Creating a novel approach to discourse treatment through coproduction with people with aphasia and speech and language therapists

Background: Although spoken discourse is an outcome prioritised by all stakeholders in aphasia rehabilitation, assessment and treatment of discourse are not routine clinical practice. The small evidence base, varied clinical expertise, multiple barriers in the workplace, and challenges for clients in understanding their altered language abilities all contribute to this situation. These factors need serious consideration when developing a new treatment. Involving intended stakeholders as partners in the development process is recommended. This assists with future implementation by ensuring assessment and treatment are practical, feasible, and acceptable to those who will deliver and undertake it. Aims: This paper reports on the coproduction phase of the Linguistic Underpinnings of Narrative in Aphasia (LUNA) research project and describes the levels of partners’ involvement, the outcomes and impact of coproduction, and the factors that influenced it. Methods and procedures: Four partners with aphasia and four speech and language therapists (SLTs) worked with academic team members across a 6-month period to create the LUNA assessment and treatment. Separate sessions were held with partners with aphasia (monthly) and SLTs (fortnightly). Coproduction methods included open discussion, the Someone Who Isn’t Me (SWIM) technique (thinking from others’ perspectives), low and high fidelity prototypes, flexible brainstorming, card sort, and active experimentation with assessment and treatment tasks. Verbal and written information was presented, shared and documented during each session in supportive formats, and each session summarised as accessible minutes. Outcomes and Results: Partners contributed at consultation, cooperation, and co-learning levels during the coproduction phase. Outcomes included joined-up thinking across assessment-goal setting-treatment-desired outcomes; agreed decisions and content for assessment protocol and treatment manual; clarity on personalised, meaningful, and relevant treatment; therapeutic alliance operationalised in treatment manual; and more. Impacts included increased confidence, self-knowledge, pride, validation, peer support, networking, and benefits to SLTs’ services. Coproduction was positively influenced by consistent session structure and conduct, group dynamics, accessible communication methods, active task experimentation, and SWIM technique. Although the process was time and labour intensive, all partners considered this worthwhile. Conclusions: LUNA has exemplified how an inclusive coproduction process can work well despite the language challenges of aphasia. Authors also believe that coproduction with intended users has resulted in products (assessment protocol, treatment manual) that are more practical, feasible, and acceptable to clinicians and clients than if designed by academics alone. This latter claim now needs testing on a wide scale

T helper cell subsets specific for pseudomonas aeruginosa in healthy individuals and patients with cystic fibrosis

Background: We set out to determine the magnitude of antigen-specific memory T helper cell responses to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in healthy humans and patients with cystic fibrosis. Methods: Peripheral blood human memory CD4+ T cells were co-cultured with dendritic cells that had been infected with different strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The T helper response was determined by measuring proliferation, immunoassay of cytokine output, and immunostaining of intracellular cytokines. Results: Healthy individuals and patients with cystic fibrosis had robust antigen-specific memory CD4+ T cell responses to Pseudomonas aeruginosa that not only contained a Th1 and Th17 component but also Th22 cells. In contrast to previous descriptions of human Th22 cells, these Pseudomonal-specific Th22 cells lacked the skin homing markers CCR4 or CCR10, although were CCR6+. Healthy individuals and patients with cystic fibrosis had similar levels of Th22 cells, but the patient group had significantly fewer Th17 cells in peripheral blood. Conclusions: Th22 cells specific to Pseudomonas aeruginosa are induced in both healthy individuals and patients with cystic fibrosis. Along with Th17 cells, they may play an important role in the pulmonary response to this microbe in patients with cystic fibrosis and other conditions

Intravenous sildenafil citrate and post-cardiac surgery acute kidney injury: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Clinical trial registration ISRCTN18386427. open access articleBackground This study assessed whether i.v. sildenafil citrate prevented acute kidney injury in at-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Methods In a double-blind RCT, adults at increased risk of acute kidney injury undergoing cardiac surgery in a single UK tertiary centre were randomised to receive sildenafil citrate 12.5 mg kg−1 i.v. over 150 min or dextrose 5% at the commencement of surgery. The primary outcome was serum creatinine measured at six post-randomisation time points. The primary analysis used a linear mixed-effects model adjusted for the stratification variables, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, and surgical procedure. Secondary outcomes considered clinical events and potential disease mechanisms. Effect estimates were expressed as mean differences (MDs) or odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Results The analysis population comprised eligible randomised patients that underwent valve surgery or combined coronary artery bypass graft and valve surgery, with cardiopulmonary bypass, between May 2015 and June 2018. There were 60 subjects in the sildenafil group and 69 in the placebo control group. The difference between groups in creatinine concentration was not statistically significant (MD: 0.88 μmol L−1 [–5.82, 7.59]). There was a statistically significant increase in multiple organ dysfunction scores in the sildenafil group (MD: 0.54 [0.02, 1.07]; P=0.044). Secondary outcomes, and biomarkers of kidney injury, endothelial function, and inflammatory cell activation, were not significantly different between the groups. Conclusions These results do not support the use of i.v. sildenafil citrate for kidney protection in adult cardiac surgery

