Adapted problem adaptation therapy for depression in mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease dementia: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Trials of effectiveness of treatment options for depression in dementia are an important priority. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial to assess adapted Problem Adaptation Therapy (PATH) for depression in mild/moderate dementia caused by Alzheimer's disease. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-six participants with mild or moderate dementia, >7 on Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia (CSDD), randomized to adapted PATH or treatment as usual. Mean age 77.0 years, 39.0% males, mean Mini-Mental State Examination 21.6, mean CSDD 12.9. For primary outcome (CSDD at 6 months), no statistically significant benefit with adapted PATH on the CSDD (6 months: -0.58; 95% CI -1.71 to 0.54). The CSDD at 3 months showed a small benefit with adapted PATH (-1.38; 95% CI -2.54 to -0.21) as did the EQ-5D (-4.97; 95% CI -9.46 to -0.48). DISCUSSION: An eight-session course of adapted PATH plus two booster sessions administered within NHS dementia services was not effective treatment for depression in people with mild and moderate dementia. Future studies should examine the effect of more intensive and longer-term therapy.

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.

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.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of assistive technology and telecare for independent living in dementia: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The use of assistive technology and telecare (ATT) has been promoted to manage risks associated with independent living in people with dementia but with little evidence for effectiveness. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to receive an ATT assessment followed by installation of all appropriate ATT devices or limited control of appropriate ATT. The primary outcomes were time to institutionalisation and cost-effectiveness. Key secondary outcomes were number of incidents involving risks to safety, burden and stress in family caregivers and quality of life. RESULTS: Participants were assigned to receive full ATT (248 participants) or the limited control (247 participants). After adjusting for baseline imbalance of activities of daily living score, HR for median pre-institutionalisation survival was 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; P = 0.20. There were no significant differences between arms in health and social care (mean -£909; 95% CI, -£5,336 to £3,345, P = 0.678) and societal costs (mean -£3,545; 95% CI, -£13,914 to £6,581, P = 0.499). ATT group members had reduced participant-rated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at 104 weeks (mean - 0.105; 95% CI, -0.204 to -0.007, P = 0.037) but did not differ in QALYs derived from proxy-reported EQ-5D. DISCUSSION: Fidelity of the intervention was low in terms of matching ATT assessment, recommendations and installation. This, however, reflects current practice within adult social care in England. CONCLUSIONS: Time living independently outside a care home was not significantly longer in participants who received full ATT and ATT was not cost-effective. Participants with full ATT attained fewer QALYs based on participant-reported EQ-5D than controls at 104 weeks.

Exploring newly qualified nurses' experiences of support and perceptions of peer support online: A qualitative study.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore newly qualified nurses' support needs and their perceptions of online peer support. BACKGROUND: The experience of being a newly qualified nurse is stressful and isolating. Support from colleagues and peers can enhance perceptions of competence and confidence in newly qualified nurses, improve well-being and aid retention. However, despite initiatives such as preceptorship, support needs may remain unmet in busy clinical environments. Online support has potential to offer a partial solution to professional isolation, but there is a lack of research into how technology can support nurses' emotional and social well-being. DESIGN: A qualitative exploratory study was designed, employing semi-structured focus groups, analysed using thematic analysis. The study is reported in accordance with the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research checklist. METHODS: Eight focus groups, supplemented by one individual interview, were conducted with newly qualified nurses between June 2018-January 2019. FINDINGS: Two main themes arose. The first was Drowning, a lot of the time with two sub-themes: (i) Feelings and emotions about being a Newly Qualified Nurse: 'Absolutely terrified' and (ii) Support within the role: 'Somebody you can count on'. The second was Potential advantages and disadvantages of online modality: 'Somebody is going to get in that phone!' which included three sub-themes (i) Potential advantages, (ii) Potential disadvantages and (iii) Preferences and recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that if barriers can be overcome, then online support has potential to contribute to newly qualified nurses' well-being. Further research is needed to explore technical and ethical issues around online support and evaluate its effectiveness for newly qualified nurses. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Online support has the potential to add to existing strategies to support nurses during stressful times. This may be particularly relevant when many staff are working under increased pressure due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Experiences of peer support for newly qualified nurses in a dedicated online group: Study protocol.

