Psychotropic medicines' prevalence, patterns and effects on cognitive and physical function in older adults with intellectual disability in Ireland: longitudinal cohort study, 2009-2020.

BACKGROUND: The frequent prescribing of psychotropics and high prevalence of polypharmacy among older adults with intellectual disabilities require close monitoring. AIMS: To describe change in prevalence, predictors and health outcomes of psychotropic use during the four waves (2009/2010, 2013/2014, 2016/2017, 2019/2020) of the Intellectual Disability Supplement to the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (IDS-TILDA). METHOD: Eligible participants were adults (≥40 years) with intellectual disabilities who participated in all four waves of IDS-TILDA and who reported medication use for the entire period. Differences between groups were tested using Cochran's Q test for binary variables and the McNemar-Bowker test for variables with more than two categories. Generalised estimating equation models were used to assess associations between psychotropic use, participants' characteristics and health outcomes. RESULTS: Across waves (433 participants) there were no significant differences in prevalence of psychotropic use (61.2-64.2%) and psychotropic polypharmacy (42.7-38.3%). Antipsychotics were the most used subgroup, without significant change in prevalence between waves (47.6-44.6%). A significant decrease was observed for anxiolytics (26.8-17.6%; P < 0.001) and hypnotics/sedatives (14.1-9.0%; P < 0.05). A significant increase was recorded for antidepressants (28.6-35.8%; P < 0.001) and mood-stabilising agents (11.5-14.6%; P < 0.05). Psychotropic polypharmacy (≥2 psychotropics) was significantly associated with moderate to total dependence in performing activities of daily living over the 10-year period (OR = 1.80, 95% CI 1.21-2.69; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates an increase in usage of some classes of psychotropic, a reduction in others and no change in the relatively high rate of antipsychotic use over 10 years in a cohort of older adults with intellectual disabilities and consequent risk of psychotropic polypharmacy and medication-related harm.

An external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care (PolyPrime).

BACKGROUND: For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy (use of multiple medications) is a standard practice. PolyPrime is a theory-based intervention developed to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. This pilot study aims to assess the feasibility of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aimed to recruit 12 general practitioner (GP) practices (six in NI; six in the ROI counties that border NI) and ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) per GP practice (n = 120). Practices allocated to the intervention arm watched an online video and scheduled medication reviews with patients on two occasions. We assessed the feasibility of collecting GP record (medication appropriateness, health service use) and patient self-reported data [health-related quality of life (HRQoL), health service use)] at baseline, 6 and 9 months. HRQoL was measured using the EuroQol-5 dimension-5 level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and medication-related burden quality-of-life (MRB-QoL) tool. An embedded process evaluation and health economics analysis were also undertaken. Pre-specified progression criteria were used to determine whether to proceed to a definitive cRCT. RESULTS: Twelve GP practices were recruited and randomised. Three GP practices withdrew from the study due to COVID-related factors. Sixty-eight patients were recruited, with 47 (69.1%) being retained until the end of the study. GP record data were available for 47 patients for medication appropriateness analysis at 9 months. EQ-5D-5L and MRB-QoL data were available for 46 and 41 patients, respectively, at 9 months. GP record and patient self-reported health service use data were available for 47 patients at 9 months. Health service use was comparable in terms of overall cost estimated from GP record versus patient self-reported data. The intervention was successfully delivered as intended; it was acceptable to GPs, practice staff, and patients; and potential mechanisms of action have been identified. All five progression criteria were met (two 'Go', three 'Amend'). CONCLUSION: Despite challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study has demonstrated that it may be feasible to conduct an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care across two healthcare jurisdictions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

Theoretically derived interventions aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in primary care: A systematic review.

