Cognitive rehabilitation for memory deficits after stroke

Memory problems are common after a stroke, leading to difficulties in everyday life. Memory rehabilitation aims to help retrain lost functions or to teach patients strategies to compensate for them. Although some studies have reported positive outcomes after memory rehabilitation, reviews have provided inconclusive evidence for effectiveness. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2000 and subsequently updated in 200

Development and validation of the suicidal behaviours questionnaire - autism spectrum conditions in a community sample of autistic, possibly autistic and non-autistic adults

BackgroundAutistic people and those with high autistic traits are at high risk of experiencing suicidality. Yet, there are no suicidality assessment tools developed or validated for these groups.MethodsA widely used and validated suicidality assessment tool developed for the general population (SBQ-R), was adapted using feedback from autistic adults, to create the Suicidal Behaviours Questionnaire—Autism Spectrum Conditions (SBQ-ASC). The adapted tool was refined through nine interviews, and an online survey with 251 autistic adults, to establish clarity and relevance of the items. Subsequently, 308 autistic, 113 possibly autistic, and 268 non-autistic adults completed the adapted tool online, alongside self-report measures of autistic traits (AQ), camouflaging autistic traits (CAT-Q), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (ASA-A), thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness (INQ-15), lifetime non-suicidal self-injury, and the original version of the suicidality assessment tool (SBQ-R). Analyses explored the appropriateness and measurement properties of the adapted tool between the groups.ResultsThere was evidence in support of content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, convergent and divergent validity, test–retest validity, sensitivity and specificity (for distinguishing those with or without lifetime experience of suicide attempt), and hypothesis testing of the adapted tool (SBQ-ASC) in each group. The structure of the SBQ-ASC was equivalent between autistic and possibly autistic adults, regardless of gender, or use of visual aids to help quantify abstract rating scales.LimitationsThe samples involved in the development and validation of the adapted tool were largely female, and largely diagnosed as autistic in adulthood, which limits the generalisability of results to the wider autistic population. The SBQ-ASC has been developed for use in research and is not recommended to assess risk of future suicide attempts and/or self-harm. The SBQ-ASC has been designed with and for autistic and possibly autistic adults, and is not appropriate to compare to non-autistic adults given measurement differences between these groups.ConclusionsThe SBQ-ASC is a brief self-report suicidality assessment tool, developed and validated with and for autistic adults, without co-occurring intellectual disability. The SBQ-ASC is appropriate for use in research to identify suicidal thoughts and behaviours in autistic and possibly autistic people, and model associations with risk and protective factors

Measurement Properties of the Suicidal Behaviour Questionnaire-Revised in Autistic Adults

Abstract: We explored the appropriateness and measurement properties of a suicidality assessment tool (SBQ-R) developed for the general population, in autistic adults—a high risk group for suicide. 188 autistic adults and 183 general population adults completed the tool online, and a sub-sample (n = 15) were interviewed while completing the tool. Multi-group factorial invariance analysis of the online survey data found evidence for metric non-invariance of the SBQ-R, particularly for items three (communication of suicidal intent) and four (likelihood of suicide attempt in the future). Cognitive interviews revealed that autistic adults did not interpret these items as intended by the tool designers. Results suggest autistic adults interpret key questions regarding suicide risk differently to the general population. Future research must adapt tools to better capture suicidality in autistic adults

Autism and autistic traits in those who died by suicide in England

Background: Autism and autistic traits are risk factors for suicidal behaviour. Aims: To explore the prevalence of autism (diagnosed and undiagnosed) in those who died by suicide, and identify risk factors for suicide in this group. Method: Stage 1: 372 coroners’ inquest records, covering the period 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2017 from two regions of England, were analysed for evidence that the person who died had diagnosed autism or undiagnosed possible autism (elevated autistic traits), and identified risk markers. Stage 2: 29 follow-up interviews with the next of kin of those who died gathered further evidence of autism and autistic traits using validated autism screening and diagnostic tools. Results: Stage 1: evidence of autism (10.8%) was significantly higher in those who died by suicide than the 1.1% prevalence expected in the UK general alive population (odds ratio (OR) = 11.08, 95% CI 3.92–31.31). Stage 2: 5 (17.2%) of the follow-up sample had evidence of autism identified from the coroners’ records in stage 1. We identified evidence of undiagnosed possible autism in an additional 7 (24.1%) individuals, giving a total of 12 (41.4%); significantly higher than expected in the general alive population (1.1%) (OR = 19.76, 95% CI 2.36–165.84). Characteristics of those who died were largely similar regardless of evidence of autism, with groups experiencing a comparably high number of multiple risk markers before they died. Conclusions: Elevated autistic traits are significantly over-represented in those who die by suicide

