Act In case of Depression: the evaluation of a care program to improve the detection and treatment of depression in nursing homes. Study Protocol

Collaborative care approaches for people with severe mental illness

BACKGROUND

Collaborative care for severe mental illness (SMI) is a community-based intervention that promotes interdisciplinary working across primary and secondary care. Collaborative care interventions aim to improve the physical and/or mental health care of individuals with SMI. This is an update of a 2013 Cochrane review, based on new searches of the literature, which includes an additional seven studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of collaborative care approaches in comparison with standard care (or other non-collaborative care interventions) for people with diagnoses of SMI who are living in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Study-Based Register of Trials (10 February 2021). We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders (CCMD) controlled trials register (all available years to 6 June 2016). Subsequent searches on Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO together with the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (with an overlap) were run on 17 December 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where interventions described as 'collaborative care' were compared with 'standard care' for adults (18+ years) living in the community with a diagnosis of SMI. SMI was defined as schizophrenia, other types of schizophrenia-like psychosis or bipolar affective disorder. The primary outcomes of interest were: quality of life, mental state and psychiatric admissions at 12 months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of authors independently extracted data. We assessed the quality and certainty of the evidence using RoB 2 (for the primary outcomes) and GRADE. We compared treatment effects between collaborative care and standard care. We divided outcomes into short-term (up to six months), medium-term (seven to 12 months) and long-term (over 12 months). For dichotomous data we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data we calculated the standardised mean difference (SMD), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used random-effects meta-analyses due to substantial levels of heterogeneity across trials. We created a summary of findings table using GRADEpro.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight RCTs (1165 participants) are included in this review. Two met the criteria for type A collaborative care (intervention comprised of the four core components). The remaining six met the criteria for type B (described as collaborative care by the trialists, but not comprised of the four core components). The composition and purpose of the interventions varied across studies. For most outcomes there was low- or very low-certainty evidence. We found three studies that assessed the quality of life of participants at 12 months. Quality of life was measured using the SF-12 and the WHOQOL-BREF and the mean endpoint mental health component scores were reported at 12 months. Very low-certainty evidence did not show a difference in quality of life (mental health domain) between collaborative care and standard care in the medium term (at 12 months) (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.32; 3 RCTs, 227 participants). Very low-certainty evidence did not show a difference in quality of life (physical health domain) between collaborative care and standard care in the medium term (at 12 months) (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.33; 3 RCTs, 237 participants). Furthermore, in the medium term (at 12 months) low-certainty evidence did not show a difference between collaborative care and standard care in mental state (binary) (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.28; 1 RCT, 253 participants) or in the risk of being admitted to a psychiatric hospital at 12 months (RR 5.15, 95% CI 0.67 to 39.57; 1 RCT, 253 participants). One study indicated an improvement in disability (proxy for social functioning) at 12 months in the collaborative care arm compared to usual care (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.95; 1 RCT, 253 participants); we deemed this low-certainty evidence. Personal recovery and satisfaction/experience of care outcomes were not reported in any of the included studies. The data from one study indicated that the collaborative care treatment was more expensive than standard care (mean difference (MD) international dollars (Int$) 493.00, 95% CI 345.41 to 640.59) in the short term. Another study found the collaborative care intervention to be slightly less expensive at three years.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review does not provide evidence to indicate that collaborative care is more effective than standard care in the medium term (at 12 months) in relation to our primary outcomes (quality of life, mental state and psychiatric admissions). The evidence would be improved by better reporting, higher-quality RCTs and the assessment of underlying mechanisms of collaborative care. We advise caution in utilising the information in this review to assess the effectiveness of collaborative care.

Models for delivery and co-ordination of primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in aged care facilities

BACKGROUND

The number of older people is increasing worldwide and public expenditure on residential aged care facilities (ACFs) is expected to at least double, and possibly triple, by 2050. Co-ordinated and timely care in residential ACFs that reduces unnecessary hospital transfers may improve residents' health outcomes and increase satisfaction with care among ACF residents, their families and staff. These benefits may outweigh the resources needed to sustain the changes in care delivery and potentially lead to cost savings. Our systematic review comprehensively and systematically presents the available evidence of the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of alternative models of providing health care to ACF residents.

