Effectiveness of Dementia Care Mapping™ to reduce agitation in care home residents with dementia: an open-cohort cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Agitation is common and problematic in care home residents with dementia. This study investigated the (cost)effectiveness of Dementia Care Mapping™ (DCM) for reducing agitation in this population.

METHOD

Pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with cost-effectiveness analysis in 50 care homes, follow-up at 6 and 16 months and stratified randomisation to intervention (n = 31) and control (n = 19). Residents with dementia were recruited at baseline (n = 726) and 16 months (n = 261). Clusters were not blinded to allocation. Three DCM cycles were scheduled, delivered by two trained staff per home. Cycle one was supported by an external DCM expert. Agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI)) at 16 months was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

DCM was not superior to control on any outcomes (cross-sectional sample n = 675: 287 control, 388 intervention). The adjusted mean CMAI score difference was -2.11 points (95% CI -4.66 to 0.44, p = 0.104, adjusted ICC control = 0, intervention 0.001). Sensitivity analyses supported the primary analysis. Incremental cost per unit improvement in CMAI and QALYs (intervention vs control) on closed-cohort baseline recruited sample (n = 726, 418 intervention, 308 control) was £289 and £60,627 respectively. Loss to follow-up at 16 months in the original cohort was 312/726 (43·0%) mainly (87·2%) due to deaths. Intervention dose was low with only a quarter of homes completing more than one DCM cycle.

CONCLUSION

No benefits of DCM were evidenced. Low intervention dose indicates standard care homes may be insufficiently resourced to implement DCM. Alternative models of implementation, or other approaches to reducing agitation should be considered.

Dementia Care Mapping™ to reduce agitation in care home residents with dementia: the EPIC cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

The quality of care for people with dementia in care homes is of concern. Interventions that can improve care outcomes are required.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Dementia Care Mapping™ (DCM) for reducing agitation and improving care outcomes for people living with dementia in care homes, versus usual care.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with an open-cohort design, follow-up at 6 and 16 months, integrated cost-effectiveness analysis and process evaluation. Clusters were not blinded to allocation. The primary end point was completed by staff proxy and independent assessors.

SETTING

Stratified randomisation of 50 care homes to the intervention and control groups on a 3 : 2 ratio by type, size, staff exposure to dementia training and recruiting hub.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty care homes were randomised (intervention, n = 31; control, n = 19), with 726 residents recruited at baseline and a further 261 recruited after 16 months. Care homes were eligible if they recruited a minimum of 10 residents, were not subject to improvement notices, had not used DCM in the previous 18 months and were not participating in conflicting research. Residents were eligible if they lived there permanently, had a formal diagnosis of dementia or a score of 4+ on the Functional Assessment Staging Test of Alzheimer's Disease, were proficient in English and were not terminally ill or permanently cared for in bed. All homes were audited on the delivery of dementia and person-centred care awareness training. Those not reaching a minimum standard were provided training ahead of randomisation. Eighteen homes took part in the process evaluation.

INTERVENTION

Two staff members from each intervention home were trained to use DCM and were asked to carry out three DCM cycles; the first was supported by an external expert.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory), measured at 16 months. Secondary outcomes included resident behaviours and quality of life.

RESULTS

There were 675 residents in the final analysis (intervention, n = 388; control, n = 287). There was no evidence of a difference in agitation levels between the treatment arms. The adjusted mean difference in Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score was -2.11 points, being lower in the intervention group than in the control (95% confidence interval -4.66 to 0.44; p = 0.104; adjusted intracluster correlation coefficient: control = 0, intervention = 0.001). The sensitivity analyses results supported the primary analysis. No differences were detected in any of the secondary outcomes. The health economic analyses indicated that DCM was not cost-effective. Intervention adherence was problematic; only 26% of homes completed more than their first DCM cycle. Impacts, barriers to and facilitators of DCM implementation were identified.

