1
|
Al-Najjar N, Bray L, Carter B, Castle AP, Collingwood A, Cook G, Crudgington H, Currier J, Dietz KC, Hardy WAS, Hiscock H, Hughes D, Morris C, Roberts D, Rouncefield-Swales A, Saron H, Spowart C, Stibbs-Eaton L, Tudur Smith C, Watson V, Whittle L, Wiggs L, Wood E, Gringras P, Pal DK. Changing Agendas on Sleep, Treatment and Learning in Epilepsy (CASTLE) Sleep-E: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing an online behavioural sleep intervention with standard care in children with Rolandic epilepsy. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e065769. [PMID: 36898757 PMCID: PMC10008377 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065769] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/12/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Sleep and epilepsy have an established bidirectional relationship yet only one randomised controlled clinical trial has assessed the effectiveness of behavioural sleep interventions for children with epilepsy. The intervention was successful, but was delivered via face-to-face educational sessions with parents, which are costly and non-scalable to population level. The Changing Agendas on Sleep, Treatment and Learning in Epilepsy (CASTLE) Sleep-E trial addresses this problem by comparing clinical and cost-effectiveness in children with Rolandic epilepsy between standard care (SC) and SC augmented with a novel, tailored parent-led CASTLE Online Sleep Intervention (COSI) that incorporates evidence-based behavioural components. METHODS AND ANALYSES CASTLE Sleep-E is a UK-based, multicentre, open-label, active concurrent control, randomised, parallel-group, pragmatic superiority trial. A total of 110 children with Rolandic epilepsy will be recruited in outpatient clinics and allocated 1:1 to SC or SC augmented with COSI (SC+COSI). Primary clinical outcome is parent-reported sleep problem score (Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire). Primary health economic outcome is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective, Child Health Utility 9D Instrument). Parents and children (≥7 years) can opt into qualitative interviews and activities to share their experiences and perceptions of trial participation and managing sleep with Rolandic epilepsy. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The CASTLE Sleep-E protocol was approved by the Health Research Authority East Midlands (HRA)-Nottingham 1 Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/EM/0205). Trial results will be disseminated to scientific audiences, families, professional groups, managers, commissioners and policymakers. Pseudo-anonymised individual patient data will be made available after dissemination on reasonable request. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN13202325.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadia Al-Najjar
- Liverpool Clinical Trials Centre, Institute of Population Health, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Lucy Bray
- Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Bernie Carter
- Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Advisory Panel Castle
- Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Amber Collingwood
- Department of Basic and Clinical Neurosciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Georgia Cook
- Centre for Psychological Research, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK
| | - Holly Crudgington
- Department of Basic and Clinical Neurosciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Janet Currier
- Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Kristina Charlotte Dietz
- Department of Basic and Clinical Neurosciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Will A S Hardy
- Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, School of Medical and Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK
| | - Harriet Hiscock
- Centre for Community Child Health, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Dyfrig Hughes
- Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, School of Medical and Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK
| | - Christopher Morris
- University of Exeter Medical School, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Deborah Roberts
- Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Alison Rouncefield-Swales
- Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Holly Saron
- Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Catherine Spowart
- Liverpool Clinical Trials Centre, Institute of Population Health, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Lucy Stibbs-Eaton
- Liverpool Clinical Trials Centre, Institute of Population Health, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Catrin Tudur Smith
- Department of Health Data Science, Institute of Population Health, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Victoria Watson
- Department of Health Data Science, Institute of Population Health, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Liam Whittle
- Department of Health Data Science, Institute of Population Health, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Luci Wiggs
- Centre for Psychological Research, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK
| | - Eifiona Wood
- Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, School of Medical and Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK
| | - Paul Gringras
- Department of Sleep Medicine, Evelina London Children's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Deb K Pal
