Improved timber harvest techniques maintain biodiversity in tropical forests

Tropical forests are selectively logged at 20 times the rate at which they are cleared, and at least a fifth have already been disturbed in this way. In a recent pan-tropical assessment, Burivalova et al. demonstrate the importance of logging intensity as a driver of biodiversity decline in timber estates. Their analyses reveal that species richness of some taxa could decline by 50% at harvest intensities of 38 m3 ha-1. However, they did not consider the extraction techniques that lead to these intensities. Here, we conduct a complementary meta-analysis of assemblage responses to differing logging practices: conventional logging and reduced-impact logging. We show that biodiversity impacts are markedly less severe in forests that utilise reduced-impact logging, compared to those using conventional methods. While supporting the initial findings of Burivalova et al., we go on to demonstrate that best practice forestry techniques curtail the effects of timber extraction regardless of intensity. Therefore, harvest intensities are not always indicative of actual disturbance levels resulting from logging. Accordingly, forest managers and conservationists should advocate practices that offer reduced collateral damage through best practice extraction methods, such as those used in reduced-impact logging. Large-scale implementation of this approach would lead to improved conservation values in the 4 million km2 of tropical forests that are earmarked for timber extraction

Pharmacist educational interventions for patients with advanced cancer pain living in the community

Background: At the end of life, patients living in their own homes experience significantly more pain than those who die in either hospital or hospice care (Office for National Statistics, 2015). With an increasing prevalence of this, person-centred medicines optimisation is essential. Aim: To investigate the feasibility of community pharmacist medicines optimisation services for patients living with advanced cancer pain in community settings. Methods: Mixed methods were used, adopting a pragmatic stance and approach. Qualitative interviews, a systematic review and meta-analysis and a proof-of-concept study were undertaken. Results: Patients with advanced cancer pain need support with their medicines which could be provided by a pharmacist. Patients experienced a significant number of medicines related problems, even those already receiving specialist palliative care. Most problems were addressed by pharmacist advice with the remainder being referred for additional prescribing. Care for patients with cancer pain is currently not person-centred and the current medicines optimisation model is unsuitable for this patient group. An enhanced model of medicines optimisation is therefore presented for patients with advanced cancer and this model can be amended and adopted for other patient groups. Conclusions: An enhanced medicines optimisation model (MOCAP) has been created to inform person-centred medicines optimisation for patients with advanced cancer pain. Feasibility and acceptability were also confirmed and it can be adapted for further clinical use. This model contributes to the goals of the NHS agenda of choice and control of care as proposed in the NHS Long Term Plan (NHS, 2019b)

Literacy practices in the learning careers of childcare students

This paper draws from the Literacies for Learning in Further Education research project, funded through the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. Drawing on the empirical study of literacy practices in eight Childcare courses in Scotland and England, we seek to demonstrate that, integral to the learning careers of students are literacy careers through which their learning is mediated. In the process, by drawing upon the lens of literacy, we also challenge some of the common sense understandings of learning in childcare. In particular we suggest that the literacy practices of lower level courses can be more diverse than those of higher level courses, producing confusing literacy careers for the students involved. We also point to the complexity of the literacy careers in childcare, given that students are required to mediate different aspects of their experience through literacy. In particular there are the mediations made possible by the use of information technology and those entailed in relating work placements to classroom practice. We argue that students on vocational courses have complex literacy careers and that a literacies approach to learning helps to reveal this complexity

REMCARE : pragmatic multi-centre randomised trial of reminiscence groups for people with dementia and their family carers : effectiveness and economic analysis

