Executive functions in insomnia disorder: a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis

Background: Executive functions (EFs) are involved in the control of basic psychological processes such as attention and memory and also contribute to emotion regulation. Research on the presence of EFs impairments in insomnia yielded inconsistent results. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of the literature on three EFs: inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility in adults with insomnia in order to investigate the presence and magnitude of insomnia-related EFs impairments. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Medline, and PsycINFO were searched. Risk of bias assessment of included studies was performed by two independent researchers. Findings were summarised using both a narrative approach and meta-analysis. Cohen’s d was calculated at 95% confidence interval (CI) as effect size of between groups differences. Results: Twenty-eight studies comparing adult individuals with a diagnosis of insomnia and healthy controls on neuropsychological measures of EFs were included. Narrative synthesis revealed substantial variability across study findings. Factors that were primarily hypothesised to account for this variability are: objective sleep impairments and test sensitivity. Exploratory meta-analysis showed impaired performance of small to moderate magnitude in individuals with insomnia as compared to controls in reaction times, but not accuracy rates, of inhibitory control (d = −0.32, 95% CI: −0.52 to −0.13) and cognitive flexibility tasks (d = −0.30, 95% CI: −0.59 to −0.01). Performance in working memory tasks was also significantly impacted (d = −0.19, 95% CI: −0.38 to −0.00). Effects sizes were larger when insomnia was associated with objective sleep impairments, rather than normal sleep. Conclusions: We gathered evidence supporting small to moderate deficits in EFs in individuals with insomnia. Due to the small sample size results should be considered preliminary and interpreted carefully

Does characterising patterns of multimorbidity in stroke matter for developing collaborative care approaches in primary care?

Stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA) remain leading causes of mortality and morbidity globally. Although mortality rates have been in decline, the number of people affected by stroke has risen. These patients have a range of long-term needs and often present to primary care. Furthermore, many of these patients have multimorbidities which increase the complexity of their healthcare. Long-term impacts from stroke/TIA along with care needs for other morbidities can be challenging to address because care can involve different healthcare professionals, both specialist and generalist. In the ideal model of care, such professionals would work collaboratively to provide care. Despite the commonality of multimorbidity in stroke/TIA, gaps in the literature remain, particularly limited knowledge of pairings or clusters of comorbid conditions and the extent to which these are interrelated. Moreover, integrated care practices are less well understood and remain variable in practice. This article argues that it is important to understand (through research) patterns of multimorbidity, including number, common clusters and types of comorbidities, and current interprofessional practice to inform future directions to improve long-term care.This article received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. JM is an National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator

Improving Primary Care After Stroke (IPCAS) trial: protocol of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate a novel model of care for stroke survivors living in the community.

INTRODUCTION: Survival after stroke is improving, leading to increased demand on primary care and community services to meet the long-term care needs of people living with stroke. No formal primary care-based holistic model of care with clinical trial evidence exists to support stroke survivors living in the community, and stroke survivors report that many of their needs are not being met. We have developed a multifactorial primary care model to address these longer term needs. We aim to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of this new model of primary care for stroke survivors compared with standard care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Improving Primary Care After Stroke (IPCAS) is a two-arm cluster-randomised controlled trial with general practice as the unit of randomisation. People on the stroke registers of general practices will be invited to participate. One arm will receive the IPCAS model of care including a structured review using a checklist; a self-management programme; enhanced communication pathways between primary care and specialist services; and direct point of contact for patients. The other arm will receive usual care. We aim to recruit 920 people with stroke registered with 46 general practices. The primary endpoint is two subscales (emotion and handicap) of the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) as coprimary outcomes at 12 months (adjusted for baseline). Secondary outcomes include: SIS Short Form, EuroQol EQ-5D-5L, ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults, Southampton Stroke Self-management Questionnaire, Health Literacy Questionnaire and medication use. Cost-effectiveness of the new model will be determined in a within-trial economic evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Favourable ethical opinion was gained from Yorkshire and the Humber-Bradford Leeds NHS Research Ethics Committee. Approval to start was given by the Health Research Authority prior to recruitment of participants at any NHS site. Data will be presented at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. Patient and public involvement helped develop the dissemination plan. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03353519.This study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research’s Programme Grant for Applied Research titled ‘Developing primary care services for stroke survivors’ reference PTC-RP-PG-0213 20001. The chief investigator for the study is JM, University of Cambridge email: [email protected]. The IPCAS trial is cosponsored by the University of Cambridge and NHS Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group. This research is covered by the Cambridge University's Public Liability and Professional Indemnity policy

