Cargando…

A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial

BACKGROUND: Optimising hearing and vision function may be important in improving a range of outcomes for people living with dementia (PwD) and their companions. The SENSE-Cog cross-national randomised controlled trial (RCT) is evaluating the effectiveness of a sensory intervention (SI) to improve qu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leroi, Iracema, Armitage, Christopher J., Collin, Fidéline, Frison, Eric, Hann, Mark, Hooper, Emma, Reeves, David, Simkin, Zoe, Wolski, Lucas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7041097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32093757
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4135-4
_version_ 1783501104260055040
author Leroi, Iracema
Armitage, Christopher J.
Collin, Fidéline
Frison, Eric
Hann, Mark
Hooper, Emma
Reeves, David
Simkin, Zoe
Wolski, Lucas
author_facet Leroi, Iracema
Armitage, Christopher J.
Collin, Fidéline
Frison, Eric
Hann, Mark
Hooper, Emma
Reeves, David
Simkin, Zoe
Wolski, Lucas
author_sort Leroi, Iracema
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Optimising hearing and vision function may be important in improving a range of outcomes for people living with dementia (PwD) and their companions. The SENSE-Cog cross-national randomised controlled trial (RCT) is evaluating the effectiveness of a sensory intervention (SI) to improve quality of life for PwD with concurrent hearing and/or vision impairment, in five European countries. To ascertain how or why the intervention will, or will not, achieve its outcomes, we have designed a process evaluation to explore potential discrepancies between expected and observed outcomes. This will also help us to understand how context may influence the outcomes. Here we describe the protocol for this process evaluation, which is embedded within the RCT. METHODS/DESIGN: We will use a mixed methods approach with a theoretical framework derived from the UK Medical Research Council’s’ guidance on process evaluations. It will include the following: (1) evaluating how key aspects of the intervention will be delivered, which will be important to scale the intervention in real world populations; (2) characterising the contextual issues, which may shape the delivery and the impact of the intervention in different countries; and (3) investigating possible causal mechanisms through analyses of potential moderators and mediators. To avoid bias, we will analyse the process data before the analysis of the main effectiveness outcomes. DISCUSSION: This evaluation will provide insight into how the complex SENSE-Cog SI will be tailored, enacted and received across the different European contexts, all of which have unique health and social care economies. The findings will provide insight into the causal mechanisms effecting change, and will determine whether we should implement the intervention, if effective, on a wider scale for PwD and concurrent sensory impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN17056211. Registered on 19 February 2018.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7041097
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70410972020-03-02 A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial Leroi, Iracema Armitage, Christopher J. Collin, Fidéline Frison, Eric Hann, Mark Hooper, Emma Reeves, David Simkin, Zoe Wolski, Lucas Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Optimising hearing and vision function may be important in improving a range of outcomes for people living with dementia (PwD) and their companions. The SENSE-Cog cross-national randomised controlled trial (RCT) is evaluating the effectiveness of a sensory intervention (SI) to improve quality of life for PwD with concurrent hearing and/or vision impairment, in five European countries. To ascertain how or why the intervention will, or will not, achieve its outcomes, we have designed a process evaluation to explore potential discrepancies between expected and observed outcomes. This will also help us to understand how context may influence the outcomes. Here we describe the protocol for this process evaluation, which is embedded within the RCT. METHODS/DESIGN: We will use a mixed methods approach with a theoretical framework derived from the UK Medical Research Council’s’ guidance on process evaluations. It will include the following: (1) evaluating how key aspects of the intervention will be delivered, which will be important to scale the intervention in real world populations; (2) characterising the contextual issues, which may shape the delivery and the impact of the intervention in different countries; and (3) investigating possible causal mechanisms through analyses of potential moderators and mediators. To avoid bias, we will analyse the process data before the analysis of the main effectiveness outcomes. DISCUSSION: This evaluation will provide insight into how the complex SENSE-Cog SI will be tailored, enacted and received across the different European contexts, all of which have unique health and social care economies. The findings will provide insight into the causal mechanisms effecting change, and will determine whether we should implement the intervention, if effective, on a wider scale for PwD and concurrent sensory impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN17056211. Registered on 19 February 2018. BioMed Central 2020-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7041097/ /pubmed/32093757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4135-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Leroi, Iracema
Armitage, Christopher J.
Collin, Fidéline
Frison, Eric
Hann, Mark
Hooper, Emma
Reeves, David
Simkin, Zoe
Wolski, Lucas
A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial
title A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial
title_full A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial
title_fullStr A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial
title_full_unstemmed A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial
title_short A randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: Protocol for a process evaluation in the SENSE-Cog trial
title_sort randomised controlled trial of hearing and vision support in dementia: protocol for a process evaluation in the sense-cog trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7041097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32093757
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4135-4
work_keys_str_mv AT leroiiracema arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT armitagechristopherj arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT collinfideline arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT frisoneric arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT hannmark arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT hooperemma arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT reevesdavid arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT simkinzoe arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT wolskilucas arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT arandomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT leroiiracema randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT armitagechristopherj randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT collinfideline randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT frisoneric randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT hannmark randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT hooperemma randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT reevesdavid randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT simkinzoe randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT wolskilucas randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial
AT randomisedcontrolledtrialofhearingandvisionsupportindementiaprotocolforaprocessevaluationinthesensecogtrial