Background: Polypharmacy (the use of multiple medications) is common in older patients and achieving a balance between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy is a challenge routinely faced by prescribers. It is recommended to incorporate the use of theory when developing complex interventions, but it is not known if theoretically derived interventions aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy are effective. Objective: This systematic review aimed to establish the overall effectiveness of theoretically derived interventions on improving appropriate polypharmacy and to investigate the degree to which theory informed intervention design. Methods: Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to August 2021 including hand-searching of reference lists. Interventions developed using a theory, involving the use of a validated tool to assess prescribing, delivered in primary care to participants with a mean age of ≥65 years and prescribed ≥four medications, were included. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers. The Theory Coding Scheme (TCS) was applied to evaluate the use of theory; Risk of Bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. Results: Two studies, one feasibility study and one randomised controlled trial (RCT) were included, and therefore overall effectiveness of the theoretically derived intervention could not be assessed. Theory used in development included the Theoretical Domains Framework and Reason's system-based risk management theory. The RCT was rated to have a high RoB. Based on the TCS, neither study used theory completely. Conclusion: The effectiveness of theoretically derived interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy in primary care could not be determined due to the small number of studies and their heterogeneity. Further incorporation of theory into intervention development is required to understand the effectiveness of this approach.Prospero registration: CRD42020157175.

Protocol for a process evaluation of an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care: the PolyPrime study.

BACKGROUND: The PolyPrime intervention is a theory-based intervention aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in older people (aged ≥65 years) in primary care. The intervention consists of an online video which demonstrates how general practitioners (GPs) can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. The aim of the process evaluation is to further examine the implementation of the PolyPrime intervention in primary care. This will involve investigating whether the PolyPrime intervention can be delivered as intended across two healthcare systems, how acceptable the intervention is to GPs, practice staff and patients, and to identify the intervention's likely mechanisms of action. METHODS: The PolyPrime study is an external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) which aims to recruit 12 GP practices across Northern Ireland [NI] (n=6) and the six counties in the Republic of Ireland (ROI) that border NI (n=6). Practices have been randomised to intervention or usual care. An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention to GPs, practice staff and patients and potential mechanisms of action (i.e. what components of the intervention were perceived to be effective). Quantitative data will be collected from data collection forms completed by GPs and practice staff and a feedback questionnaire completed by patients from intervention arm practices, which will be analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with GPs and practice staff and audio-recordings of medication review appointments from the intervention arm practices which will be transcribed and analysed using the framework method. Quantitative and qualitative data will be triangulated to provide an overall assessment of intervention fidelity, intervention acceptability, and mechanisms of action. DISCUSSION: This process evaluation will add to feasibility data from the pilot cRCT by providing evidence on the fidelity of implementing the intervention package across two healthcare systems, the acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN41009897 . Registered on 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

An external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care (PolyPrime): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The use of multiple medications (polypharmacy) is a concern in older people (≥65 years) and is associated with negative health outcomes. For older populations with multimorbidity, polypharmacy is the reality and the key challenge is ensuring appropriate polypharmacy (as opposed to inappropriate polypharmacy). This external pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) aims to further test a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care in two jurisdictions, Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: Twelve GP practices across NI (n=6) and the six counties in the ROI that border NI will be randomised to either the intervention or usual care group. Members of the research team have developed an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change. The intervention consists of two components: (1) an online video which demonstrates how a GP may prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a consultation with an older patient and (2) a patient recall process, whereby patients are invited to scheduled medication review consultations with GPs. Ten older patients receiving polypharmacy (≥4 medications) will be recruited per GP practice (n=120). GP practices allocated to the intervention arm will be asked to watch the online video and schedule medication reviews with patients on two occasions; an initial and a 6-month follow-up appointment. GP practices allocated to the control arm will continue to provide usual care to patients. The study will assess the feasibility of recruitment, retention and study procedures including collecting data on medication appropriateness (from GP records), quality of life and health service use (i.e. hospitalisations). An embedded process evaluation will assess intervention fidelity (i.e. was the intervention delivered as intended), acceptability of the intervention and potential mechanisms of action. DISCUSSION: This pilot cRCT will provide evidence of the feasibility of a range of study parameters such as recruitment and retention, data collection procedures and the acceptability of the intervention. Pre-specified progression criteria will also be used to determine whether or not to proceed to a definitive cRCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN41009897 . Registered 19 November 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04181879 . Registered 02 December 2019.

"I'm just not a Sudoku person": analysis of stroke survivor, carer, and healthcare professional perspectives for the design of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention.

