BackgroundThere is a major need for longitudinal research examining the experiences of people with dementia and their primary carers, as relatively little is known about how the factors associated with capability to ‘live well’ vary over time. The main aim of the IDEAL-2 study is to investigate how and why, over time, people with dementia and their primary carers might vary in their capability to live well with dementia, whilst exploring both their use of health and care services and their unmet needs.MethodsIDEAL-2 will build on the Improving the experience of Dementia and Enhancing Active Life (IDEAL) cohort of 1547 people (who, at recruitment between July 2014 and July 2016, had mild-to-moderate dementia), and their 1283 primary carers in Great Britain. The existing cohort will be enriched with additional participants with mild-to-moderate dementia (and their primary carers where available and willing) from the following groups: people with rarer forms of dementia, and/or those who are ≥90 years or < 65 years of age at time of recruitment. We will assess the primary outcome, capability to live well with dementia, and the factors influencing it using questionnaires at yearly intervals for 3 years. Additionally, we will seek to link the cohort data with administrative data to obtain information about health service use. Some participants will be invited for in-depth face-to-face interviews. The cohort study will be supplemented by linked research focusing on: the co-production of new measures of living well; including the perspectives of people with advanced dementia living in residential care settings; including people with dementia from black, Asian, and minority ethnic groups; and understanding the experience of people living with undiagnosed dementia.DiscussionIDEAL-2 will provide evidence about the key indicators of, and factors associated with, living well over the course of dementia and how these differ for particular subgroups. It will tell us which combinations of services and support are most beneficial and cost-effective. Moreover, the IDEAL-2 study will gather evidence from under-researched groups of people with dementia, who are likely to have their own distinct perceptions of living well.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-6129-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Humans differ from other animals in the way they can skilfully and precisely operate or invent tools to facilitate their everyday life. Tools have dominated our home, travel and work environment, becoming an integral step for our motor skills development. What happens when the part of the brain responsible for tool use is damaged in our adult life due to a cerebrovascular accident? How does daily life change when we lose the previously mastered ability to make use of the objects around us? How do patients suffering from compromised tool use cope with food preparation, personal hygiene, grooming, housework, or use of home appliances? In this literature review we present a state of the art for single and multiple tool use research, with a focus on the impact that apraxia (impaired ability to perform tool-based actions) and action disorganization syndrome (ADS; impaired ability to carry out multi-step actions) have on activities of daily living (ADL). Firstly, we summarize the behavioral studies investigating the impact of apraxia and other comorbidity syndromes, such as neglect or visual extinction, on ADL. We discuss the hallmarks of the compromised tool use in terms of the sequencing of action steps, conceptual errors committed, spatial motor control, and temporal organization of the movement. In addition, we present an up-to-date overview of the neuroimaging and lesion analyses studies that provide an insight into neural correlates of tool use in the human brain and functional changes in the neural organization following a stroke, in the context of ADL. Finally we discuss the current practice in neurorehabilitation of ADL in apraxia and ADS aiming at increasing patients’ independence.

Background and purposeA large body of research reports that stroke patients are debilitated in terms of daily independence after dismissal from the hospital unit. Patients struggle with the use of daily objects or performing complex actions. Differences between individual deficits of patients are often associated with the site of the brain damage. However, clinical studies suggest that patients exhibit varied constellations of action‐associated difficulties and neuropsychological deficits. There is a lack of conclusive evidence indicating how different neuropsychological symptoms link to the impaired ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL).Materials and methodsTo further address this matter, in this study we compared the behavior of patients with left brain damage (LBD) and right brain damage (RBD) following stroke in two naturalistic task scenarios (tea making and document filing), and compared the committed action errors to the neuropsychological screening results.ResultsWe observed mild to severe impairments in both the LBD and RBD groups amounting to 37–55% of failure rate in attainment of action goal. Interestingly, the performance on both tasks was not correlated to each other, suggesting that the tasks involved a different set of higher cognitive functions. Despite similar behavioral manifestations, in the LBD group poor task performance was related to deficits in praxis performance and unilateral tactile and visual extinction. The presence of aphasia did not correlate with task performance, except for a link between low scores in Aachen aphasia test scales and misestimation error in the tea making task. In the RBD group, difficulties with performance were primarily linked to deficit in praxis and unilateral visual extinction.ConclusionsDespite similar behavior, the underlying mechanisms of the deficits after stroke might be different (in patients with LBD and RBD) and reveal complex interlinks of cognitive networks involved in the ability to carry on everyday tasks.

There is lack of consistent evidence as to how well PD patients are able to accurately time their movements across space with an external acoustic signal. For years, research based on the finger-tapping paradigm, the most popular paradigm for exploring the brain’s ability to time movement, has provided strong evidence that patients are not able to accurately reproduce an isochronous interval [i.e., Ref. (1)]. This was undermined by Spencer and Ivry (2) who suggested a specific deficit in temporal control linked to emergent, rhythmical movement not event-based actions, which primarily involve the cerebellum. In this study, we investigated motor timing of seven idiopathic PD participants in event-based sensorimotor synchronization task. Participants were asked to move their finger horizontally between two predefined target zones to synchronize with the occurrence of two sound events at two time intervals (1.5 and 2.5 s). The width of the targets and the distance between them were manipulated to investigate impact of accuracy demands and movement amplitude on timing performance. The results showed that participants with PD demonstrated specific difficulties when trying to accurately synchronize their movements to a beat. The extent to which their ability to synchronize movement was compromised was found to be related to the severity of PD, but independent of the spatial constraints of the task.

No abstract