LIMITATIONS

The primary completion of resident outcomes was by staff proxy, owing to self-report difficulties for residents with advanced dementia. Clusters were not blinded to allocation, although supportive analyses suggested that any reporting bias was not clinically important.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no benefit of DCM over control for any outcomes. The implementation of DCM by care home staff was suboptimal compared with the protocol in the majority of homes.

FUTURE WORK

Alternative models of DCM implementation should be considered that do not rely solely on leadership by care home staff.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN82288852.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A pragmatic randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of family therapy versus treatment as usual for young people seen after second or subsequent episodes of self-harm: the Self-Harm Intervention - Family Therapy (SHIFT) trial

BACKGROUND

Self-harm in adolescents is common and repetition rates high. There is limited evidence of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce self-harm.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of family therapy (FT) compared with treatment as usual (TAU).

DESIGN

A pragmatic, multicentre, individually randomised controlled trial of FT compared with TAU. Participants and therapists were aware of treatment allocation; researchers were blind to allocation.

SETTING

Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) across three English regions.

PARTICIPANTS

Young people aged 11-17 years who had self-harmed at least twice presenting to CAMHS following self-harm.

INTERVENTIONS

Eight hundred and thirty-two participants were randomised to manualised FT delivered by trained and supervised family therapists (n = 415) or to usual care offered by local CAMHS following self-harm (n = 417).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rates of repetition of self-harm leading to hospital attendance 18 months after randomisation.

RESULTS

Out of 832 young people, 212 (26.6%) experienced a primary outcome event: 118 out of 415 (28.4%) randomised to FT and 103 out of 417 (24.7%) randomised to TAU. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in repetition rates between groups (the hazard ratio for FT compared with TAU was 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.49; p = 0.3349). FT was not found to be cost-effective when compared with TAU in the base case and most sensitivity analyses. FT was dominated (less effective and more expensive) in the complete case. However, when young people's and caregivers' quality-adjusted life-year gains were combined, FT incurred higher costs and resulted in better health outcomes than TAU within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness range. Significant interactions with treatment, indicating moderation, were detected for the unemotional subscale on the young person-reported Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits (p = 0.0104) and the affective involvement subscale on the caregiver-reported McMaster Family Assessment Device (p = 0.0338). Caregivers and young people in the FT arm reported a range of significantly better outcomes on the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Self-reported suicidal ideation was significantly lower in the FT arm at 12 months but the same in both groups at 18 months. No significant unexpected adverse events or side effects were reported, with similar rates of expected adverse events across trial arms.

CONCLUSIONS

For adolescents referred to CAMHS after self-harm, who have self-harmed at least once before, FT confers no benefits over TAU in reducing self-harm repetition rates. There is some evidence to support the effectiveness of FT in reducing self-harm when caregivers reported poor family functioning. When the young person themselves reported difficulty expressing emotion, FT did not seem as effective as TAU. There was no evidence that FT is cost-effective when only the health benefits to participants were considered but there was a suggestion that FT may be cost-effective if health benefits to caregivers are taken into account. FT had a significant, positive impact on general emotional and behavioural problems at 12 and 18 months.

LIMITATIONS

There was significant loss to follow-up for secondary outcomes and health economic analyses; the primary outcome misses those who do not attend hospital following self-harm; and the numbers receiving formal FT in the TAU arm were higher than expected.

FUTURE WORK

Evaluation of interventions targeted at subgroups of those who self-harm, longer-term follow-up and methods for evaluating health benefits for family groups rather than for individuals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN59793150.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Developing and feasibility testing of data collection methods for an economic evaluation of a supported selfmanagement programme for adults with a learning disability and type 2 diabetes

Background

The challenges of conducting research with hard to reach vulnerable groups are particularly pertinent for people with learning disabilities. Data collection methods for previous cost and cost-effectiveness analyses of health and social care interventions targeting people with learning disabilities have relied on health care/health insurance records or data collection forms completed by the service provider rather than by people with learning disabilities themselves. This paper reports on the development and testing of data collection methods for an economic evaluation within a randomised controlled trial (RCT) for a supported self-management programme for people with mild/moderate learning disabilities and type 2 diabetes.

