Randomised controlled trials of occupational therapy interventions for adults with a mental health condition or dementia: A systematic review of study methods and outcome measurement

Introduction High-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions are essential for determining whether an intervention is effective. However, many RCTs that examine the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions for adults with mental health conditions or dementia have methodological limitations that reduce confidence in their results. We aimed to systematically review the quality of methods and outcome measures used in RCTs of occupational therapy interventions for adults with a mental health condition or dementia. This will inform future research in this area and enable practitioners to appraise the evidence when selecting interventions. Method We searched peer-reviewed English language publications from 2000 to 2021 in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ASSIA, CINAHL and e-thos, and hand-searched 12 journals. We included papers that met pre-specified inclusion criteria, appraised quality using a validated tool and extracted data. We conducted a narrative synthesis. Results Of thirty-three included papers, 26 reported full or pilot RCTs, two reported secondary analysis or secondary outcomes of included RCTs, three reported process evaluations and two reported economic evaluations. Methodological limitations were found in many studies and outcome measures varied in their psychometric quality. Conclusion High-quality RCTs of occupational therapy interventions are needed for adults with mental health conditions and dementia. Researchers should follow international guidelines for rigorously developing and evaluating interventions and reporting studies. Practitioners should critically apply RCT evidence when selecting occupational therapy interventions.Output Status: Forthcoming/Available Onlin

The experience of family carers attending a joint reminiscence group with people with dementia: A thematic analysis

Reminiscence therapy has the potential to improve quality of life for people with dementia. In recent years reminiscence groups have extended to include family members, but carers' experience of attending joint sessions is undocumented. This qualitative study explored the experience of 18 family carers attending 'Remembering Yesterday Caring Today' groups. Semi-structured interviews were transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis. Five themes were identified: experiencing carer support; shared experience; expectations (met and unmet), carer perspectives of the person with dementia's experience; and learning and comparing. Family carers' experiences varied, with some experiencing the intervention as entirely positive whereas others had more mixed feelings. Negative aspects included the lack of respite from their relative, the lack of emphasis on their own needs, and experiencing additional stress and guilt through not being able to implement newly acquired skills. These findings may explain the failure of a recent trial of joint reminiscence groups to replicate previous findings of positive benefit. More targeted research within subgroups of carers is required to justify the continued use of joint reminiscence groups in dementia care

Positive psychology outcome measures for family caregivers of people living with dementia: a systematic review

Background: Family caregivers of people living with dementia can have both positive and negative experiences of caregiving. Despite this, existing outcome measures predominately focus on negative aspects of caregiving such as burden and depression. This review aimed to evaluate the development and psychometric properties of existing positive psychology measures for family caregivers of people living with dementia to determine their potential utility in research and practice. Method: A systematic review of positive psychology outcome measures for family caregivers of people with dementia was conducted. The databases searched were as follows: PsychINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed. Scale development papers were subject to a quality assessment to appraise psychometric properties. Results: Twelve positive outcome measures and six validation papers of these scales were identified. The emerging constructs of self-efficacy, spirituality, resilience, rewards, gain, and meaning are in line with positive psychology theory. Conclusions: There are some robust positive measures in existence for family caregivers of people living with dementia. However, lack of reporting of the psychometric properties hindered the quality assessment of some outcome measures identified in this review. Future research should aim to include positive outcome measures in interventional research to facilitate a greater understanding of the positive aspects of caregiving and how these contribute to well-being

Impact of person-centred care training and person-centred activities on quality of life, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes: a cluster-randomised controlled trial