OBJECTIVES

Main objective To assess the effectiveness and safety of alternative models of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in ACFs. Secondary objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of the alternative models.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers (WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov) on 26 October 2022, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individual and cluster-randomised trials, and cost/cost-effectiveness data collected alongside eligible effectiveness studies. Eligible study participants included older people who reside in an ACF as their place of permanent abode and healthcare professionals delivering or co-ordinating the delivery of healthcare at ACFs. Eligible interventions focused on either ways of delivering primary or secondary health care (or both) or ways of co-ordinating the delivery of this care. Eligible comparators included usual care or another model of care. Primary outcomes were emergency department visits, unplanned hospital admissions and adverse effects (defined as infections, falls and pressure ulcers). Secondary outcomes included adherence to clinical guideline-recommended care, health-related quality of life of residents, mortality, resource use, access to primary or specialist healthcare services, any hospital admissions, length of hospital stay, satisfaction with the health care by residents and their families, work-related satisfaction and work-related stress of ACF staff.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was any alternative model of care versus usual care.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 randomised trials (21,787 participants; three studies only reported number of beds) in this review. Included trials evaluated alternative models of care aimed at either all residents of the ACF (i.e. no specific health condition; 11 studies), ACF residents with mental health conditions or behavioural problems (12 studies), ACF residents with a specific condition (e.g. residents with pressure ulcers, 13 studies) or residents requiring a specific type of care (e.g. residents after hospital discharge, four studies). Most alternative models of care focused on 'co-ordination of care' (n = 31). Three alternative models of care focused on 'who provides care' and two focused on 'where care is provided' (i.e. care provided within ACF versus outside of ACF). Four models focused on the use of information and communication technology. Usual care, the comparator in all studies, was highly heterogeneous across studies and, in most cases, was poorly reported. Most of the included trials were susceptible to some form of bias; in particular, performance (89%), reporting (66%) and detection (42%) bias. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the proportion of residents with at least one emergency department visit (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.20; 7 trials, 1276 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may reduce the proportion of residents with at least one unplanned hospital admission (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99, I2 = 53%; 8 trials, 1263 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of alternative models of care on adverse events (proportion of residents with a fall: RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.60, I² = 74%; 3 trials, 1061 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and adherence to guideline-recommended care (proportion of residents receiving adequate antidepressant medication: RR 5.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 26.00; 1 study, 65 participants) as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may have little or no effect on the health-related quality of life of ACF residents (MD -0.016, 95% CI -0.036 to 0.004; I² = 23%; 12 studies, 4016 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably make little or no difference to the number of deaths in residents of ACFs (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 24 trials, 3881 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). We did not pool the cost-effectiveness or cost data as the specific costs associated with the various alternative models of care were incomparable, both across models of care as well as across settings. Based on the findings of five economic evaluations (all interventions focused on co-ordination of care), we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care compared to usual care as the certainty of the evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, alternative models of care may make little or no difference to the number of emergency department visits but may reduce unplanned hospital admissions. We are uncertain of the effect of alternative care models on adverse events (i.e. falls, pressure ulcers, infections) and adherence to guidelines compared to usual care, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Alternative models of care may have little or no effect on health-related quality of life and probably have no effect on mortality of ACF residents compared to usual care. Importantly, we are uncertain of the cost-effectiveness of alternative models of care due to the limited, disparate data available.

Systematic review on barriers and facilitators of complex interventions for residents with dementia in long-term care

OBJECTIVES

Psychotropic drugs are frequently and sometimes inappropriately used for the treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms of people with dementia, despite their limited efficacy and side effects. Interventions to address neuropsychiatric symptoms and psychotropic drug use are multifactorial and often multidisciplinary. Suboptimal implementation of these complex interventions often limits their effectiveness. This systematic review provides an overview of barriers and facilitators influencing the implementation of complex interventions targeting neuropsychiatric symptoms and psychotropic drug use in long-term care.

DESIGN

To identify relevant studies, the following electronic databases were searched between 28 May and 4 June: PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and CINAHL. Two reviewers systematically reviewed the literature, and the quality of the included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist. The frequency of barriers and facilitators was addressed, followed by deductive thematic analysis describing their positive of negative influence. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided data synthesis.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included, using mostly a combination of intervention types and care programs, as well as different implementation strategies. Key factors to successful implementation included strong leadership and support of champions. Also, communication and coordination between disciplines, management support, sufficient resources, and culture (e.g. openness to change) influenced implementation positively. Barriers related mostly to unstable organizations, such as renovations to facility, changes toward self-directed teams, high staff turnover, and perceived work and time pressures.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation is complex and needs to be tailored to the specific needs and characteristics of the organization in question. Champions should be carefully chosen, and the application of learned actions and knowledge into practice is expected to further improve implementation.

Process evaluation of a tailored intervention to Reduce Inappropriate psychotropic Drug use in nursing home residents with dementia

BACKGROUND

Research suggests that collaborative and tailored approaches with external expertise are important to process implementations. We therefore performed a process evaluation of an intervention using participatory action research, tailored information provision, and external coaching to reduce inappropriate psychotropic drug use among nursing home residents with dementia. The process evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial assessing the utility of this approach.

METHODS

We used Leontjevas' model of process evaluation to guide data collection and analysis, focusing on the relevance and feasibility, extent of performance, and barriers and facilitators to implementation. Data on the relevance and feasibility and on the extent of performance were collected using a questionnaire targeting internal project leaders at nursing homes and our external coaches. Implementation barriers and facilitators were identified by individual semi-structured interviews. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to structure and describe the identified barriers and facilitators.