Background Joint reminiscence groups, involving people with dementia and family carers together, are popular, but the evidence-base is limited. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups as compared to usual care. Methods This multi-centre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial had two parallel arms: intervention group and usual-care control group. A restricted dynamic method of randomisation was used, with an overall allocation ratio of 1:1, restricted to ensure viable sized intervention groups. Assessments, blind to treatment allocation, were carried out at baseline, three months and ten months (primary end-point), usually in the person's home. Participants were recruited in eight centres, mainly through NHS Memory Clinics and NHS community mental health teams. Included participants were community resident people with mild to moderate dementia (DSM-IV), who had a relative or other care-giver in regular contact, to act as informant and willing and able to participate in intervention. 71% carers were spouses. 488 people with dementia (mean age 77.5) were randomised: 268 intervention, 220 control; 350 dyads completed the study (206 intervention, 144 control). The intervention evaluated was joint reminiscence groups (with up to 12 dyads) weekly for twelve weeks; monthly maintenance sessions for further seven months. Sessions followed a published treatment manual and were held in a variety of community settings. Two trained facilitators in each centre were supported by volunteers. Primary outcome measures were self-reported quality of life for the person with dementia (QoL-AD), psychological distress for the carer (General Health Questionnaire, GHQ-28). Secondary outcome measures included: autobiographical memory and activities of daily living for the person with dementia; carer stress for the carer; mood, relationship quality and service use and costs for both. Results The intention to treat analysis (ANCOVA) identified no differences in outcome between the intervention and control conditions on primary or secondary outcomes (self-reported QoL-AD mean difference 0.07 (-1.21 to 1.35), F = 0.48, p = 0.53). Carers of people with dementia allocated to the reminiscence intervention reported a significant increase in anxiety on a General Health Questionnaire-28 sub-scale at the ten month end-point (mean difference 1.25 (0.25 to 2.26), F = 8.28, p = 0.04). Compliance analyses suggested improved autobiographical memory, quality of life and relationship quality for people with dementia attending more reminiscence sessions, however carers attending more groups showed increased care-giving stress. Economic analyses from a public sector perspective indicated that joint reminiscence groups are unlikely to be cost-effective. There were no significant adverse effects attributed to the intervention. Potential limitations of the study include less than optimal attendance at the group sessions—only 57% of participants attended at least half of the intervention sessions over the 10 month period, and a higher rate of study withdrawal in the control group. Conclusions This trial does not support the clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups. Possible beneficial effects for people with dementia who attend sessions as planned are offset by raised anxiety and stress in their carers. The reasons for these discrepant outcomes need to be explored further, and may necessitate reappraisal of the movement towards joint interventions

How do we avoid the ‘ever decreasing circles syndrome’ in service improvement?

N

Evaluating recruitment methods of patients with advanced cancer: a pragmatic opportunistic comparison

YesBackground: Recruitment of patients with advanced cancer into studies is challenging. Objective: To evaluate recruitment methods in a study of pharmacist-led cancer pain medicines consultations and produce recommendations for future studies. Method: Two methods of recruitment were employed: 1) community-based (general practitioner computer search, identification by general practitioner, community pharmacist or district nurse and hospital outpatient list search), and 2) hospice-based (in and outpatient list search). Patients identified in method 1 were invited by post and in method 2 were invited face-to-face. Information was designed in collaboration with patients and carers. Results: 128 patients were identified (85 from the community and 43 from the hospice), 47 met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three agreed to take part and 19 completed the study, 17 of whom were already under specialist palliative care. Recruitment rates were 7% for community-based methods and 40% for hospice. The recruitment methods differed in intensity of resource use. Recruitment via letter and a lack of engagement by healthcare professionals were found to be barriers. Facilitators included the researcher having personal involvement in recruitment. Conclusion: The overall recruitment rate was in line with other studies for this patient cohort. Attempts to identify and engage patients through community-based postal contact were less effective than where personal contact with patients was both possible and occurred. Methods were less successful at recruiting patients who were not already engaged with hospice services.Programme Grants for Applied Research. Grant Number: RP-PG-0610-1011

Can a mindfulness-informed intervention reduce aggressive behaviour in people with intellectual disabilities?:Protocol for a feasibility study

BACKGROUND: Approximately 10–20 % of adults with intellectual disabilities engage in challenging behaviours such as aggression, destructiveness, and self-injury, which are often accompanied by feelings of anger. The inability to manage anger can reduce quality of life. For example, aggression is a strong predictor of out-of-area placements and is a risk variable for abuse. Recent research suggests that mindfulness-based therapies (specifically, Singh’s Soles of the Feet meditation) can help people with intellectual disabilities manage angry emotions, with resultant reductions in challenging behaviour. However, previous research has been single-case design studies, and no group studies have been published with people with intellectual disabilities and aggressive behaviour. METHODS/DESIGN: For this feasibility study, a UK protocol will be developed for use by health professionals within National Health Service (NHS) Intellectual Disability (ID) teams, based upon Singh’s Soles of the Feet manual. Twenty adults with intellectual disabilities and identified problems with anger control will be recruited and six sessions will be delivered by a trained ID clinician. The study will monitor participant’s aggressive behaviour, health-related quality of life, anxiety, depression, and use of support services (medication, hospital appointments etc.). These will be measured at three time points: (1) Baseline (within 2 weeks prior to the first session of the intervention), (2) 2 months post-baseline, and (3) 6 months post-baseline. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with participants, their carers, and the therapists who delivered the intervention. In order to help design an economic evaluation alongside a future full trial, we will cost the intervention and test the acceptability and validity of health economics measures to record resource use and health-related quality of life outcomes. DISCUSSION: The data from this study will inform the feasibility of the project protocol and intervention, which will help develop future research and to determine whether a larger, randomised controlled trial with concurrent economic evaluation is feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UKCERN: 16743