To evaluate postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing colon surgery who receive perioperative prophylaxis with ertapenem compared to other antibiotic regimens.

Multicenter retrospective cohort study among adults undergoing colon surgery in seven hospitals across three health systems from 1/1/2010 to 9/1/2015.

Generalized linear mixed logistic regression models were applied to assess differential odds of select outcomes among patients who received perioperative prophylaxis with ertapenem compared to other regimens. Postoperative outcomes of interest included surgical site infection (SSI), Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and clinical culture positivity for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteraciae (CRE). Inverse probability weights were applied to account for differing covariate distributions across ertapenem and non-ertapenem groups.

A total of 2,109 patients were included for analysis. The odds of postoperative SSI was 1.56 times higher among individuals who received ertapenem than among those receiving other perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis regimens in our cohort (46 [3.5%] vs 20 [2.5%]; IPW-weighted OR 1.56, [95% CI, 1.08–2.26], P = .02). No statistically significant differences in odds of postoperative CDI (24 [1.8%] vs 16 [2.0%]; IPW-weighted OR 1.07 [95% CI, .68–1.68], P = .78) were observed between patients who received ertapenem prophylaxis compared to other regimens. Clinical CRE culture positivity was rare in both groups (.2%–.5%) and did not differ statistically.

Ertapenem use for perioperative prophylaxis was associated with increased odds of SSI among patients undergoing colon surgery in our study population, though no differences in CDI or clinical CRE culture positivity were identified. Further study and replication of these findings are needed.

Only a third of people with dementia receive a diagnosis and post-diagnostic support. An eight session, manualised, modular post-diagnostic support system (New Interventions for Independence in Dementia Study (NIDUS) – family), delivered remotely by non-clinical facilitators is the first scalable intervention to improve personalised goal attainment for people with dementia. It could significantly improve care quality.

We aimed to explore system readiness for NIDUS–family, a scalable, personalised post-diagnostic support intervention.

We conducted semi-structured interviews with professionals from dementia care services; the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided interviews and their thematic analysis.

From 2022 to 2023, we interviewed a purposive sample of 21 professionals from seven English National Health Service, health and social care services. We identified three themes: (1) potential value of a personalised intervention – interviewees perceived the capacity for choice and supporting person-centred care as relative advantages over existing resources; (2) compatibility and deliverability with existing systems – the NIDUS–family intervention model was perceived as compatible with service goals and clients’ needs, but current service infrastructures, financing and commissioning briefs constraining resources to those at greatest need were seen as barriers to providing universal, post-diagnostic care; (3) fit with current workforce skills – the intervention model aligned well with staff development plans; delivery by non-clinically qualified staff was considered an advantage over current care options.

Translating evidence for scalable and effective post-diagnostic care into practice will support national policies to widen access to support and upskill support workers, but requires a greater focus on prevention in commissioning briefs and resource planning.

The START (STrAtegies for RelaTives) intervention reduced depressive and anxiety symptoms of family carers of relatives with dementia at home over 2 years and was cost-effective.

To assess the clinical effectiveness over 6 years and the impact on costs and care home admission.

We conducted a randomised, parallel group, superiority trial recruiting from 4 November 2009 to 8 June 2011 with 6-year follow-up (trial registration: ISCTRN 70017938). A total of 260 self-identified family carers of people with dementia were randomised 2:1 to START, an eight-session manual-based coping intervention delivered by supervised psychology graduates, or to treatment as usual (TAU). The primary outcome was affective symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, total score (HADS-T)). Secondary outcomes included patient and carer service costs and care home admission.

In total, 222 (85.4%) of 173 carers randomised to START and 87 to TAU were included in the 6-year clinical efficacy analysis. Over 72 months, compared with TAU, the intervention group had improved scores on HADS-T (adjusted mean difference −2.00 points, 95% CI −3.38 to −0.63). Patient-related costs (START versus TAU, respectively: median £5759 v. £16 964 in the final year; P = 0.07) and carer-related costs (median £377 v. £274 in the final year) were not significantly different between groups nor were group differences in time until care home (intensity ratio START:TAU was 0.88, 95% CI 0.58–1.35).

START is clinically effective and this effect lasts for 6 years without increasing costs. This is the first intervention with such a long-term clinical and possible economic benefit and has potential to make a difference to individual carers.

G.L., Z.W. and C.C. are supported by the UCLH National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre. G.L. and P.R. were in part supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North Thames at Bart's Health NHS Trust. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Z.W. reports during the conduct of the study; personal fees from GE Healthcare, grants from GE Healthcare, grants from Lundbeck, other from GE Healthcare, outside the submitted work.

40% of people with dementia have disturbed sleep but there are currently no known effective treatments. Studies of sleep hygiene and light therapy have not been powered to indicate feasibility and acceptability and have shown 40–50% retention. We tested the feasibility and acceptability of a six-session manualized evidence-based non-pharmacological therapy; Dementia RElAted Manual for Sleep; STrAtegies for RelaTives (DREAMS-START) for sleep disturbance in people with dementia.

