Improving care for people with dementia: development and initial feasibility study for evaluation of life story work in dementia care

Background: Improving dementia care quality is an urgent priority nationally and internationally. Life story work (LSW) is an intervention that aims to improve individual outcomes and care for people with dementia and their carers. LSW gathers information and artefacts about the person, their history and interests, and produces a tangible output: the ‘life story’. Objective: To establish whether or not full evaluation of LSW was feasible. Design: Mixed-methods feasibility study. Methods: In-depth interviews and focus groups explored experiences of LSW and best practice with people with dementia, family members and dementia care staff. A systematic review explored best practice and theories of change for LSW. These stages helped to identify the outcomes and resources to explore in the feasibility study. A representative sample survey of health and social care dementia care providers in England established LSW practice in different settings. A survey of a self-selected sample of family members of people with dementia explored how LSW is experienced. Two small outcome studies (stepped-wedge study in six care homes and pre-test post-test study in inpatient specialist dementia care wards) explored the feasibility of full evaluation of LSW in these settings. Settings: Survey: generalist and specialist care homes; NHS dementia care settings; and community dementia services. Feasibility study: care homes and NHS inpatient dementia care wards. Participants: NHS and social care services, people with dementia, family carers, care home staff and NHS staff. Interventions: LSW. Main outcome measures: Spread of LSW and good practice, quality of life (QoL) for the person with dementia and carers, relationships between people with dementia and family carers, staff attitudes about dementia, staff burnout, resource use and costs. Review methods: Narrative review and synthesis, following Centre for Review and Dissemination guidelines. Results: Good practice in LSW is identifiable, as are theories of change about how it might affect given outcomes. Indicators of best practice were produced. LSW is spreading but practice and use vary between care settings and are not always in line with identified good practice. Two different models of LSW are evident; these are likely to be appropriate at different stages of the dementia journey. The feasibility study showed some positive changes in staff attitudes towards dementia and, for some people with dementia, improvements in QoL. These may be attributable to LSW but these potential benefits require full evaluation. The feasibility work established the likely costs of LSW and highlighted the challenges of future evaluation in care homes and inpatient dementia care settings. Limitations: There was insufficient evidence in the literature to allow estimation of outcome size. We did not carry out planned Markov chain modelling to inform decisions about carrying out future evaluation because of the dearth of outcome data in the literature; low levels of data return for people with dementia in the hospital settings; lack of detected effect for most people with dementia; and questions about implementation in the research settings. Conclusions: LSW is used across different health and social care settings in England, but in different ways, not all of which reflect ‘good practice’. This large, complex study identified a wide range of challenges for future research, but also the possibility that LSW may help to improve care staff attitudes towards dementia and QoL for some people with dementia. Future work: Full evaluation of LSW as an intervention to improve staff attitudes and care is feasible with researchers based in or very close to care settings to ensure high-quality data collection. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme. Keywords

Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study

BackgroundPain and dementia are common in older people, and impaired cognitive abilities make it difficult for them to communicate their pain. Pain, if poorly managed, impairs health and well-being. Accurate pain assessment in this vulnerable group is challenging for hospital staff, but essential for appropriate management. Robust methods for identifying, assessing and managing pain are needed.Aims and objectivesTwo studies were undertaken to inform the development of a decision support tool to aid hospital staff in the recognition, assessment and management of pain. The first was a meta-review of systematic reviews of observational pain assessment instruments with three objectives: (1) to identify the tools available to assess pain in adults with dementia; (2) to identify in which settings they were used and with what patient populations; and (3) to assess their reliability, validity and clinical utility. The second was a multisite observational study in hospitals with four objectives: (1) to identify information currently used by clinicians when detecting and managing pain in patients with dementia; (2) to explore existing processes for detecting and managing pain in these patients; (3) to identify the role (actual/potential) of carers in this process; and (4) to explore the organisational context in which health professionals operate. Findings also informed development of health economics data collection forms to evaluate the implementation of a new decision support intervention in hospitals.MethodsFor the meta-review of systematic reviews, 12 databases were searched. Reviews of observational pain assessment instruments that provided psychometric data were included. Papers were quality assessed and data combined using narrative synthesis. The observational study used an ethnographic approach in 11 wards in four UK hospitals. This included non-participant observation of 31 patients, audits of patient records, semistructured interviews with 52 staff and four carers, informal conversations with staff and carers and analysis of ward documents and policies. Thematic analysis of the data was undertaken by the project team.ResultsData from eight systematic reviews including 28 tools were included in the meta-review. Most tools showed moderate to good reliability, but information about validity, feasibility and clinical utility was scarce. The observational study showed complex ward cultures and routines, with variations in time spent with patients, communication patterns and management practices. Carer involvement was rare. No pain decision support tools were observed in practice. Information about pain was elicited in different ways, at different times, by different health-care staff and recorded in separate documents. Individual staff made sense of patients’ pain by creating their own ‘overall picture’ from available information.LimitationsGrey literature and non-English-language papers were excluded from the meta-review. Sample sizes in the observational study were smaller than planned owing to poor documentation of patients’ dementia diagnoses, gatekeeping by staff and difficulties in gaining consent/assent. Many patients had no or geographically distant carers, or a spouse who was too unwell and/or reluctant to participate.ConclusionsNo single observational pain scale was clearly superior to any other. The traditional linear concept of pain being assessed, treated and reassessed by single individuals did not ‘fit’ with clinical reality. A new approach enabling effective communication among patients, carers and staff, centralised recording of pain-related information, and an extended range of pain management interventions is proposed [Pain And Dementia Decision Support (PADDS)]. This was not tested with users, but a follow-on study aims to codesign PADDS with carers and clinicians, then introduce education on staff/patient/carer communications and use of PADDS within a structured implementation plan. PADDS will need to be tested in differing ward contexts

