RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Programme evaluations conducted alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have potential to enhance understanding of trial outcomes. This paper describes a multi-level programme evaluation to be conducted alongside an RCT of a falls prevention programme (RESPOND). OBJECTIVES: (1) To conduct a process evaluation in order to identify the degree of implementation fidelity and associated barriers and facilitators. (2) To evaluate the primary intended impact of the programme: participation in fall prevention strategies and the factors influencing participation. (3) To identify the factors influencing RESPOND RCT outcomes: falls, fall injuries and emergency department (ED) re-presentations. METHODS/DESIGN: 528 community-dwelling adults aged 60-90â years presenting to two EDs with a fall will be recruited and randomly assigned to the intervention or standard care group. All RESPOND participants and RESPOND clinicians will be included in the evaluation. A mixed methods design will be used and a programme logic model will frame the evaluation. Data will be sourced from interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, clinician case notes, recruitment records, participant-completed calendars, hospital administrative datasets and audio-recordings of intervention contacts. Quantitative data will be analysed via descriptive and inferential statistics and qualitative data will be interpreted using thematic analysis. DISCUSSION: The RESPOND programme evaluation will provide information about contextual and influencing factors related to the RESPOND RCT outcomes. The results will assist researchers, clinicians and policy makers regarding decisions about future falls prevention interventions. Insights gained may be applicable to a range of chronic conditions where similar preventive intervention approaches are indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This programme evaluation is linked to the RESPOND RCT which is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12614000336684).
Asunto(s)
Accidentes por Caídas/prevención & control , Servicios de Salud Comunitaria/organización & administración , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Servicios Preventivos de Salud , Heridas y Lesiones/prevención & control , Accidentes por Caídas/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Australia/epidemiología , Protocolos Clínicos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Planificación Ambiental , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Masculino , Servicios Preventivos de Salud/organización & administración , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Medición de Riesgo , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Heridas y Lesiones/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To determine the degree of dopaminergic response of swallowing dysfunction in Parkinson's disease. METHODS: Fifteen patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease and symptomatic dysphagia were studied. All had motor fluctuations in response to long term levodopa therapy. On two separate days, after overnight withdrawal of all antiparkinsonian medication, a modified barium swallow using cinefluoroscopy and different food consistencies was performed before and after administration of oral levodopa and subcutaneous apomorphine. RESULTS: Despite all patients having an unequivocal motor response to both agents, there were few significant responses in any of the quantitative or qualitative criteria of swallowing dysfunction assessed. The oral preparatory phase, generally considered a more voluntary component of swallowing, showed a response, but not with all consistencies. In a subgroup of patients the pharyngeal phase time also improved. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that parkinsonian swallowing dysfunction is not solely related to nigrostriatal dopamine deficiency and may be due to an additional non-dopamine related disturbance of the central pattern generator for swallowing in the pedunculopontine nucleus or related structures in the medulla.