We conducted a parallel, two-armed, single-blind randomized trial and randomized 2:1 to intervention: Treatment as Usual. Eligible participants had dementia and sleep disturbances (scoring ≥4 on one Sleep Disorders Inventory item) and a family carer and were recruited from two London memory services and Join Dementia Research. Participants wore an actiwatch for two weeks pre-randomization. Trained, clinically supervised psychology graduates delivered DREAMS-START to carers randomized to intervention; covering Understanding sleep and dementia; Making a plan (incorporating actiwatch information, light exposure using a light box); Daytime activity and routine; Difficult night-time behaviors; Taking care of your own (carer's) sleep; and What works? Strategies for the future. Carers kept their manual, light box, and relaxation recordings post-intervention. Outcome assessment was masked to allocation. The co-primary outcomes were feasibility (≥50% eligible people consenting to the study) and acceptability (≥75% of intervention group attending ≥4 intervention sessions).

In total, 63out of 95 (66%; 95% CI: 56–76%) eligible referrals consented between 04/08/2016 and 24/03/2017; 62 (65%; 95% CI: 55–75%) were randomized, and 37 out of 42 (88%; 95% CI: 75–96%) adhered to the intervention.

DREAM-START for sleep disorders in dementia is feasible and acceptable.

Agitation is reportedly the most common neuropsychiatric symptom in care home residents with dementia.

To report, in a large care home survey, prevalence and determinants of agitation in residents with dementia.

We interviewed staff from 86 care homes between 13 January 2014 and 12 November 2015 about residents with dementia with respect to agitation (Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI)), quality of life (DEMQOL-proxy) and dementia severity (Clinical Dementia Rating). We also interviewed residents and their relatives. We used random effects models adjusted for resident age, gender, dementia severity and care home type with CMAI as a continuous score.

Out of 3053 (86.2%) residents who had dementia, 1489 (52.7%) eligible residents participated. Fifteen per cent of residents with very mild dementia had clinically significant agitation compared with 33% with mild (odds ratios (ORs)=4.49 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.30) and 45% with moderate or severe dementia (OR=6.95 95% CI=3.63, 13.31 and OR=6.23 95% CI=3.25, 11.94, respectively). More agitation was associated with lower quality of life (regression coefficient (rc)=-0.53; 95% CI=-0.61, -0.46) but not with staffing or resident ratio (rc=0.03; 95% CI=-0.04, 0.11), level of residents' engagement in home activities (rc=3.21; 95% CI=-0.82, 7.21) or family visit numbers (rc=-0.03; 95% CI=-0.15, 0.08). It was correlated with antipsychotic use (rc=6.45; 95% CI=3.98, 8.91).

Care home residents with dementia and agitation have lower quality of life. More staffing time and activities as currently provided are not associated with lower agitation levels. New approaches to develop staff skills in understanding and responding to the underlying reasons for individual resident's agitation require development and testing.

Interventions to support and skill paid home carers and managers could potentially improve health and well-being of older home care clients. This is the first systematic review of interventions to improve how home carers and home care agencies deliver care to older people, with regard to clients’ health and well-being and paid carers’ well-being, job satisfaction, and retention.

We reviewed 10/731 papers found in the electronic search (to January 2016) fitting predetermined criteria, assessed quality using a checklist, and synthesized data using quantitative and qualitative techniques.

Ten papers described eight interventions. The six quantitative evaluations used diverse outcomes that precluded meta-analysis. In the only quantitative study (a cluster Randomized Controlled Trial), rated higher quality, setting meaningful goals, carer training, and supervision improved client health-related quality of life. The interventions that improved client outcomes comprised training with additional implementation, such as regular supervision and promoted care focused around clients’ needs and goals. In our qualitative synthesis of four studies, intervention elements carers valued were greater flexibility to work to a needs-based rather than a task-based model, learning more about clients, and improved communication with management and other workers.

There is a dearth of evidence regarding effective strategies to improve how home care is delivered to older clients, particularly those with dementia. More research in this sector including feasibility testing of the first home care intervention trials to include health and life quality outcomes for clients with more severe dementia is now needed.

Family carers of people with dementia frequently report acting abusively toward them and carer psychological morbidity predicts this. We investigated whether START (STrAtegies for RelaTives), a psychological intervention which reduces depression and anxiety in family carers also reduces abusive behavior in carers of people living in their own homes. We also explored the longitudinal course of carer abusive behavior over two year.

We included self-identified family carers who gave support at least weekly to people with dementia referred in the previous year to three UK mental health services and a neurological dementia service. We randomly assigned these carers to START, an eight-session, manual-based coping intervention, or treatment as usual (TAU). Carer abusive behavior (Modified Conflict Tactic Scale (MCTS) score ≥2 representing significant abuse) was assessed at baseline, 4, 8, 12, and 24 months.

We recruited 260 carers, 173 to START and 87 to TAU. There was no evidence that abusive behavior levels differed between randomization groups or changed over time. A quarter of carers still reported significant abuse after two years, but those not acting abusively at baseline did not become abusive.

There was no evidence that START, which reduced carer anxiety and depression, reduced carer abusive behavior. For ethical reasons, we frequently intervened to manage concerning abuse reported in both groups, which may have disguised an intervention effect. Future dementia research should include elder abuse as an outcome, and consider carefully how to manage detected abuse.