Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34857029›Full record

Trial reportTrials2021

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of a New psychosocial intervention to support Independence in Dementia (NIDUS-family) for family carers and people living with dementia in their own homes: a randomised controlled trial.

Alexandra Burton, Penny Rapaport, Marina Palomo, Kathryn Lord, Jessica Budgett, Julie Barber, Rachael Hunter, Laurie Butler, Victoria Vickerstaff, Kenneth Rockwood and 13 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors at 13 institutions in 4 countries.

Alexandra BurtonDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK. a.burton@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4433-3902
Penny RapaportDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Marina PalomoCamden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Kathryn LordThe Centre for Applied Dementia Studies, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
Jessica BudgettDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Julie BarberDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.
Rachael HunterResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
Laurie ButlerFaculty of Science and Engineering, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.
Victoria VickerstaffResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
Kenneth RockwoodDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.
Margaret OgdenAlzheimer's Society Research Network Volunteers, London, UK.
Debs SmithAlzheimer's Society Research Network Volunteers, London, UK.
Iain LangCollege of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Gill LivingstonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Briony DowNational Ageing Research Institute, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Helen KalesDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, UC Davis Health, University of California, California, USA.
Jill ManthorpeNIHR Policy Research Unit in Health and Social Care Workforce, King's College London, London, UK.
Kate WaltersResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
Juanita HoeDivision of Nursing, School of Health Sciences, City University of London, London, UK.
Vasiliki OrgetaDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Quincy SamusDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Claudia CooperDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
NIDUS study team
University College London · GBAlzheimer's Society · GBAnglia Ruskin University · GBCamden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust · GBCity, University of London · GBDalhousie University · CAJohns Hopkins University · USKing's College London · GBThe London College · GBThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUUniversity of Bradford · GBUniversity of California, Davis · USUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

Alzheimer's Society AS-PR2-16-002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost people living with dementia want to remain living in their own homes and are supported to do so by family carers. No interventions have consistently demonstrated improvements to people with dementia's life quality, functioning, or other indices of living as well as possible with dementia. We have co-produced, with health and social care professionals and family carers of people with dementia, a new intervention (NIDUS-family). To our knowledge, NIDUS-family is the first manualised intervention that can be tailored to personal goals of people living with dementia and their families and is delivered by facilitators without clinical training. The intervention utilizes components of behavioural management, carer support, psychoeducation, communication and coping skills training, enablement, and environmental adaptations, with modules selected to address dyads' selected goals. We will evaluate the effect of NIDUS-family and usual care on goal attainment, as measured by Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) rated by family carers, compared to usual care alone at 12-month follow-up. We will also determine whether NIDUS-family and usual care is more cost-effective than usual care alone over 12 months.

methodsA randomised, two-arm, single-masked, multi-site clinical trial involving 297 people living with dementia-family carer dyads. Dyads will be randomised 2:1 to receive the NIDUS-family intervention with usual care (n = 199) or usual care alone (n = 98). The intervention group will be offered, over 1 year, via 6-8 video call or telephone sessions (or face to face if COVID-19 restrictions allow in the recruitment period) in the initial 6 months, followed by telephone follow-ups every 1-2 months to support implementation, with a trained facilitator. DISCUSSION: Increasing the time lived at home by people living with dementia is likely to benefit lives now and in the future. Our intervention, which we adapted to include remote delivery prior to trial commencement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, aims to address barriers to living as well and as independently as possible that distress people living with dementia, exacerbate family carer(s) stress, negatively affect relationships, lead to safety risks, and frequently precipitate avoidable moves to a care home.

trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number ISRCTN11425138 . Registered on 7 October 2019.

Indexed as

COVID-19DementiaCaregiversCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansPandemicsPsychosocial InterventionQuality of LifeSARS-CoV-2DementiaFamily carerIndependencePsychosocial intervention

Identifiers

PMID34857029
PMCPMC8637036
OpenAlexW3216595750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.