Simulated presence therapy for dementia.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, characterised by progressive cognitive and functional decline. The majority of people with dementia develop behavioural disturbances, also known as behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). Several non-pharmacological interventions have been evaluated to treat BPSD in people with dementia. Simulated presence therapy (SPT), an intervention that uses video or audiotape recordings of family members played to the person with dementia, is a possible approach to treat BPSD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of SPT on behavioural and psychological symptoms and quality of life in people with dementia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library) (9 April 2020), MEDLINE Ovid SP (1946 to 9 April 2020), Embase Ovid SP (1972 to 9 April 2020), PsycINFO Ovid SP (1806 to 9 April 2020), CINAHL via EBSCOhost (1980 to 9 April 2020), LILACS via BIREME (all dates to 9 April 2020), ClinicalTrials.gov (ClinicalTrials.gov) (all dates to 9 April 2020), and the World Health Organization (WHO) Portal (apps.who.int/trialsearch) (all dates to 9 April 2020). We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles to identify any additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials, including cross-over studies, that evaluated the efficacy of SPT, consisting of personalised audio or videotape recordings of family members, in people with any form of dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. No meta-analyses were conducted because of substantial heterogeneity among the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials with 144 participants met the inclusion criteria. Two of the trials had a randomised cross-over design, one was a cross-over trial which we classified as quasi-randomised. Participants in the included studies were people with dementia living in nursing homes. They were predominantly women and had a mean age of over 80 years. SPT was performed using an audio or video recording prepared by family members or surrogates. It varied in its content, frequency of administration and duration. All the studies compared multiple treatments. In one study, SPT was compared with two other interventions; in the other two studies, it was compared with three other interventions. Specifically, SPT was compared to usual care, personalised music (two studies), a 'placebo' audiotape containing the voice of a person (two studies), and one-to-one social interaction performed by trained research assistants (one study). In terms of outcomes evaluated, one study considered agitation and withdrawn behaviour (both assessed with three methods); the second study evaluated verbal disruptive behaviour (assessed with three methods); and the third study evaluated physically agitated behaviour and verbally agitated behaviour (the method used was not clearly described). According to the GRADE criteria, the overall quality of the evidence was very low due to very small numbers of participants and risk of bias in the included studies; (none of the trials was at low risk of selection bias; all the trials were at high risk of performance bias; one trial was at high risk of attrition bias; and all had unclear selective reporting). Because of variation in the participants, the format of SPT, the comparison interventions, and the measures used to assess outcomes, we judged the results unsuitable for a meta-analysis. Within each trial, the effect of SPT on behaviour, compared to usual care, was mixed and depended on the measure used. Two trials which included a personalised music intervention reported no significant differences between simulated presence and music on behavioural outcomes. Because the overall quality of the evidence was very low, we were very uncertain regarding all the results None of the studies evaluated quality of life or any of our secondary outcome measures (performance of activities of daily living, dropout and carer burden). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of SPT for treating behavioural and psychological symptoms and improving quality of life of people with dementia. New high-quality studies are needed to investigate the effect of SPT.

Simulated presence therapy for dementia.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, characterised by progressive cognitive and functional decline. The majority of people with dementia develop behavioural disturbances, also known as behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). Several non-pharmacological interventions have been evaluated to treat BPSD in people with dementia. Simulated presence therapy (SPT), an intervention that uses video or audiotape recordings of family members played to the person with dementia, is a possible approach to treat BPSD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of SPT on behavioural and psychological symptoms and quality of life in people with dementia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library) (9 February 2016), MEDLINE Ovid SP (1946 to 6 January 2017), Embase Ovid SP (1972 to 6 January 2017), PsycINFO Ovid SP (1806 to 6 January 2017), CINAHL via EBSCOhost (1980 to 6 January 2017), LILACS via BIREME (all dates to 6 January 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov (ClinicalTrials.gov) (all dates to 6 January 2017), and the World Health Organization (WHO) Portal (apps.who.int/trialsearch) (all dates to 6 January 2017). We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles to identify any additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials, including cross-over studies, that evaluated the efficacy of SPT, consisting of personalised audio or videotape recordings of family members, in people with any form of dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. No meta-analyses were conducted because of substantial heterogeneity among the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials with 144 participants met the inclusion criteria. Two of the trials had a randomised cross-over design, one was a cross-over trial which we classified as quasi-randomised.Participants in the included studies were people with dementia living in nursing homes. They were predominantly women and had a mean age of over 80 years. SPT was performed using an audio or video recording prepared by family members or surrogates. It varied in its content, frequency of administration and duration. All the studies compared multiple treatments. In one study, SPT was compared with two other interventions; in the other two studies, it was compared with three other interventions. Specifically, SPT was compared to usual care, personalised music (two studies), a 'placebo' audiotape containing the voice of a person (two studies), and one-to-one social interaction performed by trained research assistants (one study). In terms of outcomes evaluated, one study considered agitation and withdrawn behaviour (both assessed with three methods); the second study evaluated verbal disruptive behaviour (assessed with three methods); and the third study evaluated physically agitated behaviour and verbally agitated behaviour (the method used was not clearly described).According to the GRADE criteria, the overall quality of the evidence was very low due to very small numbers of participants and risk of bias in the included studies; (none of the trials was at low risk of selection bias; all the trials were at high risk of performance bias; one trial was at high risk of attrition bias; and all had unclear selective reporting).Because of variation in the participants, the format of SPT, the comparison interventions, and the measures used to assess outcomes, we judged the results unsuitable for a meta-analysis.Within each trial, the effect of SPT on behaviour, compared to usual care, was mixed and depended on the measure used. Two trials which included a personalised music intervention reported no significant differences between simulated presence and music on behavioural outcomes. Because the overall quality of the evidence was very low, we were very uncertain regarding all the resultsNone of the studies evaluated quality of life or any of our secondary outcome measures (performance of activities of daily living, dropout and carer burden). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of SPT for treating behavioural and psychological symptoms and improving quality of life of people with dementia. New high-quality studies are needed to investigate the effect of SPT.