RESULTS

The intervention was viewed positively, but it was also considered time consuming due to the involvement of many people and designing a tailored action and implementation plan was viewed as complex. The extent of performance differed between nursing homes. Delays in implementation and suboptimal execution of actions may have reduced effectiveness of the RID intervention in some nursing homes. Barriers to implementation were reorganizations, staff turnover, communication issues, unclear expectations, and perceived time pressures. Implementation also depended on the involvement and skills of key stakeholders, and organizations' readiness to change. Although external coaches stimulated implementation, their additional value was rated variably across organizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers to implementation occurred on several levels and some barriers appear to be inherent to the nursing home environment and could be points of leverage of future implementation trajectories. This underlines the importance of assessing and supporting organizations in their readiness to change. Sensitivity analyses, taking into account the week in which nursing homes started with implementation and the degree to which actions were implemented as intended, will be appropriate in the effect analyses of the trial.

Health Economic Evaluation Alongside Stepped Wedge Trials: A Methodological Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been an increase in use of the stepped wedge trial (SWT) design in the context of health services research, due to its pragmatic and methodological advantages over the parallel group design.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to summarise the statistical methods used when conducting economic evaluations alongside SWTs.

METHODS

A systematic literature search extending to February 2020 was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) databases to find and evaluate studies where there was an intention to conduct an economic evaluation alongside an SWT. Studies were assessed for their eligibility, findings, reporting of statistical methods and quality of reporting.

RESULTS

Of the 586 studies retrieved from the literature search, 69 studies were identified and included in this systematic review. A total of 54 studies were published protocols, with eight economic evaluations and seven studies reporting full trial results. Included studies varied in terms of their reporting of statistical methods, in both detail and methodology. There were 34 studies that did not report any statistical methods for the economic evaluation, and only 16 studies reported appropriate methods, mainly using some form of mixed/multilevel model, and two used seemingly unrelated regression. Twelve studies reported the use of generic bootstrap methods and other modelling techniques, whilst the remaining studies failed to appropriately account for clustering, correlation or adjustment for time.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of appropriate statistical methods that account for time, clustering and correlation between costs and outcomes is an important part of SWT health economics analysis, one that will benefit from an effort to communicate the methods available and their performance.

Specific components of a complex depression care program can affect staff outcomes differently: post-hoc analyses of a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in nursing homes

OBJECTIVE

The Act in case of Depression program showed effects on the quality of life and depression in nursing home (NH) residents. We aimed to explore the effects of this complex multidisciplinary program on job satisfaction, job demands, and autonomy in nursing home staff.

DESIGN

Four data points from a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial on patient outcomes were used for secondary analyses on staff outcomes.

SETTING

Sixteen dementia special care and 17 somatic care units in Dutch NHs.Participants were 717 (90.1%) care staff or trainees, 34 (4.3%) paramedical staff, and 45 (5.7%) other staff members.Intervention describes procedures for nursing staff, activity therapists, psychologists, and physicians. It contains evidence-based pathways for depression assessment, treatment, and monitoring treatment results.

RESULTS

Mixed models for intention-to-treat analyses showed no significant changes in job demands, job satisfaction, or autonomy. Models corrected for the ratio of unit residents who received, when indicated, a specific program component revealed reduced job demands and improved job satisfaction and autonomy when treatment procedures were used. A better use of assessment procedures was associated with increased job demands, while conducting monitoring procedures was associated with increased job demands and decreased autonomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Components of complex care programs may affect the staff outcomes in opposite directions and, taken together, produce a zero-sum or a statistically insignificant effect. While implementing treatment protocols affecting patients directly can also improve job outcomes such as satisfaction and autonomy and decrease job demands, it is possible that other procedures of complex programs may have unfavorable effects on job outcomes. It is important to account for specific components of complex interventions when evaluating intervention effects.

Reducing inappropriate psychotropic drug use in nursing home residents with dementia: protocol for participatory action research in a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Psychotropic drugs are often prescribed to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in nursing home residents with dementia, despite having limited efficacy and considerable side effects. To reduce the inappropriate prescribing of these psychotropic drugs, various non-pharmacological, psychosocial, person-centered, or multidisciplinary interventions are advocated. However, existing multidisciplinary interventions have shown variable effects, with limited effectiveness often resulting from suboptimal implementation. We hypothesize that an effective intervention needs to fit the local situation of a nursing home and that support should be offered during implementation.