Factors influencing follow-up care post-TIA and minor stroke: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up care after transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke has been found to be sub-optimal, with individuals often feeling abandoned. We aimed to explore factors influencing holistic follow-up care after TIA and minor stroke. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with 24 healthcare providers (HCPs): 5 stroke doctors, 4 nurses, 9 allied health professionals and 6 general practitioners. Participants were recruited from three TIA clinics, seven general practices and one community care trust in the West Midlands, England. Interview transcripts were deductively coded using the Theoretical Domains Framework and themes were generated from coded data. RESULTS: There was no clear pathway for supporting people with TIA or minor stroke after rapid specialist review in hospital; consequently, these patients had limited access to HCPs from all settings ('Environmental context and resources'). There was lack of understanding of potential needs post-TIA/minor stroke, in particular residual problems such as anxiety/fatigue ('Knowledge'). Identification and management of needs was largely influenced by HCPs' perceived role, professional training ('Social professional role and identity') and time constraints ('Environmental context and resources'). Follow-up was often passive - with onerous on patients to seek support - and predominantly focused on acute medical management ('Intentions'/'Goal'). CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up care post-TIA/minor stroke is currently sub-optimal. Through identifying factors which influence follow-up, we can inform guidelines and practical strategies to improve holistic healthcare

Reintroducing face-to-face support alongside remote support to form a hybrid stop smoking service in England: a formative mixed methods evaluation

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, United Kingdom (UK) stop smoking services had to shift to remote delivery models due to social distancing regulations, later reintroducing face-to-face provision. The “Living Well Smokefree” service in North Yorkshire County Council adopted a hybrid model offering face-to-face, remote, or a mix of both. This evaluation aimed to assess the hybrid approach’s strengths and weaknesses and explore potential improvements. Methods: Conducted from September 2022 to February 2023, the evaluation consisted of three components. First, qualitative interviews involved 11 staff and 16 service users, analysed thematically. Second, quantitative data from the QuitManager system that monitored the numbers and proportions of individuals selecting and successfully completing a 4-week quit via each service option. Third, face-to-face service expenses data was used to estimate the value for money of additional face-to-face provision. The qualitative findings were used to give context to the quantitative data via an “expansion” approach and complementary analysis. Results: Overall, a hybrid model was seen to provide convenience and flexible options for support. In the evaluation, 733 individuals accessed the service, with 91.3% selecting remote support, 6.1% face-to-face, and 2.6% mixed provision. Remote support was valued by service users and staff for promoting openness, privacy, and reducing stigma, and was noted as removing access barriers and improving service availability. However, the absence of carbon monoxide monitoring in remote support raised accountability concerns. The trade-off in “quantity vs. quality” of quits was debated, as remote support reached more users but produced fewer carbon monoxide-validated quits. Primarily offering remote support could lead to substantial workloads, as staff often extend their roles to include social/mental health support, which was sometimes emotionally challenging. Offering service users a choice of support options was considered more important than the “cost-per-quit”. Improved dissemination of information to support service users in understanding their options for support was suggested. Conclusions: The hybrid approach allows smoking cessation services to evaluate which groups benefit from remote, face-to-face, or mixed options and allocate resources accordingly. Providing choice, flexible provision, non-judgmental support, and clear information about available options could improve engagement and match support to individual needs, enhancing outcomes

Ten simple rules for implementing open and reproducible research practices after attending a training course

Open, reproducible, and replicable research practices are a fundamental part of science. Training is often organized on a grassroots level, offered by early career researchers, for early career researchers. Buffet style courses that cover many topics can inspire participants to try new things; however, they can also be overwhelming. Participants who want to implement new practices may not know where to start once they return to their research team. We describe ten simple rules to guide participants of relevant training courses in implementing robust research practices in their own projects, once they return to their research group. This includes (1) prioritizing and planning which practices to implement, which involves obtaining support and convincing others involved in the research project of the added value of implementing new practices; (2) managing problems that arise during implementation; and (3) making reproducible research and open science practices an integral part of a future research career. We also outline strategies that course organizers can use to prepare participants for implementation and support them during this process