Systematic review of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological interventions to treat behavioural disturbances in older patients with dementia. The SENATOR-OnTop series.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of non-pharmacological interventions for behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia (BPSD). DESIGN: Systematic overview of reviews. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL and PsycINFO (2009-March 2015). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews (SRs) that included at least one comparative study evaluating any non-pharmacological intervention, to treat BPSD. DATA EXTRACTION: Eligible studies were selected and data extracted independently by 2 reviewers.The AMSTAR checklist was used to assess the quality of the SRs. DATA ANALYSIS: Extracted data were synthesised using a narrative approach. RESULTS: 38 SRs and 129 primary studies were identified, comprising the following categories of non-pharmacological interventions: (1) sensory stimulation interventions (25 SRs, 66 primary studies) that encompassed: shiatsu and acupressure, aromatherapy, massage/touch therapy, light therapy, sensory garden and horticultural activities, music/dance therapy, dance therapy, snoezelen multisensory stimulation therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; (2) cognitive/emotion-oriented interventions (13 SRs; 26 primary studies) that included cognitive stimulation, reminiscence therapy, validation therapy, simulated presence therapy; (3) behaviour management techniques (6 SRs; 22 primary studies); (4) Multicomponent interventions (3 SR; four primary studies); (5) other therapies (5 SRs, 15 primary studies) comprising exercise therapy, animal-assisted therapy, special care unit and dining room environment-based interventions. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of non-pharmacological interventions for BPSD were identified. The majority of the studies had great variation in how the same type of intervention was defined and applied, the follow-up duration, the type of outcome measured, usually with modest sample size. Overall, music therapy and behavioural management techniques were effective for reducing BPSD.

Simulated presence therapy for dementia: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The majority of patients with dementia develop behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). Non-pharmacological interventions are an appealing alternative for the treatment of BPSD in patients with dementia. Simulated presence therapy (SPT) is a simple and inexpensive non-pharmacological intervention that can be used to treat BPSD. We propose a Cochrane protocol for the collection and assessment of evidence concerning the efficacy of SPT to treat relevant outcomes in people with dementia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, CENTRAL and a number of trial registers as well as grey literature sources. We will include randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (including cross-over studies) that evaluated SPT in people with dementia. Comparators such as usual care with no additional activity, or any activity that differs in content and approach from SPT, but is additional to usual care, will be considered. The primary outcomes of interest will comprise behavioural and psychological symptoms, as measured by relevant scales, and quality of life. Two review authors working independently and in tandem will be involved in title and abstract screening, full-text screening and data abstraction. Where possible, quantitative data will be pooled, and relative risk and mean difference with 95% CI will be employed for dichotomous and continuous data, respectively. Assessment of risk of bias will be performed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required. The final results of this systematic review will be presented to the Cochrane Library and will also be disseminated at relevant conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015029778.

Efficacy of Non-Pharmacological Interventions to Prevent and Treat Delirium in Older Patients: A Systematic Overview. The SENATOR project ONTOP Series.

BACKGROUND: Non-pharmacological intervention (e.g. multidisciplinary interventions, music therapy, bright light therapy, educational interventions etc.) are alternative interventions that can be used in older subjects. There are plenty reviews of non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium in older patients and clinicians need a synthesized, methodologically sound document for their decision making. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a systematic overview of systematic reviews (SRs) of comparative studies concerning non-pharmacological intervention to treat or prevent delirium in older patients. The PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, CINHAL, and PsychINFO (April 28th, 2014) were searched for relevant articles. AMSTAR was used to assess the quality of the SRs. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of primary studies. The elements of the multicomponent interventions were identified and compared among different studies to explore the possibility of performing a meta-analysis. Risk ratios were estimated using a random-effects model. Twenty-four SRs with 31 primary studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Based on the AMSTAR criteria twelve reviews resulted of moderate quality and three resulted of high quality. Overall, multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions significantly reduced the incidence of delirium in surgical wards [2 randomized trials (RCTs): relative risk (RR) 0.71, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.86, I2=0%; (GRADE evidence: moderate)] and in medical wards [2 CCTs: RR 0.65, 95%CI 0.49 to 0.86, I2=0%; (GRADE evidence: moderate)]. There is no evidence supporting the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent delirium in low risk populations (i.e. low rate of delirium in the control group)[1 RCT: RR 1.75, 95%CI 0.50 to 6.10 (GRADE evidence: very low)]. For patients who have developed delirium, the available evidence does not support the efficacy of multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions to treat delirium. Among single component interventions only staff education, reorientation protocol (GRADE evidence: very low)] and Geriatric Risk Assessment MedGuide software [hazard ratio 0.42, 95%CI 0.35 to 0.52, (GRADE evidence: moderate)] resulted effective in preventing delirium. CONCLUSIONS: In older patients multi-component non-pharmacological interventions as well as some single-components intervention were effective in preventing delirium but not to treat delirium.