Acromial stress fracture in a young wheelchair user with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease: a case report

Acromial stress fractures are rare and have not been highlighted as a potential complication of wheelchair use. We report the case of a 22-year old female wheelchair bound patient with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease who presented with a four-year history of shoulder pain which impaired mobility and quality of life. Plain radiographs showed a cortical irregularity of the acromion but no double-density sign. After CT scans a non-united acromial stress fracture was diagnosed. She had no other shoulder pathology. The new technique of using a superiorly closing wedge osteotomy with cancellous lag screw fixation was successful in correcting the mobile non-united acromial fragment and resolving her pain

Preliminary Psychometric Analyses of Two Assessment Measures Quantifying Communicative and Social Activities: the COMACT and SOCACT

Background: There is a need for clinical tools that capture the real-life impact of aphasia (Simmons-Mackie, Threats & Kagan, 2005). This study reports on a psychometric investigation of two self-report tools: the Communicative Activities Checklist and the Social Activities Checklist (COMACT; SOCACT: Cruice, 2001), which assess the dimensions of communication activity and social participation in aphasia. Aims: (1) To investigate internal consistency, convergent and known validity of the COMACT and SOCACT; and (2) To investigate the impact of personal contextual factors: gender, age, years in education, linguistic ability and emotional health on communicative and social activities. Method: 30 participants with mild-moderate chronic aphasia (PWA: mean age 71 years, mean time post-onset 41 months, mean years in education 10.77) and 75 control neurologically healthy participants (NHP: mean age 74 years, mean years in education 13.18) completed the COMACT and SOCACT reporting how frequently they engaged in particular activities. The COMACT has 45 communication activities with sub-scales of Talking, Listening, Reading and Writing. The SOCACT contains 20 social activities with sub-scales of Leisure, Informal and Formal. Internal consistency (IC) was examined using Cronbach’s alpha (α). Correlations with published assessments, Western Aphasia Battery (WAB: Kertesz, 1982) and Communication Activities of Daily Living (CADL-2: Holland, Frattali & Fromm, 1999) were computed for COMACT only. Multiple regression models were examined for differences in participant (PWA vs. NHP) performance on COMACT and SOCACT. COMACT & SOCACT: psychometric investigation Results: Total COMACT IC was 0.83 (PWA), and 0.84 (NHP). Following deletion of four items, to further improve sub-scale ICs, total COMACT IC was 0.83 (PWA) and 0.86 (NHP). COMACT total score and WAB AQ were moderately correlated (r = 0.55). Total SOCACT IC was 0.58 (PWA) and 0.63 (NHP). Following single item deletion, total IC was 0.65 (PWA) and 0.64 (NHP). Statistical analysis revealed PWA, in comparison to NHP, participated in significantly fewer communication and social activities. Personal contextual factors impacted both groups differently; particular aspects were associated with communication activity (age and language severity) and social activity (age only). For NHP, ageing, emotional health and years in education were significant predictors of social and communication activity. Conclusion: This study finds the COMACT to be a reliable, valid measure of communication activity. The SOCACT had ‘questionable’ IC and requires further psychometric investigation. Both tools demonstrate known group validity. Relationships between impairment-level and personal contextual factors for communication activity and social participation are highlighted

Are ethnic disparities in HbA1c levels explained by mental wellbeing? Analysis of population-based data from the Health Survey for England

Aims: It is unclear how ethnic differences in HbA1c levels are affected by individual variations in mental wellbeing. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the extent to which HbA1c disparities between Caucasian and South Asian adults are mediated by various aspects of positive psychological functioning. Methods: Data from the 2014 Health Survey for England was analysed using bootstrapping methods. A total of 3894 UK residents with HbA1c data were eligible to participate. Mental wellbeing was assessed using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale. To reduce bias BMI, blood pressure, diabetes status, and other factors were treated as covariates. Results: Ethnicity directly predicted blood sugar control (unadjusted coefficient -2.15; 95% CI -3.64, -0.67), with Caucasians generating lower average HbA1c levels (37.68 mmol/mol (5.6%)) compared to South Asians (39.87 mmol/mol (5.8%)). This association was mediated by positive mental wellbeing, specifically concerning perceived vigour (unadjusted effect 0.30; 95% CI 0.13, 0.58): South Asians felt more energetic than Caucasians (unadjusted coefficient -0.32; 95% CI -0.49, -0.16), and greater perceived energy predicted lower HbA1c levels (unadjusted coefficient -0.92; 95% CI -1.29, -0.55). This mediator effect accounted for just over 14% of the HbA1c variance, and was negated after adjusting for BMI. Conclusions: Caucasian experience better HbA1c levels compared with their South Asian counterparts. However, this association is partly confounded by individual differences in perceived energy levels, which is implicated in better glycaemic control, and appears to serve a protective function in South Asians

Comparing the use of direct observation, standardized patients and exit interviews in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of methods of assessing quality of primary care.

