Sleep disturbance in people living with dementia or mild cognitive impairment: a realist review of general practice.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is a prevalent condition among people living with dementia (PLwD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Its assessment and management within primary care is complex because of the comorbidities, older age, and cognitive impairment typical of this patient group. AIM: To explore how primary care clinicians assess, understand, and manage sleep disturbance for PLwD or MCI; if and why such initiatives work; and how people and their carers experience sleep disturbance and its treatment. DESIGN AND SETTING: A realist review of existing literature conducted in 2022. METHOD: Six bibliographic databases were searched. Context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) were developed and refined. RESULTS: In total, 60 records were included from 1869 retrieved hits and 19 CMOCs were developed. Low awareness of and confidence in the treatment of sleep disturbance among primary care clinicians and patients, combined with time and resource constraints, meant that identifying sleep disturbance was difficult and not prioritised. Medication was perceived by clinicians and patients as the primary management tool, resulting in inappropriate or long-term prescription. Rigid nursing routines in care homes were reportedly not conducive to good-quality sleep. CONCLUSION: In primary care, sleep disturbance among PLwD or MCI is not adequately addressed. Over-reliance on medication, underutilisation of non-pharmacological strategies, and inflexible care home routines were reported as a result of low confidence in sleep management and resource constraints. This does not constitute effective and person-centred care. Future work should consider ways to tailor the assessment and management of sleep disturbance to the needs of individuals and their informal carers without overstretching services.

What really is nontokenistic fully inclusive patient and public involvement/engagement in research?

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is critically important in healthcare research. A useful starting point for researchers to understand the scope of PPIE is to review the definition from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) as, 'research being carried out "with" or "by" members of the public rather than "to", "about" or "for" them'. PPIE does not refer to participation in research, but to actively shaping its direction. The 'Effectiveness of a decision support tool to optimise community-based tailored management of sleep for people living with dementia or mild cognitive impairment (TIMES)' study is funded through the NIHR programme grant for applied research. TIMES has thoroughly embraced PPIE by ensuring the person's voice is heard, understood, and valued. This editorial showcases how the TIMES project maximised inclusivity, and we share our experiences and top tips for other researchers. We base our reflections on the six key UK standards for public involvement; Inclusive Opportunities, Working Together, Support and Learning, Communications, Impact and Governance. We present our work, which had been co-led by our PPIE leads, academics and partners including, together in dementia everyday, Innovations in Dementia, The UK Network of Dementia Voices (Dementia Engagement & Empowerment Project) and Liverpool Chinese Wellbeing. We have a Lived Experience Advisory Forum on Sleep, which includes people with dementia, family carers, representatives of the South Asian Community and the Chinese community.

Understanding primary care diagnosis and management of sleep disturbance for people with dementia or mild cognitive impairment: a realist review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The increasingly ageing population is associated with greater numbers of people living with dementia (PLwD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). There are an estimated 55 million PLwD and approximately 6% of people over 60 years of age are living with MCI, with the figure rising to 25% for those aged between 80 and 84 years. Sleep disturbances are common for this population, but there is currently no standardised approach within UK primary care to manage this. Coined as a 'wicked design problem', sleep disturbances in this population are complex, with interventions supporting best management in context. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The aim of this realist review is to deepen our understanding of what is considered 'sleep disturbance' in PLwD or MCI within primary care. Specifically, we endeavour to better understand how sleep disturbance is assessed, diagnosed and managed. To co-produce this protocol and review, we have recruited a stakeholder group comprising individuals with lived experience of dementia or MCI, primary healthcare staff and sleep experts. This review will be conducted in line with Pawson's five stages including the development of our initial programme theory, literature searches and the refinement of theory. The Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) quality and reporting standards will also be followed. The realist review will be an iterative process and our initial realist programme theory will be tested and refined in response to our data searches and stakeholder discussions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review. We will follow the RAMESES standards to ensure we produce a complete and transparent report. Our final programme theory will help us to devise a tailored sleep management tool for primary healthcare professionals, PLwD and their carers. Our dissemination strategy will include lay summaries via email and our research website, peer-reviewed publications and social media posts. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022304679.