- Department of Basic and Clinical Neurosciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wiley K, Robinson R, Mandryk RL. The Making and Evaluation of Digital Games Used for the Assessment of Attention: Systematic Review. JMIR Serious Games 2021; 9:e26449. [PMID: 34383674 PMCID: PMC8386381 DOI: 10.2196/26449] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2020] [Revised: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 05/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Serious games are now widely used in many contexts, including psychological research and clinical use. One area of growing interest is that of cognitive assessment, which seeks to measure different cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and perception. Measuring these functions at both the population and individual levels can inform research and indicate health issues. Attention is an important function to assess, as an accurate measure of attention can help diagnose many common disorders, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and dementia. However, using games to assess attention poses unique problems, as games inherently manipulate attention through elements such as sound effects, graphics, and rewards, and research on adding game elements to assessments (ie, gamification) has shown mixed results. The process for developing cognitive tasks is robust, with high psychometric standards that must be met before these tasks are used for assessment. Although games offer more diverse approaches for assessment, there is no standard for how they should be developed or evaluated. Objective To better understand the field and provide guidance to interdisciplinary researchers, we aim to answer the question: How are digital games used for the cognitive assessment of attention made and measured? Methods We searched several databases for papers that described a digital game used to assess attention that could be deployed remotely without specialized hardware. We used Rayyan, a systematic review software, to screen the records before conducting a systematic review. Results The initial database search returned 49,365 papers. Our screening process resulted in a total of 74 papers that used a digital game to measure cognitive functions related to attention. Across the studies in our review, we found three approaches to making assessment games: gamifying cognitive tasks, creating custom games based on theories of cognition, and exploring potential assessment properties of commercial games. With regard to measuring the assessment properties of these games (eg, how accurately they assess attention), we found three approaches: comparison to a traditional cognitive task, comparison to a clinical diagnosis, and comparison to knowledge of cognition; however, most studies in our review did not evaluate the game’s properties (eg, if participants enjoyed the game). Conclusions Our review provides an overview of how games used for the assessment of attention are developed and evaluated. We further identified three barriers to advancing the field: reliance on assumptions, lack of evaluation, and lack of integration and standardization. We then recommend the best practices to address these barriers. Our review can act as a resource to help guide the field toward more standardized approaches and rigorous evaluation required for the widespread adoption of assessment games.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katelyn Wiley
- Department of Computer Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
| | - Raquel Robinson
- Department of Computer Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
| | - Regan L Mandryk
- Department of Computer Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hiscock H, Mulraney M, Heussler H, Rinehart N, Schuster T, Grobler AC, Gold L, Bohingamu Mudiyanselage S, Hayes N, Sciberras E. Impact of a behavioral intervention, delivered by pediatricians or psychologists, on sleep problems in children with ADHD: a cluster-randomized, translational trial. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2019; 60:1230-1241. [PMID: 31184382 DOI: 10.1111/jcpp.13083] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/15/2019] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We have demonstrated the efficacy of a brief behavioral intervention for sleep in children with ADHD in a previous randomized controlled trial and now aim to examine whether this intervention is effective and cost-effective when delivered by pediatricians or psychologists in community settings. METHODS Translational, cluster-randomized trial of a behavioral intervention versus usual care from 19th January, 2015 to 30th June, 2017. Participants (n = 361) were children aged 5-13 years with ADHD and parent report of a moderate/severe sleep problem who met criteria for American Academy of Sleep Medicine criteria for chronic insomnia disorder, delayed sleep-wake phase disorder, or were experiencing sleep-related anxiety. Participants were randomized at the level of the pediatrician (n = 61) to intervention (n = 183) or usual care (n = 178). Families in the intervention group received two consultations with a pediatrician or a psychologist covering sleep hygiene and tailored behavioral strategies. RESULTS In an intention-to-treat analysis, at 3 and 6 months respectively, the proportion of children with moderate to severe sleep problems was lower in the intervention (28.0%, 35.8%) compared with usual care group (55.4%, 60.1%; 3 month: risk ratio (RR): 0.51, 95% CI 0.37, 0.70, p < .001; 6 month: RR: 0.58; 95% CI 0.45, 0.76, p < .001). Intervention children had improvements across multiple Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire subscales at 3 and 6 months. No benefits of the intervention were observed in other domains. Cost-effectiveness of the intervention was AUD 13 per percentage point reduction in child sleep problem at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS A low-cost brief behavioral sleep intervention is effective in improving sleep problems when delivered by community clinicians. Greater sample comorbidity, lower intervention dose or insufficient clinician supervisions may have contributed to the lack benefits seen in our previous trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harriet Hiscock
- Centre for Community Child Health, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,Health Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Melissa Mulraney
- Health Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Helen Heussler
- Mater Research Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Nicole Rinehart
- Deakin Child Study Centre, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | - Tibor Schuster
- Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit and Melbourne Children's Trials Centre, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Anneke C Grobler
- Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit and Melbourne Children's Trials Centre, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Lisa Gold
- School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Nicole Hayes
- Mater Research Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Emma Sciberras
- Centre for Community Child Health, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.,Deakin Child Study Centre, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|