AIM: To explore experiences of online peer support for newly qualified nurses. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis. METHOD: Phase one involves conducting focus groups with newly qualified nurses in the West Midlands area to refine the online peer support environment. Phase two involves 30-40 new nurses joining an online peer group for 3 months; participants will be able to access a general chat community alongside a more structured discussion board. Phase 3 will collect written interview data from all participants about their experiences of online peer support. Face-to-face interviews with 10-12 participants will also be undertaken. The study will run from May 2018-October 2019. FINDINGS: Data from focus groups, written and verbal interviews will be analysed using thematic analysis with the aid of NVivo software. Findings will be disseminated to participants and key stakeholders involved in the study and also via publication and networking events. CONCLUSION: If online peer support is found to be beneficial to new nurses, it may be adopted by local NHS trusts as part of an innovation scheme. IMPACT: It is important that the psychological well-being of nurses is addressed as more nurses are now leaving than joining the profession; this is an international concern. Online peer support may offer a sustainable and accessible means of promoting psychological well-being in the nursing workforce. In such a way, contributory factors to low retention rates such as burnout, stress and job dissatisfaction may also be reduced.

Efficacy and safety of tau-aggregation inhibitor therapy in patients with mild or moderate Alzheimer's disease: a randomised, controlled, double-blind, parallel-arm, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Leuco-methylthioninium bis(hydromethanesulfonate; LMTM), a stable reduced form of the methylthioninium moiety, acts as a selective inhibitor of tau protein aggregation both in vitro and in transgenic mouse models. Methylthioninium chloride has previously shown potential efficacy as monotherapy in patients with Alzheimer's disease. We aimed to determine whether LMTM was safe and effective in modifying disease progression in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We did a 15-month, randomised, controlled double-blind, parallel-group trial at 115 academic centres and private research clinics in 16 countries in Europe, North America, Asia, and Russia with patients younger than 90 years with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Patients concomitantly using other medicines for Alzheimer's disease were permitted to be included because we considered it infeasible not to allow their inclusion; however, patients using medicines carrying warnings of methaemoglobinaemia were excluded because the oxidised form of methylthioninium in high doses has been shown to induce this condition. We randomly assigned participants (3:3:4) to 75 mg LMTM twice a day, 125 mg LMTM twice a day, or control (4 mg LMTM twice a day to maintain blinding with respect to urine or faecal discolouration) administered as oral tablets. We did the randomisation with an interactive web response system using 600 blocks of length ten, and stratified patients by severity of disease, global region, whether they were concomitantly using Alzheimer's disease-labelled medications, and site PET capability. Participants, their study partners (generally carers), and all assessors were masked to treatment assignment throughout the study. The coprimary outcomes were progression on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) and the Alzheimer's Disease Co-operative Study-Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL) scales from baseline assessed at week 65 in the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01689246) and the European Union Clinical Trials Registry (2012-002866-11). FINDINGS: Between Jan 29, 2013, and June 26, 2014, we recruited and randomly assigned 891 participants to treatment (357 to control, 268 to 75 mg LMTM twice a day, and 266 to 125 mg LMTM twice a day). The prespecified primary analyses did not show any treatment benefit at either of the doses tested for the coprimary outcomes (change in ADAS-Cog score compared with control [n=354, 6·32, 95% CI 5·31-7·34]: 75 mg LMTM twice a day [n=257] -0·02, -1·60 to 1·56, p=0·9834, 125 mg LMTM twice a day [n=250] -0·43, -2·06 to 1·20, p=0·9323; change in ADCS-ADL score compared with control [-8·22, 95% CI -9·63 to -6·82]: 75 mg LMTM twice a day -0·93, -3·12 to 1·26, p=0·8659; 125 mg LMTM twice a day -0·34, -2·61 to 1·93, p=0·9479). Gastrointestinal and urinary effects were the most common adverse events with both high doses of LMTM, and the most common causes for discontinuation. Non-clinically significant dose-dependent reductions in haemoglobin concentrations were the most common laboratory abnormality. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities were noted in less than 1% (8/885) of participants. INTERPRETATION: The primary analysis for this study was negative, and the results do not suggest benefit of LMTM as an add-on treatment for patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Findings from a recently completed 18-month trial of patients with mild Alzheimer's disease will be reported soon. FUNDING: TauRx Therapeutics.