METHODS

We will embed participatory action research within a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial to study the effects of a tailored intervention and implementation plan to reduce inappropriate psychotropic drug prescribing. Nursing homes will be provided with tailored information about the perceived problems of managing neuropsychiatric symptoms and we will offer coaching support throughout. Alongside the participatory action research, we will perform a process evaluation to examine the quality of the study, the intervention, and the implementation. Our aim is to recruit 600 residents from 16 nursing homes throughout the Netherlands, with measurements taken at baseline, 8 months, and 16 months. Nursing homes will be randomly allocated to an intervention or a deferred intervention group. During each intervention stage, we will provide information about inappropriate psychotropic drug prescribing, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and difficulties in managing neuropsychiatric symptoms through collaboration with each nursing home. After this, a tailored intervention and implementation plan will be written and implemented, guided by a coach. The primary outcome will be the reduction of inappropriate prescribing, as measured by the Appropriate Psychotropic drug use In Dementia index. Secondary outcomes will be the frequency of psychotropic drug use and neuropsychiatric symptoms, plus quality of life. A mixed methods design will be used for the process evaluation. Effects will be assessed using multilevel analyses. The project leader of the nursing home and the coach will complete questionnaires and in-depth interviews.

DISCUSSION

We anticipate that the proposed tailored intervention with coaching will reduce inappropriate psychotropic drug prescribing for nursing home residents with neuropsychiatric symptoms. This study should also provide insights into the barriers to, and facilitators of, implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NTR5872 , registered on July 2, 2016.

Delaying and withholding interventions: ethics and the stepped wedge trial

Ethics has been identified as a central reason for choosing the stepped wedge trial over other kinds of trial designs. The potential advantage of the stepped wedge design is that it provides all arms of the trial with the active intervention over the course of the study. Some groups receive it later than others, but the study intervention is not withheld from any group. This feature of the stepped wedge design seems particularly ethically advantageous in two instances: (1) when the study intervention appears especially likely to be effective and (2) when the consequences of not receiving the intervention may be dire. But despite an increase in the use of the stepped wedge design and appeals to its ethical superiority as the motivation for its selection, there has been limited attention to the stepped wedge trial in the ethics literature. In the following, I examine whether there are persuasive ethical reasons to prefer or to require a stepped wedge trial. I argue that while the stepped wedge design is ethically permissible, it is not morally superior to other kinds of trials. To this end, I examine the ethical justification for providing, withholding, and delaying interventions in research.

Depression in the nursing home: a cluster-randomized stepped-wedge study to probe the effectiveness of a novel case management approach to improve treatment (the DAVOS project)

Background

Depression is the second most common psychiatric illness in old people. Up to 30% of nursing home residents have minor or major depression. Although depressive disorders in old age can be improved and even cured with adequate therapy, they often go unnoticed in nursing home residents and remain untreated. This highlights a striking deficit in health care and might result not only in lower quality of life among those concerned but also in poor physical functioning, premature mortality, and increased hospitalization rates.

Methods

The aims of the interdisciplinary research project DAVOS are to implement an innovative and stepped structural case management program to improve depression treatment for nursing home residents by a modularized intervention and to assess it in terms of its effectiveness. Intervention modules are in line with recommendations given by the German national treatment guidelines for depression (S3 guidelines). Ten nursing homes in Frankfurt, Germany, will participate in the project, which aims to recruit a study population of 380. The recruitment will continue throughout the trial (open cohort). Persons (>60 years) who live in a nursing home, have no medical diagnosis of dementia, and can provide their informed consent to participate are eligible for inclusion in the study. Residents with a clinical diagnosis of dementia, alcohol or substance-related disorders, or other serious psychiatric illnesses will be excluded. DAVOS is a controlled cluster-randomized study that employs a stepped-wedge design.

Discussion

Our main hypothesis is that the implementation of the intervention will lead to a decline in the prevalence of depression and a reduction in depression symptoms among the home residents. In addition, we expect the intervention to have a positive impact on secondary outcomes such as level of functioning, quality of life, and social participation. The project’s results can make an important contribution toward improving the health care of nursing home residents who have late-life depression.

Trial registration

DRKS, DRKS00015686, Oct. 10, 2018.

Apathy and health-related quality of life in nursing home residents

PURPOSE

To explore the association between apathy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from resident and proxy perspectives and whether cognition and depression moderate this relationship.

METHODS

Secondary analyses with baseline data from a cluster randomized trial on the effects of a care program for depression in Nursing Homes (NHs) were conducted. For HRQoL, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Dutch version of the European Quality of Life (EQ-5D) were administered to 521 NH residents, and to professional caregivers reporting from the perspective of the NH resident (Resident-Proxy) and from their own perspective (Proxy-Proxy). Utility scores (U) were calculated for the three perspectives. Apathy, depression, and cognition were measured using the 10-item Apathy Evaluation Scale, the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia, and the standardized Mini-Mental State Examination, respectively.

RESULTS

Mixed models adjusted for clustering within NH units revealed that apathy was negatively associated with HRQoL both from the Resident-Proxy perspective (EQ-5D VAS: estimated effect, - 0.31, P < 0.001; EQ-5D Utility: - 0.30, P < 0.001) and from the Proxy-Proxy perspective (VAS: - 0.29, P < 0.001; U: - 0.03, P < 0.001), but not from the Resident-Resident perspective (VAS: - 0.05, P = 0.423; Utility: - 0.08, P = 0.161). Controlling for depression and cognition and their interaction terms with apathy did not change the results.

