National Certification Programme for Cardiovascular Rehabilitation – aiming to improve practice

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) continues to be a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the United Kingdom.1 It is also a leading contributor to health inequalities; reducing excess deaths from coronary heart disease in the most deprived fifth of areas would have the greatest impact on the life expectancy gap in England.2 Cardiovascular rehabilitation (CR) is a multifaceted secondary prevention programme which aims to improve outcomes for people with CVD, with strong evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness,3 and is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).4,5 The evidence-based service standards for delivery6,7 include centre or home-based options (equally effective8), by a multidisciplinary team supported by community services (such as smoking cessation). The British Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation (BACPR) recommends that a CR programme should be based on seven components which have health behaviour change and education at their core (Figure 1). Quality assurance of CR delivery is monitored, assessed and findings published, annually, by the British Heart Foundation–funded National Audit of Cardiac Rehabilitation (NACR) based at the University of York. The NACR collects both programme and patient-level data from a majority of CR programmes across most of the United Kingdom (with the exception of Scotland). To ensure data security and quality, NACR data are hosted by NHS Digital

Olaparib for Maintenance Treatment of BRCA 1 or 2 Mutated, Relapsed, Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian, Fallopian Tube and Peritoneal Cancer in People Whose Relapsed Disease has Responded to Platinum-Based Chemotherapy: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its Single Technology Appraisal process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of olaparib (AstraZeneca) to submit evidence on the clinical and cost effectiveness of olaparib for the maintenance treatment of BRCA1/2 mutated (BRCAm), platinum-sensitive relapsed (PSR) ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancer in people whose relapsed disease has responded to platinum-based chemotherapy. The Evidence Review Group (ERG) produced a critical review of the evidence contained within the company’s submission (CS) to NICE. The clinical evidence related to one phase II, double-blind randomised controlled trial that recruited 265 patients with PSR serous ovarian cancer (OC) regardless of BRCAm status. Patients received olaparib 400 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) or matched placebo. In the whole population, the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) was met (hazard ratio [HR] 0.35; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.25–0.49, p < 0.01) for olaparib versus placebo. The BRCAm subgroup analysis (added after the study commenced but 1 month before the primary analysis was undertaken) reported an HR for PFS of 0.18 (95 % CI 0.10–0.31, p < 0.0001) for olaparib versus placebo, though interaction tests appeared inconclusive. Overall survival was not statistically significant in the whole group (HR 0.88; 95 % CI 0.64–1.21; p = 0.44) or the BRCAm subgroup (0.73; 95 % CI 0.45–1.17; p = 0.19), though treatment switching may have confounded results. The exclusion of data from sites allowing crossover resulted in an HR for overall survival (OS) of 0.52 (95 % CI 0.28–0.97, p = 0.039) in the BRCAm group. Health-related quality-of-life measures were not significantly different between groups. All post hoc exploratory outcomes (time to treatment discontinuation/death, time to first subsequent therapy/death, and time to second subsequent therapy/death) were statistically significantly better in the olaparib arm in the whole population and the BRCAm subgroup analyses. Adverse events were more frequent for olaparib but were largely minor or manageable. The company’s semi-Markov model assessed the cost effectiveness of olaparib versus routine surveillance in patients with BRCAm PSR OC from a National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective over a lifetime horizon. The model suggests that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for olaparib versus routine surveillance is expected to be approximately £49,146 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ERG did not consider the company’s cost-effectiveness estimates to be credible. Additional ERG analyses suggested that the ICER is likely to be more than £92,214 per QALY gained. Additional analyses provided by the company in patients who received three or more lines of chemotherapy suggested a more favourable cost-effectiveness profile for olaparib. The NICE Appraisal Committee recommended olaparib for this subgroup provided the cost of olaparib for people who continue to receive treatment after 15 months will be met by the company

Non‐pharmacological interventions for challenging behaviours of adults with intellectual disabilities: A meta‐analysis

Background  Non-pharmacological interventions are recommended for the treatment of challenging behaviours in individuals with intellectual disabilities by clinical guidelines. However, evidence for their effectiveness is ambiguous. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to update the existing evidence, to investigate long-term outcome, and to examine whether intervention type, delivery mode, and study design were associated with differences in effectiveness. Method An electronic search was conducted using the databases Medline, Eric, PsychINFO and Cinahl. Studies with experimental or quasi-experimental designs were included. We performed an overall random-effect meta-analysis and subgroup analyses. Results We found a significant moderate overall effect of non-pharmacological interventions on challenging behaviours (d = 0.573, 95% CI [0.352-0.795]), and this effect appears to be longlasting. Interventions combining mindfulness and behavioural techniques showed to be more effective than other interventions. However, this result should be interpreted with care due to possible overestimation of the subgroup analysis. No differences in effectiveness were found across assessment times, delivery modes or study designs. Conclusions Non-pharmacological interventions appear to be moderately effective on the short and long term in reducing challenging behaviours in adults with intellectual disabilities

The use of an implementation science theoretical framework to inform the development of a region wide Positive Behavioural Support Workforce Development approach