Clinical records in primary healthcare settings in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) are often lacking or of too poor quality to accurately assess what happens during the patient consultation. We examined the most common methods for assessing healthcare workers' clinical behaviour: direct observation, standardized patients and patient/healthcare worker exit interview. The comparative feasibility, acceptability, reliability, validity and practicalities of using these methods in this setting are unclear. We systematically review and synthesize the evidence to compare and contrast the advantages and disadvantages of each method. We include studies in LMICs where methods have been directly compared and systematic and narrative reviews of each method. We searched several electronic databases and focused on real-life (not educational) primary healthcare encounters. The most recent update to the search for direct comparison studies was November 2019. We updated the search for systematic and narrative reviews on the standardized patient method in March 2020 and expanded it to all methods. Search strategies combined indexed terms and keywords. We searched reference lists of eligible articles and sourced additional references from relevant review articles. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by two reviewers and discrepancies resolved through discussion. Data were iteratively coded according to pre-defined categories and synthesized. We included 12 direct comparison studies and eight systematic and narrative reviews. We found that no method was clearly superior to the others-each has pros and cons and may assess different aspects of quality of care provision by healthcare workers. All methods require careful preparation, though the exact domain of quality assessed and ethics and selection and training of personnel are nuanced and the methods were subject to different biases. The differential strengths suggest that individual methods should be used strategically based on the research question or in combination for comprehensive global assessments of quality

Comparing the use of direct observation, standardized patients and exit interviews in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of methods of assessing quality of primary care.

Clinical records in primary healthcare settings in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) are often lacking or of too poor quality to accurately assess what happens during the patient consultation. We examined the most common methods for assessing healthcare workers' clinical behaviour: direct observation, standardized patients and patient/healthcare worker exit interview. The comparative feasibility, acceptability, reliability, validity and practicalities of using these methods in this setting are unclear. We systematically review and synthesize the evidence to compare and contrast the advantages and disadvantages of each method. We include studies in LMICs where methods have been directly compared and systematic and narrative reviews of each method. We searched several electronic databases and focused on real-life (not educational) primary healthcare encounters. The most recent update to the search for direct comparison studies was November 2019. We updated the search for systematic and narrative reviews on the standardized patient method in March 2020 and expanded it to all methods. Search strategies combined indexed terms and keywords. We searched reference lists of eligible articles and sourced additional references from relevant review articles. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by two reviewers and discrepancies resolved through discussion. Data were iteratively coded according to pre-defined categories and synthesized. We included 12 direct comparison studies and eight systematic and narrative reviews. We found that no method was clearly superior to the others-each has pros and cons and may assess different aspects of quality of care provision by healthcare workers. All methods require careful preparation, though the exact domain of quality assessed and ethics and selection and training of personnel are nuanced and the methods were subject to different biases. The differential strengths suggest that individual methods should be used strategically based on the research question or in combination for comprehensive global assessments of quality

Creating a novel approach to discourse treatment through coproduction with people with aphasia and speech and language therapists

Background Although spoken discourse is an outcome prioritised by all stakeholders in aphasia rehabilitation, assessment and treatment of discourse are not routine clinical practice. The small evidence base, varied clinical expertise, multiple barriers in the workplace, and challenges for clients in understanding their altered language abilities all contribute to this situation. These factors need serious consideration when developing a new treatment. Involving intended stakeholders as partners in the development process is recommended. This assists with future implementation by ensuring assessment and treatment are practical, feasible, and acceptable to those who will deliver and undertake it. Aims This paper reports on the coproduction phase of the Linguistic Underpinnings of Narrative in Aphasia (LUNA) research project and describes the levels of partners’ involvement, the outcomes and impact of coproduction, and the factors that influenced it. Methods and procedures Four partners with aphasia and four speech and language therapists (SLTs) worked with academic team members across a 6-month period to create the LUNA assessment and treatment. Separate sessions were held with partners with aphasia (monthly) and SLTs (fortnightly). Coproduction methods included open discussion, the Someone Who Isn’t Me (SWIM) technique (thinking from others’ perspectives), low and high fidelity prototypes, flexible brainstorming, card sort, and active experimentation with assessment and treatment tasks. Verbal and written information was presented, shared and documented during each session in supportive formats, and each session summarised as accessible minutes. Outcomes and Results Partners contributed at consultation, cooperation, and co-learning levels during the coproduction phase. Outcomes included joined-up thinking across assessment-goal setting-treatment-desired outcomes; agreed decisions and content for assessment protocol and treatment manual; clarity on personalised, meaningful, and relevant treatment; therapeutic alliance operationalised in treatment manual; and more. Impacts included increased confidence, self-knowledge, pride, validation, peer support, networking, and benefits to SLTs’ services. Coproduction was positively influenced by consistent session structure and conduct, group dynamics, accessible communication methods, active task experimentation, and SWIM technique. Although the process was time and labour intensive, all partners considered this worthwhile. Conclusions LUNA has exemplified how an inclusive coproduction process can work well despite the language challenges of aphasia. Authors also believe that coproduction with intended users has resulted in products (assessment protocol, treatment manual) that are more practical, feasible, and acceptable to clinicians and clients than if designed by academics alone. This latter claim now needs testing on a wide scale