CONCLUSION

Apathy is negatively associated with NH resident HRQoL as reported by proxies. Depression and cognitive functioning do not moderate this association. NH residents do not self-report a relationship between apathy and HRQoL. More research is needed to understand caregiver and NH resident attitudes and underlying assumptions regarding apathy and HRQoL.

Reducing Depressive Symptoms in Nursing Home Residents: Evaluation of the Pennsylvania Depression Collaborative Quality Improvement Program

Depression reduces quality of life for nursing home (NH) residents and places them at greater risk for disability, medical morbidity, and mortality. However, accumulating evidence suggests that interventions for early detection and treatment can mitigate symptoms of clinical and subclinical levels of depression. The Promoting Positive Well-Being (PPW) program is a quality improvement (QI) intervention that features tools and strategies to assist NHs in early identification, assessment, treatment, and monitoring of residents with depressive symptoms. The PPW was evaluated in 40 NHs through an 8-month QI collaborative that provided participants with tools, webinar training, and technical support. Results showed a significant group by time interaction effect with facility quality rating as a covariate; the active group (n = 18 NHs) outperformed the waitlist control group (n = 19 NHs). In all, there was a 58% relative reduction in the percentage of residents with self-reported moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms. Most NHs reported that they were satisfied with the collaborative (97%) and would recommend it to others (86%); only 15% reported significant challenges. The rate of webinar attendance and data submission compliance was 92%. Results suggest that PPW is a promising approach that should be further evaluated in larger NH initiatives and other settings.

Nursing interventions in depressed children with low serum levels of BDNF

The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation between brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in serum and depression in children, and explore the effects of different nursing protocols on patients with low levels of BDNF. We recruited 128 children with depression and 50 healthy subjects. Compared with healthy controls, the mRNA and protein levels of BDNF in serum were lower in children with depression (p<0.01). We selected 60 depressed children with low BDNF and randomly divided them in two groups: comprehensive nursing (n=30) and regular nursing (n=30). Compared to healthy children, there was a significant increase in Hamilton depression (HAMD) scores in patients with depression in childhood (p<0.01). After treatment, BDNF protein expression was higher in the comprehensive nursing group than that in the regular nursing group (p<0.05). Also, the HAMD score in the comprehensive nursing group was significantly lower than that in the regular nursing group (p<0.05). Compliance to treatment and quality of life after treatment improved in the comprehensive nursing group compared with the regular nursing group (p<0.05). Overall, a decrease in BDNF expression is closely correlated with depression, and comprehensive nursing care can significantly ameliorate the depression symptoms in pediatric patients, increase the BDNF expression, and improve compliance and quality of life. These results provide theoretical and practical significance for clinical nursing care of patients with depression in childhood.

Research Designs for Intervention Research with Small Samples II: Stepped Wedge and Interrupted Time-Series Designs

The stepped wedge design (SWD) and the interrupted time-series design (ITSD) are two alternative research designs that maximize efficiency and statistical power with small samples when contrasted to the operating characteristics of conventional randomized controlled trials (RCT). This paper provides an overview and introduction to previous work with these designs and compares and contrasts them with the dynamic wait-list design (DWLD) and the regression point displacement design (RPDD), which were presented in a previous article (Wyman, Henry, Knoblauch, and Brown, Prevention Science. 2015) in this special section. The SWD and the DWLD are similar in that both are intervention implementation roll-out designs. We discuss similarities and differences between the SWD and DWLD in their historical origin and application, along with differences in the statistical modeling of each design. Next, we describe the main design characteristics of the ITSD, along with some of its strengths and limitations. We provide a critical comparative review of strengths and weaknesses in application of the ITSD, SWD, DWLD, and RPDD as small sample alternatives to application of the RCT, concluding with a discussion of the types of contextual factors that influence selection of an optimal research design by prevention researchers working with small samples.

Stepped wedge cluster randomised trials: a review of the statistical methodology used and available

BACKGROUND

Previous reviews have focussed on the rationale for employing the stepped wedge design (SWD), the areas of research to which the design has been applied and the general characteristics of the design. However these did not focus on the statistical methods nor addressed the appropriateness of sample size methods used.This was a review of the literature of the statistical methodology used in stepped wedge cluster randomised trials.

METHODS

Literature Review. The Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were searched for methodological guides and RCTs which employed the stepped wedge design.

RESULTS

This review identified 102 trials which employed the stepped wedge design compared to 37 from the most recent review by Beard et al. 2015. Forty six trials were cohort designs and 45 % (n = 46) had fewer than 10 clusters. Of the 42 articles discussing the design methodology 10 covered analysis and seven covered sample size. For cohort stepped wedge designs there was only one paper considering analysis and one considering sample size methods. Most trials employed either a GEE or mixed model approach to analysis (n = 77) but only 22 trials (22 %) estimated sample size in a way which accounted for the stepped wedge design that was subsequently used.