'We do need to keep some human touch'-Patient and clinician experiences of ovarian cancer follow-up and the potential for an electronic patient-reported outcome pathway: A qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore experiences of follow-up after treatment and views on an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) pathway among ovarian cancer patients and clinicians. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with clinicians and patients previously treated for ovarian cancer. Interviews explored experiences of the current follow-up pathway, patients' needs and views on an ePRO pathway enabling patients to report symptoms online rather than attend clinic-based appointments. Transcripts were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Sixteen patients and 10 clinicians participated from four hospitals in England. Four key themes were identified: transition into follow-up, key features of effective follow-up, issues in follow-up and views of ePRO. Both patients and clinicians saw benefits of an ePRO pathway alongside continued access to specialist support and discussed various practicalities (e.g., frequency, introduction and communication). Technology concerns and feelings of abandonment were highlighted as barriers. The proposed impact on clinical and individual patient outcomes was discussed. CONCLUSION: Patient and clinician views on follow-up and an ePRO pathway informed key recommendations on the development/introduction of ePRO follow-up. Technology use in healthcare will continue to grow and may offer solutions to facilitate responsive and tailored care. Further research should explore the safety, experiences and acceptability of ePRO follow-up.

Measuring Quality of Life in Carers of People With Dementia: Development and Psychometric Evaluation of Scales measuring the Impact of DEmentia on CARers (SIDECAR).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A 2008 European consensus on research outcome measures in dementia care concluded that measurement of carer quality of life (QoL) was limited. Three systematic reviews (2012, 2017, and 2018) of dementia carer outcome measures found existing instruments wanting. In 2017, recommendations were published for developing reliable measurement tools of carers' needs for research and clinical application. The aim of this study was to develop a new instrument to measure the QoL of dementia carers (family/friends). METHODS: Items were generated directly from carers following an inductive needs-led approach. Carers (n = 566) from 22 English and Welsh locations then completed the items and comparator measures at three time points. Rasch, factor, and psychometric (reliability, validity, responsiveness, and minimally important differences [MIDs]) analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: Following factor analysis, the pool of 70 items was refined to three independent scales: primary SIDECAR-D (direct impact of caring upon carer QOL, 18 items), secondary SIDECAR-I (indirect impact, 10 items), and SIDECAR-S (support and information, 11 items). All three scales satisfy Rasch model assumptions. SIDECAR-D, I, S psychometrics: reliability (internal ≥ .70; test-retest ≥ .85); convergent validity (as hypothesized); responsiveness (effect sizes: D: moderate; I and S: small); MIDs (D = 9/100, I = 10/100, S = 11/100). DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: SIDECAR scales demonstrate robust measurement properties, meeting COSMIN quality standards for study design and psychometrics. SIDECAR provides a theoretically based needs-led QoL profile specifically for dementia carers. SIDECAR is free for use in public health, social care, and voluntary sector services, and not-for-profit organizations.

Development of an Item Pool for a Needs-Based Measure of Quality of Life of Carers of a Family Member with Dementia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the development of an item pool for a needs-based self-report outcome measure of the impact of caring for a relative, friend or neighbour with dementia on carer quality of life. The aims are to give a detailed account of the steps involved and describe the resulting item pool. METHODS: Seven steps were followed: generation of an initial item set drawing on 42 needs-led interviews with carers; a content and face validity check; assessment of psychometric potential; testing of response formats; pre-testing through cognitive interviews with 22 carers; administration rehearsal with two carers; and final review. RESULTS: An initial set of 99 items was refined to a pool of 70 to be answered using a binary response format. Items were excluded due to overlap with others, ceiling effects, ambiguity, dependency on function of the person with dementia or two-part phrasing. Items retained covered a breadth of areas of impact of caring and were understandable and acceptable to respondents. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting dementia carer-specific item pool reflects the accounts of a diverse sample of those who provide care for a person with dementia, allowing them to define the nature of the impact on their lives and resulting in a valid, acceptable set of items.

A Needs-led Framework for Understanding the Impact of Caring for a Family Member With Dementia.

Background and Objectives: Approximately half the care for people with dementia is provided by families. It is therefore imperative that research informs ways of maintaining such care. In this study, we propose that a needs-led approach can provide a useful, novel means of conceptualizing the impact of caring on the lives of family carers. Our aim was to develop and present a needs-led framework for understanding how providing care impacts on carers' fulfilment of needs. Design and Methods: In this qualitative study, we conducted 42 semistructured interviews with a purposively diverse sample of family carers to generate nuanced contextualized accounts of how caring impacted on carers' lives. Our inductive thematic analysis focused upon asking: "What need is being impacted here?" in order to generate a needs-led framework for understanding. Results: Nine themes were widely endorsed. Each completed the sentence: "Being a carer impacts on fulfilling my need to/for….": Freedom; feel close to my relative; feel in control of my life; be my own person; protect my relative; share/express my thoughts and feelings; take care of myself; feel connected to the people around me; get things done. Discussion and Implications: These needs echo those from other research areas, with relational needs emerging as particularly central. The needs-led approach offers a perspective that is able to capture both stresses and positive aspects of caregiving. We recommend that clinical interviewing using Socratic questioning to discover human needs that are being impacted by caring would provide a valuable starting point for care planning.