Methods

A case finding study was conducted to identify types of health and social care use and data collection methods employed in previous studies with this population. Based on this evidence, resource use questionnaires for completion by GP staff and interviewer-administered participant questionnaires (covering a wider cost perspective and health-related quality of life) were tested within a feasibility RCT. Interviewer-administered questionnaires included the EQ-5D-3L (the NICE recommended measure for use in economic evaluation). Participants were adults > 18 years with a mild or moderate learning disability and type 2 diabetes, with mental capacity to give consent to research participation.

Results

Data collection for questionnaires completed by GP staff requesting data for the last 12 months proved time intensive and difficult. Whilst 82.3% (121/147) of questionnaires were returned, up to 17% of service use items were recorded as unknown. Subsequently, a shorter recall period (4 months) led to a higher return rate but with a higher rate of missing data. Missing data for interviewer-administered participant questionnaires was > 8% but the interviewers reported difficulty with participant recall. Almost 60% (48/80) of participants had difficulty completing the EQ-5D-3L.

Conclusions

Further investigation as to how service use can be recorded is recommended. Concerns about the reliability of identifying service use data directly from participants with a learning disability due to challenges in completion, specifically around recall, remain. The degree of difficulty to complete EQ-5D-3L indicates concerns regarding the appropriateness of using this measure in its current form in research with this population.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41897033 (registered 21 January 2013).

Evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Dementia Care Mapping™ to enable person-centred care for people with dementia and their carers (DCM-EPIC) in care homes: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Up to 90 % of people living with dementia in care homes experience one or more behaviours that staff may describe as challenging to support (BSC). Of these agitation is the most common and difficult to manage. The presence of agitation is associated with fewer visits from relatives, poorer quality of life and social isolation. It is recommended that agitation is treated through psychosocial interventions. Dementia Care Mapping™ (DCM™) is an established, widely used observational tool and practice development cycle, for ensuring a systematic approach to providing person-centred care. There is a body of practice-based literature and experience to suggests that DCM™ is potentially effective but limited robust evidence for its effectiveness, and no examination of its cost-effectiveness, as a UK health care intervention. Therefore, a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) of DCM™ in the UK is urgently needed.

METHODS/DESIGN

A pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster-randomised controlled trial of Dementia Care Mapping (DCM™) plus Usual Care (UC) versus UC alone, where UC is the normal care delivered within the care home following a minimum level of dementia awareness training. The trial will take place in residential, nursing and dementia-specialist care homes across West Yorkshire, Oxfordshire and London, with residents with dementia. A random sample of 50 care homes will be selected within which a minimum of 750 residents will be registered. Care homes will be randomised in an allocation ratio of 3:2 to receive either intervention or control. Outcome measures will be obtained at 6 and 16 months following randomisation. The primary outcome is agitation as measured by the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, at 16 months post randomisation. Key secondary outcomes are other BSC and quality of life. There will be an integral cost-effectiveness analysis and a process evaluation.

DISCUSSION

The protocol was refined following a pilot of trial procedures. Changes include replacement of a questionnaire, whose wording caused some residents distress, to an adapted version specifically designed for use in care homes, a change to the randomisation stratification factors, adaption in how the staff measures are collected to encourage greater compliance, and additional reminders to intervention homes of when mapping cycles are due, via text message.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN82288852 . Registered on 16 January 2014. Full protocol version and date: v7.1: 18 December 2015.

Supported self-management for adults with type 2 diabetes and a learning disability (OK-Diabetes): study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Individuals with a learning disability (LD) are at higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes, but LD is not straightforward to define or identify, especially at the milder end of the spectrum, which makes case finding difficult. While supported self-management of health problems is now established, current material is largely educational and didactic with little that facilitates behavioural change. The interaction between the person with diabetes and others supporting their care is also largely unknown. For these reasons, there is considerable work needed to prepare for a definitive trial. The aim of this paper is to publish the abridged protocol of this preparatory work.