CONCLUSIONS

Many studies which employ the stepped wedge design have few clusters but use methods of analysis which may require more clusters for unbiased and efficient intervention effect estimates. There is the need for research on the minimum number of clusters required for both types of stepped wedge design. Researchers should distinguish in the sample size calculation between cohort and cross sectional stepped wedge designs. Further research is needed on the effect of adjusting for the potential confounding of time on the study power.

Stepped wedge randomised controlled trials: systematic review of studies published between 2010 and 2014

BACKGROUND

In a stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial, clusters receive the intervention at different time points, and the order in which they received it is randomised. Previous systematic reviews of stepped wedge trials have documented a steady rise in their use between 1987 and 2010, which was attributed to the design's perceived logistical and analytical advantages. However, the interventions included in these systematic reviews were often poorly reported and did not adequately describe the analysis and/or methodology used. Since 2010, a number of additional stepped wedge trials have been published. This article aims to update previous systematic reviews, and consider what interventions were tested and the rationale given for using a stepped wedge design.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, PsychINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and the Current Controlled Trials Register for articles published between January 2010 and May 2014. We considered stepped wedge randomised controlled trials in all fields of research. We independently extracted data from retrieved articles and reviewed them. Interventions were then coded using the functions specified by the Behaviour Change Wheel, and for behaviour change techniques using a validated taxonomy.

RESULTS

Our review identified 37 stepped wedge trials, reported in 10 articles presenting trial results, one conference abstract, 21 protocol or study design articles and five trial registrations. These were mostly conducted in developed countries (n = 30), and within healthcare organisations (n = 28). A total of 33 of the interventions were educationally based, with the most commonly used behaviour change techniques being 'instruction on how to perform a behaviour' (n = 32) and 'persuasive source' (n = 25). Authors gave a wide range of reasons for the use of the stepped wedge trial design, including ethical considerations, logistical, financial and methodological. The adequacy of reporting varied across studies: many did not provide sufficient detail regarding the methodology or calculation of the required sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

The popularity of stepped wedge trials has increased since 2010, predominantly in high-income countries. However, there is a need for further guidance on their reporting and analysis.

Designing a stepped wedge trial: three main designs, carry-over effects and randomisation approaches

BACKGROUND

There is limited guidance on the design of stepped wedge cluster randomised trials. Current methodological literature focuses mainly on trials with cross-sectional data collection at discrete times, yet many recent stepped wedge trials do not follow this design. In this article, we present a typology to characterise the full range of stepped wedge designs, and offer guidance on several other design aspects.

METHODS

We developed a framework to define and report the key characteristics of a stepped wedge trial, including cluster allocation and individual participation. We also considered the relative strengths and weaknesses of trials according to this framework. We classified recently published stepped wedge trials using this framework and identified illustrative case studies. We identified key design choices and developed guidance for each.

RESULTS

We identified three main stepped wedge designs: those with a closed cohort, an open cohort, and a continuous recruitment short exposure design. In the first two designs, many individuals experience both control and intervention conditions. In the final design, individuals are recruited in continuous time as they become eligible and experience either the control or intervention condition, but not both, and then provide an outcome measurement at follow-up. While most stepped wedge trials use simple randomisation, stratification and restricted randomisation are often feasible and may be useful. Some recent studies collect outcome information from individuals exposed a long time before or after the rollout period, but this contributes little to the primary analysis. Incomplete designs should be considered when the intervention cannot be implemented quickly. Carry-over effects can arise in stepped wedge trials with closed and open cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Stepped wedge trial designs should be reported more clearly. Researchers should consider the use of stratified and/or restricted randomisation. Trials should generally not commit resources to collect outcome data from individuals exposed a long time before or after the rollout period. Though substantial carry-over effects are uncommon in stepped wedge trials, researchers should consider their possibility before conducting a trial with closed or open cohorts.

Logistic, ethical, and political dimensions of stepped wedge trials: critical review and case studies

Background

Three arguments are usually invoked in favour of stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trials: the logistic convenience of implementing an intervention in phases, the ethical benefit of providing the intervention to all clusters, and the potential to enhance the social acceptability of cluster randomised controlled trials. Are these alleged benefits real? We explored the logistic, ethical, and political dimensions of stepped wedge trials using case studies of six recent evaluations.

Methods

We identified completed or ongoing stepped wedge evaluations using two systematic reviews. We then purposively selected six with a focus on public health in high, middle, and low-income settings. We interviewed their authors about the logistic, ethical, and social issues faced by their teams. Two authors reviewed interview transcripts, identified emerging issues through qualitative thematic analysis, reflected upon them in the context of the literature, and invited all participants to co-author the manuscript.