Canonical Wnt signalling induces satellite-cell proliferation during adult skeletal muscle regeneration

Satellite cells represent the stem cell population of adult skeletal muscle. The molecular mechanisms that control the proliferation of satellite cells are not well understood. In this study, we show that in response to injury, myofibres activate Wnt ligand transcription and activate a reporter cell line that is sensitive to the canonical Wnt-signalling pathway. Activated satellite cells on isolated cultured myofibres show robust expression of activated-β-catenin (Act-β-Cat), a key downstream transcriptional coactivator of canonical Wnt signalling. We provide evidence that the Wnt family of secreted glycoproteins act on satellite cells in a ligand-specific manner. Overexpression of Wnt1, Wnt3a or Wnt5a protein causes a dramatic increase in satellite-cell proliferation. By contrast, exposure of satellite cells to Wnt4 or Wnt6 diminishes this process. Moreover, we show that the prolonged satellite-cell quiescence induced by inhibitory Wnt is reversible and exposing inhibited satellite cells to stimulatory Wnt signalling restores their proliferation rate. Stimulatory Wnt proteins induce premature satellite cell BrdU incorporation as well as nuclear translocation of Act-β-Cat. Finally, we provide evidence that the Act-β-Cat translocation observed in single fibres during in vitro culture also occurs in cases of acute and chronic skeletal muscle regeneration in rodents and humans. We propose that Wnt proteins may be key factors that regulate the rate of satellite-cell proliferation on adult muscle fibres during the wound-healing response

Fourth European stroke science workshop

Lake Eibsee, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, 16 to 18 November, 2017: The European Stroke Organisation convened >120 stroke experts from 21 countries to discuss latest results and hot topics in clinical, translational and basic stroke research. Since its inception in 2011, the European Stroke Science Workshop has become a cornerstone of European Stroke Organisation’s academic activities and a major highlight for researchers in the field. Participants include stroke researchers at all career stages and with different backgrounds, who convene for plenary lectures and discussions. The workshop was organised in seven scientific sessions focusing on the following topics: (1) acute stroke treatment and endovascular therapy; (2) small vessel disease; (3) opportunities for stroke research in the omics era; (4) vascular cognitive impairment; (5) intracerebral and subarachnoid haemorrhage; (6) alternative treatment concepts and (7) neural circuits, recovery and rehabilitation. All sessions started with a keynote lecture providing an overview on current developments, followed by focused talks on a timely topic with the most recent findings, including unpublished data. In the following, we summarise the key contents of the meeting. The program is provided in the online only Data Supplement. The workshop started with a key note lecture on how to improve the efficiency of clinical trial endpoints in stroke, which was delivered by Craig Anderson (Sydney, Australia) and set the scene for the following discussions

Additional file 4 of Mapping age- and sex-specific HIV prevalence in adults in sub-Saharan Africa, 2000–2018

Additional file 4: Supplemental results.1. README. 2. Prevalence range across districts. 3. Prevalence range between sexes. 4. Prevalence range between ages. 5. Age-specific district ranges