Cost-effectiveness of donepezil and memantine in moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease (the DOMINO-AD trial).

OBJECTIVE: Most investigations of pharmacotherapy for treating Alzheimer's disease focus on patients with mild-to-moderate symptoms, with little evidence to guide clinical decisions when symptoms become severe. We examined whether continuing donepezil, or commencing memantine, is cost-effective for community-dwelling, moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease patients. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis was based on a 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, factorial clinical trial. A total of 295 community-dwelling patients with moderate/severe Alzheimer's disease, already treated with donepezil, were randomised to: (i) continue donepezil; (ii) discontinue donepezil; (iii) discontinue donepezil and start memantine; or (iv) continue donepezil and start memantine. RESULTS: Continuing donepezil for 52 weeks was more cost-effective than discontinuation, considering cognition, activities of daily living and health-related quality of life. Starting memantine was more cost-effective than donepezil discontinuation. Donepezil-memantine combined is not more cost-effective than donepezil alone. CONCLUSIONS: Robust evidence is now available to inform clinical decisions and commissioning strategies so as to improve patients' lives whilst making efficient use of available resources. Clinical guidelines for treating moderate/severe Alzheimer's disease, such as those issued by NICE in England and Wales, should be revisited. © 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Overcoming challenges of conducting research in nursing homes.

In the UK, one third of the 850,000 people with dementia live in care homes. This article explores the process of carrying out research in nursing homes, identifying barriers and enabling factors, and making recommendations for researchers. The authors' experiences derive from an ongoing study investigating the effect of educational interventions to promote and embed person-centred care, designed for nurses caring for the people with dementia in nursing homes. Design issues arose from the need to use cluster randomisation which requires a large sample size, implementation fidelity, poor compliance and high numbers of participants lost to follow up. Further difficulties included gaining ethical approval, recruitment, raising concerns and the practicalities of participant retention. There are many benefits of conducting research in care homes, for the homes themselves, their staff and residents. These include training and education, networking and empowerment of staff and subsequent improved standards of care. For the research team, benefits include opportunities to contribute to an underserved setting, to advance care standards and improve nurses' working lives.

Donepezil and memantine for moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have shown the benefits of cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. It is not known whether treatment benefits continue after the progression to moderate-to-severe disease. METHODS: We assigned 295 community-dwelling patients who had been treated with donepezil for at least 3 months and who had moderate or severe Alzheimer's disease (a score of 5 to 13 on the Standardized Mini-Mental State Examination [SMMSE, on which scores range from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive function]) to continue donepezil, discontinue donepezil, discontinue donepezil and start memantine, or continue donepezil and start memantine. Patients received the study treatment for 52 weeks. The coprimary outcomes were scores on the SMMSE and on the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS, on which scores range from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater impairment). The minimum clinically important differences were 1.4 points on the SMMSE and 3.5 points on the BADLS. RESULTS: Patients assigned to continue donepezil, as compared with those assigned to discontinue donepezil, had a score on the SMMSE that was higher by an average of 1.9 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 2.5) and a score on the BADLS that was lower (indicating less impairment) by 3.0 points (95% CI, 1.8 to 4.3) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Patients assigned to receive memantine, as compared with those assigned to receive memantine placebo, had a score on the SMMSE that was an average of 1.2 points higher (95% CI, 0.6 to 1.8; P<0.001) and a score on the BADLS that was 1.5 points lower (95% CI, 0.3 to 2.8; P=0.02). The efficacy of donepezil and of memantine did not differ significantly in the presence or absence of the other. There were no significant benefits of the combination of donepezil and memantine over donepezil alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate or severe Alzheimer's disease, continued treatment with donepezil was associated with cognitive benefits that exceeded the minimum clinically important difference and with significant functional benefits over the course of 12 months. (Funded by the U.K. Medical Research Council and the U.K. Alzheimer's Society; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN49545035.).

Learning to predict is spared in mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease.