Background Agitation is a common, challenging symptom affecting large numbers of people with dementia and impacting on quality of life (QoL). There is an urgent need for evidence-based, cost-effective psychosocial interventions to improve these outcomes, particularly in the absence of safe, effective pharmacological therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a person-centred care and psychosocial intervention incorporating an antipsychotic review, WHELD, on QoL, agitation, and antipsychotic use in people with dementia living in nursing homes, and to determine its cost. Methods and findings This was a randomised controlled cluster trial conducted between 1 January 2013 and 30 September 2015 that compared the WHELD intervention with treatment as usual (TAU) in people with dementia living in 69 UK nursing homes, using an intention to treat analysis. All nursing homes allocated to the intervention received staff training in person-centred care and social interaction and education regarding antipsychotic medications (antipsychotic review), followed by ongoing delivery through a care staff champion model. The primary outcome measure was QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy). Secondary outcomes were agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory [CMAI]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory–Nursing Home Version [NPI-NH]), antipsychotic use, global deterioration (Clinical Dementia Rating), mood (Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia), unmet needs (Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly), mortality, quality of interactions (Quality of Interactions Scale [QUIS]), pain (Abbey Pain Scale), and cost. Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. In all, 847 people were randomised to WHELD or TAU, of whom 553 completed the 9-month randomised controlled trial. The intervention conferred a statistically significant improvement in QoL (DEMQOL-Proxy Z score 2.82, p = 0.0042; mean difference 2.54, SEM 0.88; 95% CI 0.81, 4.28; Cohen’s D effect size 0.24). There were also statistically significant benefits in agitation (CMAI Z score 2.68, p = 0.0076; mean difference 4.27, SEM 1.59; 95% CI −7.39, −1.15; Cohen’s D 0.23) and overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPI-NH Z score 3.52, p < 0.001; mean difference 4.55, SEM 1.28; 95% CI −7.07,−2.02; Cohen’s D 0.30). Benefits were greatest in people with moderately severe dementia. There was a statistically significant benefit in positive care interactions as measured by QUIS (19.7% increase, SEM 8.94; 95% CI 2.12, 37.16, p = 0.03; Cohen’s D 0.55). There were no statistically significant differences between WHELD and TAU for the other outcomes. A sensitivity analysis using a pre-specified imputation model confirmed statistically significant benefits in DEMQOL-Proxy, CMAI, and NPI-NH outcomes with the WHELD intervention. Antipsychotic drug use was at a low stable level in both treatment groups, and the intervention did not reduce use. The WHELD intervention reduced cost compared to TAU, and the benefits achieved were therefore associated with a cost saving. The main limitation was that antipsychotic review was based on augmenting processes within care homes to trigger medical review and did not in this study involve proactive primary care education. An additional limitation was the inherent challenge of assessing QoL in this patient group. Conclusions These findings suggest that the WHELD intervention confers benefits in terms of QoL, agitation, and neuropsychiatric symptoms, albeit with relatively small effect sizes, as well as cost saving in a model that can readily be implemented in nursing homes. Future work should consider how to facilitate sustainability of the intervention in this setting

Community Occupational Therapy for people with dementia and family carers (COTiD-UK) versus treatment as usual (Valuing Active Life in Dementia [VALID]) study: A single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate the clinical effectiveness of Community Occupational Therapy for people with dementia and family carers-UK version (Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia-UK version [COTiD-UK]) relative to treatment as usual (TAU). We hypothesised that COTiD-UK would improve the ability of people with dementia to perform activities of daily living (ADL), and family carers' sense of competence, compared with TAU. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The study design was a multicentre, 2-arm, parallel-group, assessor-masked, individually randomised controlled trial (RCT) with internal pilot. It was conducted in 15 sites across England from September 2014 to January 2018. People with a diagnosis of mild to moderate dementia living in their own home were recruited in pairs with a family carer who provided domestic or personal support for at least 4 hours per week. Pairs were randomised to either receive COTiD-UK, which comprised 10 hours of occupational therapy delivered over 10 weeks in the person with dementia's home or TAU, which comprised the usual local service provision that may or may not include standard occupational therapy. The primary outcome was the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale (BADLS) score at 26 weeks. Secondary outcomes for the person with dementia included the following: the BADLS scores at 52 and 78 weeks, cognition, quality of life, and mood; and for the family carer: sense of competence and mood; plus the number of social contacts and leisure activities for both partners. Participants were analysed by treatment allocated. A total of 468 pairs were recruited: people with dementia ranged from 55 to 97 years with a mean age of 78.6 and family carers ranged from 29 to 94 with a mean of 69.1 years. Of the people with dementia, 74.8% were married and 19.2% lived alone. Of the family carers, 72.6% were spouses, and 22.2% were adult children. On randomisation, 249 pairs were assigned to COTiD-UK (62% people with dementia and 23% carers were male) and 219 to TAU (52% people with dementia and 32% carers were male). At the 26 weeks follow-up, data were available for 364 pairs (77.8%). The BADLS score at 26 weeks did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted mean difference estimate 0.35, 95% CI -0.81 to 1.51; p = 0.55). Secondary outcomes did not differ between the groups. In total, 91% of the activity-based goals set by the pairs taking part in the COTiD-UK intervention were fully or partially achieved by the final COTiD-UK session. Study limitations include the following: Intervention fidelity was moderate but varied across and within sites, and the reliance on primarily proxy data focused on measuring the level of functional or cognitive impairment which may not truly reflect the actual performance and views of the person living with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Providing community occupational therapy as delivered in this study did not improve ADL performance, cognition, quality of life, or mood in people with dementia nor sense of competence or mood in family carers. Future research should consider measuring person-centred outcomes that are more meaningful and closely aligned to participants' priorities, such as goal achievement or the quantity and quality of activity engagement and participation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10748953

Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia intervention for people with mild to moderate dementia and their family carers in the UK: the VALID research programme including RCT