Study of user-experience of an objective test (QbTest) to aid ADHD assessment and medication management: a multi-methods approach

Background The diagnosis and monitoring of Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) typically relies on subjective reports and observations. Objective continuous performance tests (CPTs) have been incorporated into some services to support clinical decision making. However, the feasibility and acceptability of adding such a test into routine practice is unknown. The study aimed to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of adding an objective computerised test to the routine assessment and monitoring of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians (n = 10) and families (parents/young people, n = 20) who participated in a randomised controlled trial. Additionally, the same clinicians (n = 10) and families (n = 76) completed a survey assessing their experience of the QbTest. The study took place in child and adolescent mental health and community paediatric clinics across the UK. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed. Results Interviewed clinicians and families valued the QbTest for providing an objective, valid assessment of symptoms. The QbTest was noted to facilitate communication between clinicians, families and schools. However, whereas clinicians were more unanimous on the usefulness of the QbTest, survey findings showed that, although the majority of families found the test useful, less than half felt the QbTest helped them understand the clinician’s decision making around diagnosis and medication. The QbTest was seen as a potentially valuable tool to use early in the assessment process to streamline the care pathway. Although clinicians were conscious of the additional costs, these could be offset by reductions in time to diagnosis and the delivery of the test by a Healthcare Assistant. Conclusions The findings indicate the QbTest is an acceptable and feasible tool to implement in routine clinical settings. Clinicians should be mindful to discuss the QbTest results with families to enable their understanding and engagement with the process. Further findings from definitive trials are required to understand the cost/benefit; however, the findings from this study support the feasibility and acceptability of integrating QbTest in the ADHD care pathway

Cognitive rehabilitation for memory deficits after stroke (review)

Background Memory problems are a common cognitive complaint following stroke and can potentially affect ability to complete functional activities. Cognitive rehabilitation programmes either attempt to retrain lost or poor memory functions, or teach patients strategies to cope with them. Some studies have reported positive results of cognitive rehabilitation for memory problems, but the results obtained from previous systematic reviews have been less positive and they have reported inconclusive evidence. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2000 and most recently updated in 2007. Objectives To determine whether participants who have received cognitive rehabilitation for memory problems following a stroke have better outcomes than those given no treatment or a placebo control. The outcomes of interest were subjective and objective assessments of memory function, functional ability, mood, and quality of life. We considered the immediate and long-term outcomes of memory rehabilitation. Search methods We used a comprehensive electronic search strategy to identify controlled studies indexed in the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 19 May 2016) and in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL2016, Issue 5), MEDLINE (2005 to 7 March 2016), EMBASE 2005 to 7 March 2016), CINAHL (2005 to 5 February 2016), AMED (2005 to 7 March 2016), PsycINFO (2005 to 7 March 2016), and nine other databases and registries. Start dates for the electronic databases coincided with the last search for the previous review. We handsearched reference lists of primary studies meeting the inclusion criteria and review articles to identify further eligible studies. Selection criteria We selected randomised controlled trials in which cognitive rehabilitation for memory problems was compared to a control condition. We included studies where more than 75% of the participants had experienced a stroke, or if separate data were available from those with stroke in mixed aetiology studies. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, which was then confirmed through group discussion. Data collection and analysis We assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted the investigators of primary studies for further information where required. We conducted data analysis and synthesis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews ofInterventions. We performed a ’best evidence’ synthesis based on the risk of bias of the primary studies included. Where there were sufficient numbers of similar outcomes, we calculated and reported standardised mean differences (SMD) using meta-analysis. Main results We included 13 trials involving 514 participants. There was a significant effect of treatment on subjective reports of memory in the short term (standard mean difference (SMD) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.64, P = 0.01, moderate quality of evidence), but not the long term (SMD 0.31, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.64, P = 0.06, low quality of evidence). The SMD for the subjective reports of memory had small to moderate effect sizes. The results do not show any significant effect of memory rehabilitation on performance in objective memory tests, mood, functional abilities, or quality of life. No information was available on adverse events. Authors’ conclusions Participants who received cognitive rehabilitation for memory problems following a stroke reported benefits from the intervention on subjective measures of memory in the short term (i.e. the first assessment point after the intervention, which was a minimum of four weeks). This effect was not, however, observed in the longer term (i.e. the second assessment point after the intervention, which was a minimum of three months). There was, therefore, limited evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation. The evidence was limited due to the poor quality of reporting in many studies, lack of consistency in the choice of outcome measures, and small sample sizes. There is a need for more robust, well-designed, adequately powered, and better-reported trials of memory rehabilitation using common standardised outcome measures

Where do we go from here? Autism community priorities for future suicide research

No abstract available

Autism Community Priorities for Suicide Prevention: An International Society for Autism Research Policy Brief

No abstract available