Background Many people with dementia living in care homes have distressing and costly agitation symptoms. Interventions should be efficacious, scalable, and feasible. Methods We did a parallel-group, cluster-randomised controlled trial in 20 care homes across England. Care homes were eligible if they had 17 residents or more with dementia, agreed to mandatory training for all eligible staff and the implementation of plans, and more than 60% of eligible staff agreed to participate. Staff were eligible if they worked during the day providing face-to-face care for residents with dementia. Residents were eligible if they had a known dementia diagnosis or scored positive on screening with the Noticeable Problems Checklist. A statistician independent of the study randomised care homes (1:1) to the Managing Agitation and Raising Quality of Life (MARQUE) intervention or treatment as usual (TAU) using computer-generated randomisation in blocks of two, stratified by type of home (residential or nursing). Care home staff were not masked to the intervention but were asked not to inform assessors. Residents with dementia, family carers, outcome assessors, statisticians, and health economists were masked to allocation until the data were analysed. MARQUE is an evidence-based manualised intervention, delivered by supervised graduate psychologists to staff in six interactive sessions. The primary outcome was agitation score at 8 months, measured using the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI). Analysis of the primary outcome was done in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all randomly assigned residents for whom CMAI data was available at 8 months. Mortality was assessed in all randomly assigned residents. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN96745365.

BackgroundOlder adults are at increased risk both of falling and of experiencing accidental domestic fire. In addition to advanced age, these adverse events share the risk factors of balance or mobility problems, cognitive impairment and socioeconomic deprivation. For both events, the consequences include significant injury and death, and considerable socioeconomic costs for the individual and informal carers, as well as for emergency services, health and social care agencies.Secondary prevention services for older people who have fallen or who are identifiable as being at high risk of falling include NHS Falls clinics, where a multidisciplinary team offers an individualised multifactorial targeted intervention including strength and balance exercise programmes, medication changes and home hazard modification. A similar preventative approach is employed by most Fire and Rescue Services who conduct Home Fire Safety Visits to assess and, if necessary, remedy domestic fire risk, fit free smoke alarms with instruction for use and maintenance, and plan an escape route. We propose that the similarity of population at risk, location, specific risk factors and the commonality of preventative approaches employed could offer net gains in terms of feasibility, effectiveness and acceptability if activities within these two preventative approaches were to be combined.Methods/DesignThis prospective proof of concept study, currently being conducted in two London boroughs, (Southwark and Lambeth) aims to reduce the incidence of both fires and falls in community-dwelling older adults. It comprises two concurrent 12-month interventions: the integration of 1) fall risk assessments into the Brigade's Home Fire Safety Visit and 2) fire risk assessments into Falls services by inviting older clinic attendees to book a Visit. Our primary objective is to examine the feasibility and effectiveness of these interventions. Furthermore, we are evaluating their acceptability and value to key stakeholders and services users.DiscussionIf our approach proves feasible and the risk assessment is both effective and acceptable, we envisage advocating a partnership model of working more broadly to fire and rescue services and health services in Britain, such that effective integration of preventative services for older people becomes routine for an ageing population.

A brief group self-management intervention increased knowledge and confidence in managing epilepsy.

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link AbstractPurpose -A growing older population with complex care needs, including dementia, are living in care homes. It is important to support researchers in conducting ethical and appropriate work in this complex research environment. The purpose of this paper is to discuss key issues in care homes research including examples of best practice. The intention is to inform researchers across disciplines, leading to more sensitive and meaningful care home research practice. Design/methodology/approach -Experienced care homes researchers were invited to provide methodological insights and details not already reported in their publications. These have been analysed, creating key themes and linked to project publications. Findings -The need for reflexivity was a key finding. In particular, researchers need to: appreciate that the work is complex; see participants as potential research partners; and consider how cognitive and physical frailty of residents, staffing pressures and the unique environments of care homes might impact upon their research. Other challenges include recruitment and consenting people who lack mental capacity. Research limitations/implications -As the care homes research landscape continues to develop and grow, there still remains limited reflection and discussion of methodological issues with a need for a "safe space" for researchers to discuss challenges. Originality/value -This review is an updated methodological guide for care homes researchers, also highlighting current gaps in the mechanisms for continuing to share best research practice.

Falls are a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in older adults. Physical, psychological and social consequences include injury, fall-related fear and loss of self-efficacy. In turn, these may result in decreased physical activity, reduced functional capacity, and increased risk of institutionalisation. Falls prevention exercise programmes (FPEP) are now widespread within the National Health Service, often part of multifactorial interventions, and are designed to minimise impairments that impact physical function, such as strength and balance. Assessment of the clinical efficacy of FPEPs has therefore focused on the measurement of physical function and rate of falls. Whilst important, this approach may be too narrow to capture the highly variable and multidimensional responses that individuals make to a fall and to a FPEP. We argue that the current focus may miss a paradoxical lack of or even deleterious impact on quality of life, despite a reduction in physical performance-related falls risk. We draw upon the Selective Optimisation and Compensation (SOC) model, developed by Paul and Margret Baltes, to explore how this paradox may be a result of the coping strategies adopted by individuals in response to a fall.