Background: Concern about the poor care of some people with an intellectual disability has highlighted the need for systemic, large scale interventions to develop a skilled workforce. Method: We outline how an implementation science theoretical model informed the development of a region wide Positive Behavioural Support (PBS) Workforce Development (WFD) approach. Results: We provide an example of the application of the model in practice and demonstrate how this enabled us to: understand the competencies and development needs of the workforce; engage effectively with stakeholders; and develop, deliver, and evaluate a PBS WFD model. Conclusion: The application of the model helped us to identify, prioritise, and address the multiple and complex factors that were relevant to the implementation of the PBS WFD approach

"They're Really PD Today": An Exploration of Mental Health Nursing Students' Perceptions of Developing a Therapeutic Relationship With Patients With a Diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder

The therapeutic relationship is of particular importance when working with patients with antisocial personality disorder, but despite this, there is a paucity of literature exploring student nurses’ perceptions of developing a therapeutic relationship with such patients. Hence, this qualitative study explored the perceptions of second-year mental health nursing students of developing a therapeutic relationship with this patient group. Student nurses from a University in the Northwest of England participated in two focus groups, to compare the perceptions of a group of student nurses who had experience in secure settings (forensic hospital) with those who had not. Four key themes emerged: diagnosis, safety, engagement, and finally environmental influences. Both groups commented on looking beyond the diagnosis and seeing the person. The student nurses cited other staff in their clinical placement areas as hugely influential in terms of the development of their perceptions of patients with antisocial personality disorder and how to relate to them

Estimating a preference-based single index measuring the quality of life impact of self-management for diabetes

Objective. Self-management is becoming increasingly important in diabetes but is neglected in conventional preference-based measures. The objective of this paper was to generate health state utility values for a novel classification system measuring the quality-of-life impact of self-management for diabetes, which can be used to generate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Methods. A large online survey was conducted using a discrete choice experiment (DCE), with duration as an additional attribute, on members of the UK general population (n = 1,493) to elicit values for health (social limitations, mood, vitality, hypoglycaemia) and non-health (stress, hassle, control, support) aspects of self-management in diabetes. The data were modelled using a conditional fixed-effects logit model and utility estimates were anchored on the one to zero (full health to dead) scale. Results. The model produced significant and consistent coefficients, with one logical inconsistency and 3 insignificant coefficients for the milder levels of some attributes. The anchored utilities ranged from 1 for the best state to −0.029 for the worst state (meaning worse than dead) defined by the classification system. Conclusion. The results presented here can potentially be used to generate utility values capturing the day to day impact of interventions in diabetes on both health and self-management. These utility values can potentially be used to generate QALYs for economic models of the cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes

Developing 'high impact' guideline-based quality indicators for UK primary care: a multi-stage consensus process

Background Quality indicators (QIs) are an important tool for improving clinical practice and are increasingly being developed from evidence-based guideline recommendations. We aimed to identify, select and apply guideline recommendations to develop a set of QIs to measure the implementation of evidence-based practice using routinely recorded clinical data in United Kingdom (UK) primary care. Methods We reviewed existing national clinical guidelines and QIs and used a four-stage consensus development process to derive a set of ‘high impact’ QIs relevant to primary care based upon explicit prioritisation criteria. We then field tested the QIs using remotely extracted, anonymised patient records from 89 randomly sampled primary care practices in the Yorkshire region of England. Results Out of 2365 recommendations and QIs originally reviewed, we derived a set of 18 QIs (5 single, 13 composites – comprising 2-9 individual recommendations) for field testing. QIs predominantly addressed chronic disease management, in particular diabetes, cardiovascular and renal disease, and included both processes and outcomes of care. Field testing proved to be critical for further refinement and final selection. Conclusions We have demonstrated a rigorous and transparent methodology to develop a set of high impact, evidence-based QIs for primary care from clinical guideline recommendations. While the development process was successful in developing a limited set of QIs, it remains challenging to derive robust new QIs from clinical guidelines in the absence of established systems for routine, structured recording of clinical care

Experiences of older people with dementia: homecare enablement to support transitions in daily life at home

Introduction: The majority of people with dementia live at home. Homecare enablement services are considered an important short-term intervention, using a person-centred approach. Little is known about people with dementia’s perspectives of theservices. This study aimed to explore the users’ experiences. Method: Following ethical approval, participants who had recently used homecare enablement services were invited to participate in two semi-structured interviews through homecare enablement services’ teams within a local authority. Interviews focused on people with dementia’s narratives of the impact of homecare enablement services on their daily functioning. Overall findings were taken back to the participants at the follow-up interviews for member checking. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using grounded theory. Findings: Sixteen participants with dementia and eight carers took part. Three key themes were revealed: the meaning of enablement in later life; homecare enablement services as instrumental to support transitions in daily life; and enablement through activity engagement in everyday life. Conclusion: The scope of homecare enablement services is evolving to meet the requirements of the Care Act of 2014 and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Services’ improvements and redesign must consider the viewpoints of people with dementia