Learning the statistics of the environment is critical for predicting upcoming events. However, little is known about how we translate previous knowledge about scene regularities to sensory predictions. Here, we ask whether patients with mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (MCI-AD) that are known to have spared implicit but impaired explicit recognition memory are able to learn temporal regularities and predict upcoming events. We tested the ability of MCI-AD patients and age-matched controls to predict the orientation of a test stimulus following exposure to sequences of leftwards or rightwards oriented gratings. Our results demonstrate that exposure to temporal sequences without feedback facilitates the ability to predict an upcoming stimulus in both MCI-AD patients and controls. Further, we show that executive cognitive control may account for individual variability in predictive learning. That is, we observed significant positive correlations of performance in attentional and working memory tasks with post-training performance in the prediction task. Taken together, these results suggest a mediating role of circuits involved in cognitive control (i.e. frontal circuits) that may support the ability for predictive learning in MCI-AD.

Evaluation of dementia training for staff in acute hospital settings.

The development, pilot and evaluation of a brief psychosocial training intervention (BPTI) for staff working with people with dementia in an acute hospital setting are described. The project had two phases. Phase one involved adapting an existing competency framework and developing the BPTI using focus groups. For the pilot and evaluation, in phase two, a mixed methods approach was adopted using self-administered standardised questionnaires and qualitative interviews. Qualitative analysis suggested that delivering skills-based training can develop communication, problem-solving and self-directed learning skills; benefit staff in terms of increased knowledge, skills and confidence; and be problematic in the clinical area in terms of time, organisation and the physical environment. These factors must be taken into consideration when delivering training. These changes were not reflected in the quantitative results and measures were not always sensitive to changes in this setting. Definitive conclusions cannot be drawn about the efficacy of the intervention, due to the contradictory outcomes between the quantitative and qualitative data. Further developments and research are required to explore how staff and organisations can be supported to deliver the best possible care.

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.

Thiamine for prevention and treatment of Wernicke-Korsakoff Syndrome in people who abuse alcohol.

BACKGROUND: Autopsy studies suggest that Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome (WKS) is not a rare disorder, particularly in individuals who abuse alcohol. Thiamine has been established as the treatment of choice for over 50 years, but uncertainty remains about appropriate dosage and duration. Current practice guidelines are based on case reports and clinical experience. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and last updated in 2008. OBJECTIVES: • To assess the efficacy of thiamine in preventing and treating the manifestations of WKS due to excess alcohol consumption. • To determine the optimum form, dose and duration of thiamine treatment for this indication. SEARCH METHODS: ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 6 September 2012 using the term thiamine OR aneurine. ALOIS contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trial databases and grey literature sources. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any randomised trials comparing thiamine with alternative interventions or comparing different thiamine regimens (varying in formulation, dose or duration of administration). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All abstracts were independently inspected by two reviewers (ED and PWB), and relevant articles were retrieved and assessed for methodological quality using criteria provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria, but only one contained sufficient data for quantitative analysis. Ambrose (2001) randomly assigned participants (n = 107) to one of five doses of intramuscular thiamine and measured outcomes after 2 days of treatment. We compared the lowest dose (5 mg/day) with each of the other four doses. A significant difference favoured 200 mg/day compared with the 5-mg/day dose in determining the number of trials needed to meet inclusion criteria on a delayed alternation test (mean difference (MD) -17.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -35.4 to -0.40, P = 0.04). No significant differences emerged when the other doses were compared with 5 mg/day. The pattern of results did not reflect a simple dose-response relationship. The study had methodological shortcomings in design and in the presentation of results that limited further analysis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from randomised controlled clinical trials is insufficient to guide clinicians in determining the dose, frequency, route or duration of thiamine treatment for prophylaxis against or treatment of WKS due to alcohol abuse.

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.

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.

A qualitative study exploring the support needs of newly qualified nurses and their experiences of an online peer support intervention.

BACKGROUND: In the transitional period following registration, newly qualified nurses may feel socially isolated and easily overwhelmed by increases in accountability, workplace pressures and the psychological demands of the role. Such experiences place them at risk of burnout and leaving the profession. AIMS: To explore newly qualified nurses' support needs and their experiences of an online peer support intervention. METHOD: Eighteen newly qualified nurses participated in online peer support groups. After 3 months participants took part in interviews exploring their support needs and experiences of the groups. Eight one-to one interviews were conducted between October 2019 and January 2020. Qualitative thematic analysis was used. FINDINGS: Two themes identified were; "The Support needs of newly qualified nurses" with two subthemes, "The role of the newly qualified nurse" and "Unmet support needs"; "The online experience" with three subthemes, "Barriers to participation", "Anticipated benefits" and "Unmet expectations". CONCLUSION: Our findings suggested that there is insufficient support for newly qualified nurses. The newly qualified nurses wanted to use online support to help manage their stress. However, the organisation of online peer support needs careful consideration to ensure participation can be beneficial. IMPACT STATEMENT: Online support requires careful design and clear support from employing organisations to promote improved transition experiences. Further research should focus on evaluating adjusted online support interventions.