Results

Our analysis raises three main points. First, the phased implementation of interventions can alleviate problems linked to simultaneous roll-out, but also brings new challenges. Issues to consider include the feasibility of organising intervention activities according to a randomised sequence, estimating time lags in implementation and effects, and accommodating policy changes during the trial period. Second, stepped wedge trials, like parallel cluster trials, require equipoise: without it, randomising participants to a control condition, even for a short time, remains problematic. In stepped wedge trials, equipoise is likely to lie in the degree of effect, effectiveness in a specific operational milieu, and the balance of benefit and harm, including the social value of better evaluation. Third, the strongest arguments for a stepped wedge design are logistic and political rather than ethical. The design is advantageous when simultaneous roll-out is impractical and when it increases the acceptability of using counterfactuals.

Conclusions

The logistic convenience of phased implementation is context-dependent, and may be vitiated by the additional requirements of phasing. The potential for stepped wedge trials to enhance the social acceptability of cluster randomised trials is real, but their ethical legitimacy still rests on demonstrating equipoise and its configuration for each research question and setting.

Psychotherapy for depression in older veterans via telemedicine: a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Many older adults with major depression, particularly veterans, do not have access to evidence-based psychotherapy. Telemedicine could increase access to best-practice care for older adults facing barriers of mobility, stigma, and geographical isolation. We aimed to establish non-inferiority of behavioural activation therapy for major depression delivered via telemedicine to same-room care in largely male, older adult veterans.

METHODS

In this randomised, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority trial, we recruited veterans (aged ≥58 years) meeting DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder from the Ralph H Johnson Veterans Affairs Medical Center and four associated community outpatient-based clinics in the USA. We excluded actively psychotic or demented people, those with both suicidal ideation and clear intent, and those with substance dependence. The study coordinator randomly assigned participants (1:1; block size 2-6; stratified by race; computer-generated randomisation sequence by RGK) to eight sessions of behavioural activation for depression either via telemedicine or in the same room. The primary outcome was treatment response according to the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI; defined as a 50% reduction in symptoms from baseline at 12 months), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, clinician version (defined as no longer being diagnosed with major depressive disorder at 12 months follow-up), in the per-protocol population (those who completed at least four treatment sessions and for whom all outcome measurements were done). Those assessing outcomes were masked. The non-inferiority margin was 15%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00324701.

FINDINGS

Between April 1, 2007, and July 31, 2011, we screened 780 patients, and the study coordinator randomly assigned participants to either telemedicine (120 [50%]) or same-room treatment (121 [50%]). We included 100 (83%) patients in the per-protocol analysis in the telemedicine group and 104 (86%) in the same-room group. Treatment response according to GDS did not differ significantly between the telemedicine (22 [22·45%, 90% CI 15·52-29·38] patients) and same-room (21 [20·39%, 90% CI 13·86-26·92]) groups, with an absolute difference of 2·06% (90% CI -7·46 to 11·58). Response according to BDI also did not differ significantly (telemedicine 19 [24·05%, 90% CI 16·14-31·96] patients; same room 19 [23·17%, 90% CI 15·51-30·83]), with an absolute difference of 0·88% (90% CI -10·13 to 11·89). Response on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, clinician version, also did not differ significantly (39 [43·33%, 90% CI 34·74-51·93] patients in the telemedicine group and 46 [48·42%, 90% CI 39·99-56·85] in the same-room group), with a difference of -5·09% (-17·13 to 6·95; p=0·487). Results from the intention-to-treat population were similar. MEM analyses showed that no significant differences existed between treatment trajectories over time for BDI and GDS. The criteria for non-inferiority were met. We did not note any adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

Telemedicine-delivered psychotherapy for older adults with major depression is not inferior to same-room treatment. This finding shows that evidence-based psychotherapy can be delivered, without modification, via home-based telemedicine, and that this method can be used to overcome barriers to care associated with distance from and difficulty with attendance at in-person sessions in older adults.

FUNDING

US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Prevalence and risk factors of depression in the elderly nursing home residents in Singapore

OBJECTIVES

Depression is a common health problem in elderly nursing home (NH) residents and is often under-recognized and under-treated. This study aimed to determine the prevalence rates of depression and identify the risk factors associated with depression in the elderly NH population in Singapore.

METHODS

A sample of 375 residents in six NHs in Singapore, aged 55 years and above, was assessed with the Structural Clinical Interview (SCID), based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) criteria. The association of demographic, functional and health-related characteristics with depression was examined using multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Overall point prevalence for depression in the elderly NH residents was found to be 21.1% (95% confidence intervals (CI): 17.1%-25.6%). The prevalence rate for minor depression in the elderly NH residents was 14.4% (95% CI: 11.1%-18.5%) and 6.7% (95% CI: 4.5%-9.8%) for major depression. Significant risk factors that were found to be associated with depression were length of stay for more than 2 years, known history of depression, pain, and no or lack of social contact.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence rates for depression were high among NH residents in Singapore. More attention is needed to care for the psychosocial needs of elderly NH residents in Singapore.

More insight into the concept of apathy: a multidisciplinary depression management program has different effects on depressive symptoms and apathy in nursing homes

BACKGROUND

Apathy is common in nursing home (NH) residents and it overlaps with depression. This study examines the effects of a multidisciplinary depression program on apathy and depressive motivational and mood symptoms.

