Trial reportNature communications2025
Achieving Quality and Effectiveness in Dementia Using Crisis Teams (AQUEDUCT): a randomised controlled trial evaluating the impact of a best practice Resource Kit used by teams managing crisis in dementia.
Trial report in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People with dementia frequently experience mental health crisis requiring psychiatric hospital admission. In the UK, Teams Managing Crisis in Dementia (TMCDs) vary in structure and practice due to the absence of a standardized model. A pragmatic, randomised controlled trial (RCT) was designed to evaluate the AQUEDUCT Best Practice Tool and online Resource Kit (RK). Twenty-three TMCDs across England were randomised 1:1 To receive the RK plus usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control) ( www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN42855694 ). The primary outcome was the number of psychiatric hospital admissions for people with dementia at the primary endpoint of six months. Secondary outcomes included TMCD staff mental health (GHQ-12), psychological flexibility (WAAQ), and work engagement (UWES); and for people with dementia and carers, service satisfaction (CSQ-8) and mental wellbeing (GHQ-12). There was no significant difference in number of psychiatric admissions between groups (incident rate ratio: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.37-1.48; p = 0.397) and the primary endpoint was met. No significant differences were found for the secondary outcomes across staff or service user groups. Fidelity to the intervention varied; five TMCDs met or exceeded implementation criteria, while others reported structural barriers. Limited engagement was attributed to the absence of a learning collaborative and pandemic-related service pressures. Although the RK was valued by staff for guiding quality improvement, it did not significantly reduce hospital admissions or improve secondary outcomes. Future studies should prioritise implementation support and explore systemic barriers to service improvement in dementia crisis care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.