Status Update and Interim Results from the Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial-2 (ACST-2)

Objectives: ACST-2 is currently the largest trial ever conducted to compare carotid artery stenting (CAS) with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis requiring revascularization. Methods: Patients are entered into ACST-2 when revascularization is felt to be clearly indicated, when CEA and CAS are both possible, but where there is substantial uncertainty as to which is most appropriate. Trial surgeons and interventionalists are expected to use their usual techniques and CE-approved devices. We report baseline characteristics and blinded combined interim results for 30-day mortality and major morbidity for 986 patients in the ongoing trial up to September 2012. Results: A total of 986 patients (687 men, 299 women), mean age 68.7 years (SD ± 8.1) were randomized equally to CEA or CAS. Most (96%) had ipsilateral stenosis of 70-99% (median 80%) with contralateral stenoses of 50-99% in 30% and contralateral occlusion in 8%. Patients were on appropriate medical treatment. For 691 patients undergoing intervention with at least 1-month follow-up and Rankin scoring at 6 months for any stroke, the overall serious cardiovascular event rate of periprocedural (within 30 days) disabling stroke, fatal myocardial infarction, and death at 30 days was 1.0%. Conclusions: Early ACST-2 results suggest contemporary carotid intervention for asymptomatic stenosis has a low risk of serious morbidity and mortality, on par with other recent trials. The trial continues to recruit, to monitor periprocedural events and all types of stroke, aiming to randomize up to 5,000 patients to determine any differential outcomes between interventions. Clinical trial: ISRCTN21144362. © 2013 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Support for family carers of children and young people with developmental disabilities and challenging behaviour: What stops it being helpful?

Background: Many family carers find the support they receive in respect of their child’s challenging behaviour unhelpful. This study sought to identify carer perceptions of the ways in which support is unhelpful and how it could be more helpful. Methods: Thirteen mothers, caring for a child with intellectual disability and challenging behaviour, were interviewed. Parental perceptions and concerns regarding support received were investigated. Transcribed interviews were analysed using interpretive phenomenological analysis. Results: Parents reported problems with generic disability services including accessing good services, obtaining relevant information, working relationships with professionals, and issues with respite provision. Concerns were also expressed about challenging behaviour specific provision including ineffective strategies being suggested, an apparent lack of expertise, insufficient input and their child’s exclusion from services. Conclusions: More preventative approaches, more widespread adoption of effective behaviour management and improved partnership between professionals and families appear needed. Increasing family support may be ineffective if not accompanied by greater insight into the factors related to effectiveness and recognition of the role of informal support