METHODS

Secondary analyses of a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized controlled trial were conducted with six measurements. Sixteen dementia NH units and 17 somatic units were enrolled. In the intervention condition, a program containing depression assessment procedures and multidisciplinary treatment (activating strategies, psychotherapy, and medication) was introduced. Usual care was provided in the control condition. Outcomes were assessed using the 10-item Apathy Evaluation Scale and the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat analyses showed that the whole depression management program reduced apathy in dementia units (p < 0.001; Cohen's d, -0.35), and depressive motivational symptoms in somatic units (p = 0.008; Cohen's d, -0.40). Depressive mood symptoms were not affected in both unit types. The effect on apathy in dementia units was mainly attributed to activating strategies (p < 0.001; Cohen's d, -0.73). The effect on motivational symptoms in somatic units was mainly attributed to psychotherapy (p = 0.002; Cohen's d, -0.80). Apathy worsening was associated with pharmacological depression treatment in both unit types (p = 0.009; Cohen's d, 0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Depression management may affect apathy and depressive symptoms differently, which underpins the position of apathy as a distinct syndrome. NH professionals can effectively use activating strategies in dementia units, and psychotherapy in somatic units. More research is needed on treating depressive mood symptoms, and on effects of antidepressants in NHs.

A structural multidisciplinary approach to depression management in nursing-home residents: a multicentre, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Depression in nursing-home residents is often under-recognised. We aimed to establish the effectiveness of a structural approach to its management.

METHODS

Between May 15, 2009, and April 30, 2011, we undertook a multicentre, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial in four provinces of the Netherlands. A network of nursing homes was invited to enrol one dementia and one somatic unit per nursing home. In enrolled units, nursing-home staff recruited residents, who were eligible as long as we had received written informed consent. Units were randomly allocated to one of five groups with computer-generated random numbers. A multidisciplinary care programme, Act in Case of Depression (AiD), was implemented at different timepoints in each group: at baseline, no groups were implenting the programme (usual care); the first group implemented it shortly after baseline; and other groups sequentially began implementation after assessments at intervals of roughly 4 months. Residents did not know when the intervention was being implemented or what the programme elements were; research staff were masked to intervention implementation, depression treatment, and results of previous assessments; and data analysts were masked to intervention implementation. The primary endpoint was depression prevalence in units, which was the proportion of residents per unit with a score of more than seven on the proxy-based Cornell scale for depression in dementia. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Netherlands National Trial Register, number NTR1477.

FINDINGS

16 dementia units (403 residents) and 17 somatic units (390 residents) were enrolled in the course of the study. In somatic units, AiD reduced prevalence of depression (adjusted effect size -7·3%, 95% CI -13·7 to -0·9). The effect was not significant in dementia units (0·6, -5·6 to 6·8) and differed significantly from that in somatic units (p=0·031). Adherence to depression assessment procedures was lower in dementia units (69% [SD 19%]) than in somatic units (82% [15%]; p=0·045). Adherence to treatment pathways did not differ between dementia units (43% [SD 33%]) and somatic units (38% [40%]; p=0·745).

INTERPRETATION

A structural approach to management of depression in nursing homes that includes assessment procedures can reduce depression prevalence in somatic units. Improvements are needed in depression screening in dementia units and in implementation of nursing-home treatment protocols generally.

FUNDING

The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

Nijmegen observer-rated depression scale for detection of depression in nursing home residents

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to test the accuracy of the Nijmegen observer-rated depression (NORD) scale, a new short scale for screening of depression in nursing home (NH) residents with and without dementia.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study with 103 residents with dementia (N = 19 depressed) and 72 residents without dementia (N = 10 depressed) was undertaken in 13 Dutch NH units. An elderly care physician and a psychologist of each unit assessed residents for the presence of clinical depression. Primary professional caregivers administered the NORD scale.

RESULTS

Five of the six proposed items showed acceptable performance in screening for depression. Receiver operating characteristic analyses revealed significant areas under the empirical curve (AUC) for the 5-item NORD scale in the total sample (AUC = 0.83, p < 0.001), as well as in residents with dementia (AUC = 0.84, p < 0.001) and without dementia (AUC = 0.84, p < 0.001). The cutoff score of >1 showed the highest sum of sensitivity (100) and specificity (69) in non-dementia and >2 the highest sum of sensitivity (79) and specificity (77) in dementia. The cutoff score of >1 showed the lowest negative likelihood ratio of 0.0 in non-dementia and of 0.2 in dementia. The highest positive likelihood ratios were found for the cutoff of >2 in non-dementia (3.4) and for >4 in dementia (26.5).

CONCLUSION

The 5-item NORD scale showed acceptable accuracy comparable with those of more extensive scales in other studies. It is easy and quick to administer and can be used for screening of depression in NH residents with or without dementia.