Purpose: Exploring the views of those impacted by stroke is key to the design of an effective and appropriate cognitive rehabilitation intervention for post-stroke cognitive impairment. This qualitative study examined the perspectives and preferences of stroke survivors, carers, and healthcare professionals to inform the design of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention.Design and methods: The research employed a qualitative study design and thematic analysis of data. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with stroke survivors (n = 14), carers (n = 11), and healthcare professionals involved in providing stroke care (n = 19). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Coding was conducted and themes were developed both inductively and deductively.Results: Themes address five broad areas relevant for the design and implementation of the intervention: (i) activities to include; (ii) when it takes place; (iii) location; (vi) format; (v) who the intervention should include.Conclusions: Qualitative work with stroke survivors, carers and healthcare professionals provided vital information for the intervention design. Issues identified by participants as being key to intervention development included: (i) implications of post-stroke cognitive impairment survivors' confidence; (ii) their individual capacity in terms of fatigue and metacognition; and (iii) practical issues such as intervention location. The inclusion of psychoeducation regarding consequences of stroke was recommended.Implications for rehabilitationStroke survivors, carers, and rehabilitation professionals who provide stroke care can provide valuable insights and ideas to inform the development of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention.A cognitive rehabilitation intervention should be tailored to patient-specified goals, incorporating both group and individualized activities.Information, education, and communication are required to help stroke survivors and carers understand the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral consequences of stroke.Intervention content should be considerate of stroke survivors' capacity in terms of cognitive impairment and fatigue levels.

Addressing cognitive impairment following stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomised controlled studies of psychological interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive impairment is a pervasive outcome of stroke, reported in over half of patients 6 months post-stroke and is associated with increased disability and a poorer quality of life. Despite the prevalence of post-stroke cognitive impairment, the efficacy of existing psychological interventions for the rehabilitation of cognitive impairment following stroke has yet to be established. The aim of this study is to identify psychological interventions from non-randomised studies that intended to improve post-stroke cognitive function and establish their efficacy. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomised studies of psychological interventions addressing post-stroke cognitive impairment. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches were performed in the Pubmed, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases, the search dating from inception to February 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All non-randomised controlled studies and quasi-randomised controlled trials examining psychological interventions to improve cognitive function following stroke were included, such as feasibility studies, pilot studies, experimental studies, and quasi-experimental studies. The primary outcome was cognitive function. The prespecified secondary outcomes were functional abilities in daily life and quality of life. METHODS: The current meta-analyses combined the findings of seven controlled studies, examining the efficacy of psychological interventions compared with treatment-as-usual controls or active controls, and 13 one-group pre-post studies. RESULTS: Results indicated an overall small effect on cognition across the controlled studies (Hedges' g=0.38, 95% CI=0.06 to 0.7) and a moderate effect on cognition across the one-group pre-post studies (Hedges' g=0.51, 95% CI=0.3 to 0.73). Specific cognitive domains, such as memory and attention also demonstrated a benefit of psychological interventions. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides support for the potential of psychological interventions to improve overall cognitive function post-stroke. Limitations of the study, in terms of risk of bias and quality of included studies, and future research directions are explored. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017069714.

Managing cognitive impairment following stroke: protocol for a systematic review of non-randomised controlled studies of psychological interventions.

INTRODUCTION: Stroke is one of the primary causes of death and disability worldwide, leaving a considerable proportion of survivors with persistent cognitive and functional deficits. Despite the prevalence of poststroke cognitive impairment, there is no established treatment aimed at improving cognitive function following a stroke. Therefore, the aims of this systematic review are to identify psychological interventions intended to improve poststroke cognitive function and establish their efficacy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review of non-randomised controlled studies that investigated the efficacy of psychological interventions aimed at improving cognitive function in stroke survivors will be conducted. Electronic searches will be performed in the PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases, the search dating from the beginning of the index to February 2017. Reference lists of all identified relevant articles will be reviewed to identify additional studies not previously identified by the electronic search. Potential grey literature will be reviewed using Google Scholar. Titles and abstracts will be assessed for eligibility by one reviewer, with a random sample of 50% independently double-screened by second reviewers. Any discrepancies will be resolved through discussion, with referral to a third reviewer where necessary. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Meta-analyses will be performed if studies are sufficiently homogeneous. This review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The quality of the evidence regarding cognitive function will be assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review will collect secondary data only and as such ethical approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated through presentations and peer-reviewed publication. This review will provide information on the effectiveness of psychological interventions for poststroke cognitive impairment, identifying which psychological interventions are effective for improving poststroke cognitive function. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017069714.