Retinal Microvascular Dysfunction Occurs Early and Similarly in Mild Alzheimer's Disease and Primary-Open Angle Glaucoma Patients.

Purpose: To assess the similarities and differences in retinal microvascular function between mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, early-stage primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) patients and healthy controls. Methods: Retinal vessel reactivity to flickering light was assessed in 10 AD, 19 POAG and 20 healthy age matched control patients by means of dynamic retinal vessel analysis (DVA, IMEDOS, GmbH, Jena, Germany) according to an established protocol. All patients additionally underwent BP measurements and blood analysis for glucose and lipid metabolism markers. Results: AD and POAG patients demonstrated comparable alterations in retinal artery reactivity, in the form of an increased arterial reaction time (RT) to flicker light on the final flicker cycle (p = 0.009), which was not replicated by healthy controls (p > 0.05). Furthermore, the sequential changes in RT on progressing from flicker one to flicker three were found to differ between healthy controls and the two disease groups (p = 0.001). Conclusion: AD and POAG patients demonstrate comparable signs of vascular dysfunction in their retinal arteries at the early stages of their disease process. This provides support for the concept of a common underlying vascular aetiology in these two neurodegenerative diseases.

Determining the minimum clinically important differences for outcomes in the DOMINO trial.

BACKGROUND: Although less likely to be reported in clinical trials than expressions of the statistical significance of differences in outcomes, whether or not a treatment has delivered a specified minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is also relevant to patients and their caregivers and doctors. Many dementia treatment randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have not reported MCIDs and, where they have been done, observed differences have not reached these. METHODS: As part of the development of the Statistical Analysis Plan for the DOMINO trial, investigators met to consider expert opinion- and distribution-based values for the MCID and triangulated these to provide appropriate values for three outcome measures, the Standardised Mini-mental State Examination (sMMSE), Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) and Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Only standard deviations (SD) were presented to investigators who remained blind to treatment allocation. RESULTS: Adoption of values for MCIDs based upon 0.4 of the SD of the change in score from baseline on the sMMSE, BADLS and NPI in the first 127 participants to complete DOMINO yielded MCIDs of 1.4 points for sMMSE, 3.5 for BADLS and 8.0 for NPI. CONCLUSIONS: Reference to MCIDs is important for the full interpretation of the results of dementia trials and those conducting such trials should be open about the way in which they have determined and chosen their values for the MCIDs.

An investigation into the validity of effort tests in a working age dementia population.

OBJECTIVES: Performance on neuropsychological tests can be influenced by non-cognitive factors, including deliberate underperformance, stress, the need to fulfil a sick role, depression, un-cooperativeness, fatigue and unhappiness with the evaluative situation. Tests to detect suboptimal effort are becoming widely used in clinical practice and are based on their reported insensitivity to cognitive dysfunction. A diagnosis of dementia has life-changing implications for an individual of working age. It is therefore crucial that clinicians can be confident they have obtained a valid estimate of current cognitive functioning. This study aimed to establish whether mood or cognitive functioning adversely influenced performance on symptom validity tests (SVTs) in individuals with working age dementia, who were judged to be using full effort. METHOD: Forty-two participants with dementia diagnosed before the age of 65 completed measures of emotional and cognitive functioning and six SVTs. RESULTS: There were no significant correlations between emotional functioning and measures of effort. However, cognitive functioning, in particular new learning, was significantly related to SVT performance. Participants with mild dementia performed significantly better on all six SVTs than those with moderate/severe dementia. The results also suggest that the SVTs are not equally sensitive to cognitive dysfunction. Rey's Dot Counting Test (DCT) (times criterion) achieved 100% specificity, and was the only test passed by every participant. CONCLUSION: Rey's DCT is the only SVT that can be recommended for use in those under 65 years with possible dementia at this time until further validation studies are undertaken.