BackgroundPeople with dementia find it increasingly difficult to carry out daily activities (activities of daily living), and may require increasing support from family carers. Researchers in the Netherlands developed the Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia intervention, which was delivered in 10 1-hour sessions over 5 weeks to people with dementia and their family carers at home. Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia was found to be clinically effective and cost-effective.ObjectivesTranslate and adapt Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia to develop the Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version intervention and training programme and to optimise its suitability for use within the UK. To estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version for people with mild to moderate dementia and their family carers compared with treatment as usual.DesignThe development phase used mixed methods to develop Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version: translation, expert review, and adaptation of the manual and training materials; training occupational therapists; focus groups and interviews, including occupational therapists, managers, people with dementia and family carers; consensus conference; and an online survey of occupational therapists to scope UK practice. A multicentre, two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind individually randomised pragmatic trial was preceded by an internal pilot. Pairs were randomly allocated between Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version and treatment as usual. A cost–utility analysis, fidelity study and qualitative study were also completed.SettingCommunity services for people with dementia across England.ParticipantsPeople with mild to moderate dementia recruited in pairs with a family carer/supporter.InterventionsCommunity Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version is an activity-based, goal-setting approach for people with dementia and family carers, and is delivered at home by an occupational therapist for 10 hours over 10 weeks. Treatment as usual comprised the usual local service provision, which may or may not include standard occupational therapy.Main outcome measuresData were collected through interviews conducted in person with dyads at baseline and at 12 and 26 weeks post randomisation, and then over the telephone with a reduced sample of just carers at 52 and 78 weeks post randomisation. The primary outcome was the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale at 26 weeks. The secondary outcomes were as follows: person with dementia – cognition, activities of daily living, quality of life and mood; carer – sense of competence, quality of life and mood; all participants – social contacts, leisure activities and serious adverse events.ResultsThe Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia manual and training materials were translated and reviewed. In total, 44 occupational therapists were trained and delivered Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia to 130 pairs. A total of 197 occupational therapists completed the survey, of whom 138 also provided qualitative data. In total, 31 people attended the consensus conference. Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version has more flexibility than Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia in terms of content and delivery; for example, occupational therapists can use the wider range of assessment tools that are already in regular use within UK practice and the time span for delivery is 10 weeks to better meet the needs of pairs and be more feasible for services to deliver. In total, 31 occupational therapists provided Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version within the randomised controlled trial. A total of 468 pairs were randomised (249 pairs to Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version, 219 pairs to treatment as usual). People with dementia ranged in age from 55 to 97 years (mean 78.6 years), and family carers ranged in age from 29 to 94 years (mean 69.1 years). The majority of those with dementia (74.8%) were married; 19.2% lived alone. Most family carers (72.6%) were spouses but 22.2% were adult children. At 26 weeks, 406 (87%) pairs remained in the trial, and the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale total score did not differ at the 5% level when comparing groups (adjusted mean difference estimate 0.35, 95% confidence interval –0.81 to 1.51; p = 0.55). The adjusted (for baseline Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale total score and randomised group) intracluster correlation coefficient estimate at week 26 was 0.043. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. At 52 and 78 weeks, there were no differences between the two groups in Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale total score and secondary outcomes. The probability that Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version is cost-effective at a threshold of willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life-year of £20,000 is 0.02%. In the qualitative interviews, participants reported positive benefits and outcomes. Of the 249 pairs allocated to Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version, 227 reached the goal-setting phase, and 838 of the 920 goals set (90.8%) were fully or partially achieved.LimitationsThe development phase took longer than estimated because of translation time and organisational delays in delivering the intervention. Recruitment to the randomised controlled trial took longer than expected. Fidelity overall was moderate, with variation across sites and therapists. It is possible that Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version did not work well in the UK service model in which usual care differs from that in the Netherlands.ConclusionsThis programme used a rigorous process to develop Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version but found no statistical evidence of clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness compared with usual care. Qualitative findings provided positive examples of how Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia - the UK version had enabled people to live well with dementia

Taking part in the community occupational therapy in dementia UK intervention from the perspective of people with dementia, family carers and occupational therapists: A qualitative study

Aim: Community Occupational Therapy in Dementia (COTiD-UK) is a manualised intervention delivered to the person with dementia and their identified family carer primarily in their own home. The focus is on enabling both the person with dementia and their family carer to engage in personally meaningful activities. This qualitative study examines the experiences of people with mild to moderate dementia, their family carers and occupational therapists, of taking part in the COTiD-UK intervention. Method: A purposive sample of 22 pairs of people with dementia and a family carer and seven occupational therapists took part in semi-structured interviews that were audio recorded, transcribed and inductively analysed using thematic analysis. Findings: Themes from the occupational therapist interviews relate to the COTiD-UK intervention philosophy and content, aspects of delivering it in practice and thinking ahead to it becoming usual practice. Themes from the pair interviews relate to the focus of COTiD-UK sessions on meaningful occupation and working together and a sense of being able to plan to live well with dementia in the short- and longer-term as a result of the intervention. Conclusion: This person-centred occupation-focussed intervention was highly valued by people with dementia and their family carers and the occupational therapists delivering it