METHODS/DESIGN

Phase I is a prospective case-finding study (target n = 120 to 350) to identify and characterise potential participants, while developing a standardised supported self-management intervention. Phase II is a randomised feasibility trial (target n = 80) with blinded outcome assessment. Patients identified in Phase I will be interviewed and consented prior to being randomised to (1) standard treatment, or (2) supported self-management. Both arms will also be provided with an 'easy read' accessible information resource on managing type 2 diabetes. The intervention will be standardised but delivered flexibly depending on patient need, including components for the participant, a supporter, and shared activities. Outcomes will be (i) robust estimates of eligibility, consent and recruitment rates with refined recruitment procedures; (ii) characterisation of the eligible population; (iii) a standardised intervention with associated written materials, (iv) adherence and negative outcomes measures; (v) preliminary estimates of adherence, acceptability, follow-up and missing data rates, along with refined procedures; and (vi) description of standard treatment.

DISCUSSION

Our study will provide important information on the nature of type 2 diabetes in adults with LD living in the community, on the challenges of identifying those with milder LD, and on the possibilities of evaluating a standardised intervention to improve self-management in this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41897033 (registered 21 January 2013).

A unique drug treatment program for pregnant and postpartum substance-using women in New York City: results of a pilot project, 1990-1995

In the 1980s, there was virtually no drug treatment for pregnant women in New York City, especially women who used crack cocaine. The purpose of the Parent and Child Enrichment (PACE) demonstration project was to assess the effectiveness of the one-stop shopping model of drug treatment for this population. Among PACE clients, 88% were primarily users of crack cocaine. The mean total length of stay was 100.0 days (median 55.5 days). Client retention 42 days after intake was 54.3%. This paper describes the essential components of this program model. "Long-stay" and "short-stay" clients were compared using urine toxicology tests and activity logs. In addition, the birth outcomes of clients were compared to two similar populations. A strong positive correlation was found between total length of stay and low rate of positive urine drug tests (UDTs). Infants of PACE long-stay clients had greater mean birth weight, less low birth weight, and less intrauterine growth retardation than the infants of the comparison groups. Fetal exposure to cocaine was decreased dramatically among women who were enrolled for 42 or more days during their pregnancy. This model of drug treatment for pregnant and postpartum women seems to improve mothers' lives, fetal drug exposure, and birth outcome significantly.

Breast-feeding initiation in New York City, 1979 to 1996

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to explore changes in breast-feeding initiation from 1979 to 1996 among infants born in New York City hospitals.

METHODS

All New York City hospitals were surveyed every 2 years. Hospital staff reported feeding method at newborn discharge.

RESULTS

New York City breast-feeding initiation rates increased consistently from 1979 to 1996 (from 29% to 58%, P < .0001), including 1984 to 1990, when rates decreased nationally.

CONCLUSIONS

A 1984 New York State regulation requiring each hospital to designate a lactation coordinator may have been associated with the continuing increases in breast-feeding initiation.

Homicide and other injuries as causes of maternal death in New York City, 1987 through 1991

OBJECTIVES

We attempted to document the role of homicide and other injuries as causes of maternal death and to compare the risk of fatal injury among pregnant women with that in the general population.

STUDY DESIGN

We reviewed New York City medical examiner records of 2331 women aged 15 to 44 years who died of injury in 1987 through 1991. Pregnancies were identified from autopsy information.

RESULTS

A total of 115 (39%) of 293 deaths in currently or recently pregnant women were attributable to injury. These 115 deaths included homicide (63%), suicide (13%), motor vehicle crashes (12%), and drug overdoses (7%). Minority women were overrepresented among the injury deaths (black 53%, Hispanic 24%, white 19%). Recent substance use was documented in 48% of the injury deaths. Pregnancy was documented on only 35% of the 115 death certificates. The risk of fatal injury is similar for currently pregnant women and for women in the general population, except for an increased risk of homicide among pregnant black women.

CONCLUSIONS

Homicide and other injuries are major contributors to maternal mortality and should be (but rarely are) included routinely in maternal mortality surveillance systems. Prenatal and postpartum clinic visits represent an ideal time to implement interventions to prevent injuries among pregnant women.