment and relatives' satisfaction. The long-stay hospital may not be appropriate as a "home for life" for those with dementia, and we recommend that long-stay care settings should be able to cater flexibly for a range of resident needs.