Liz Graham
University of Leeds
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Liz Graham.
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | 2015
Tamar Pincus; Shamaila Anwar; Lance M. McCracken; Alison H. McGregor; Liz Graham; Michelle Collinson; John McBeth; Paul J. Watson; Stephen Morley; Juliet Henderson; Amanda Farrin
BackgroundLow Back Pain (LBP) remains a common and costly problem. Psychological obstacles to recovery have been identified, but psychological and behavioural interventions have produced only moderate improvements. Reviews of trials have suggested that the interventions lack clear theoretical basis, are often compromised by low dose, lack of fidelity, and delivery by non-experts. In addition, interventions do not directly target known risk mechanisms. We identified a theory driven intervention (Contexual Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, CCBT) that directly targets an evidence-based risk mechanism (avoidance and ensured dose and delivery were optimised. This feasibility study was designed to test the credibility and acceptability of optimised CCBT against physiotherapy for avoidant LBP patients, and to test recruitment, delivery of the intervention and response rates prior to moving to a full definitive trial.MethodsA randomised controlled feasibility trial with patients randomised to receive CCBT or physiotherapy. CCBT was delivered by trained supervised psychologists on a one to one basis and comprised up to 8 one-hour sessions. Physiotherapy comprised back to fitness group exercises with at least 60 % of content exercise-based. Patients were eligible to take part if they had back pain for more than 3 months, and scored above a threshold indicating fear avoidance, catastrophic beliefs and distress.Results89 patients were recruited. Uptake rates were above those predicted. Scores for credibility and acceptability of the interventions met the set criteria. Response rates at three and six months fell short of the 75 % target. Problems associated with poor response rates were identified and successfully resolved, rates increased to 77 % at 3 months, and 68 % at 6 months. Independent ratings of treatment sessions indicated that CCBT was delivered to fidelity. Numbers were too small for formal analysis. Although average scores for acceptance were higher in the CCBT group than in the group attending physiotherapy (increase of 7.9 versus 5.1) and change in disability and pain from baseline to 6 months were greater in the CCBT group than in the physiotherapy group, these findings should be interpreted with caution.ConclusionsCCBT is a credible and acceptable intervention for LBP patients who exhibit psychological obstacles to recovery.Trial registrationISRCTN43733490, registered 15/12/2010.
Trials | 2013
Tamar Pincus; Shamaila Anwar; Lance McCracken; Alison H. McGregor; Liz Graham; Michelle Collinson; Amanda Farrin
BackgroundChronic back pain continues to be a costly and prevalent condition. The latest NICE guidelines issued in 2009 state that for patients with persistent back pain (of between six weeks and twelve months duration), who are highly distressed and/or disabled and for whom exercise, manual therapy and acupuncture has not been beneficial, the evidence supports a combination of around 100 hours of combined physical and psychological treatment. This is costly, and may prove unacceptable to many patients. A key recommendation of these guidelines was for further randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological treatment and to target treatment to specific sub-groups of patients. Recent trials that have included psychological interventions have shown only moderate improvement at best, and results are not maintained long term. There is therefore a need to test theoretically driven interventions that focus on specific high-risk sub-groups, in which the intervention is delivered at full integrity against a credible control.Methods/designA feasibility study of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing psychologist-delivered Contextual Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CCBT) against Treatment As Usual (TAU) physiotherapy delivered by physiotherapists for the treatment of chronic lower back pain in ‘avoidant’ patients. Ninety-two patients referred for physiotherapy will be recruited and randomised on a 1:1 basis to receive CCBT or TAU. Treatment groups will be balanced by centre and pain interference score. Primary outcomes include assessing the credibility and acceptability of the intervention, and to demonstrate proof of principle through a greater change in pain acceptance in the CCBT arm, measured by the Acceptance and Action –II and the Chronic Pain Acceptance questionnaires. In addition, the feasibility of carrying out a full trial will be explored with reference to recruitment and follow-up rates including the assessment of the burden of outcome measure completion. Secondary patient outcomes include disability, pain, fear of movement, mood, quality of life, and global recovery. Outcomes are measured at three and six months post-randomisation.DiscussionThis paper details the rationale, design, therapist training system and recruitment methods to be used in a feasibility study which will inform the design and efficient implementation of a future definitive RCT.Trial registrationISRCTN43733490
BMC Medical Research Methodology | 2016
Liz Graham; Judy Wright; Rebecca Walwyn; Amy M. Russell; Louise D. Bryant; Amanda Farrin; Allan House
BackgroundReporting adherence to intervention delivery and uptake is a detailed way of describing what was actually delivered and received, in comparison to what was intended. Measuring and reporting adherence is not routinely done well in complex interventions. The OK Diabetes trial (ISRCTN41897033) aimed to develop and subsequently test the feasibility of implementing a supported self-management intervention in adults with a learning disability and type 2 diabetes. A key study objective was to develop a measure of adherence to the intervention.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of published literature, extracting data from included papers using a standardised proforma. We undertook a narrative synthesis of papers to determine the form and content of methods for adherence measurement for self-management interventions in this population that had already been developed. We used the framework and data extraction form developed for the review as the basis for an adherence measurement tool that we applied in the OK Diabetes trial.ResultsThe literature review found variability in the quality and content of adherence measurement and reporting, with no standardised approach. We were able to develop an adherence measure based upon the review, and populate it with data collected during the OK Diabetes trial. The adherence tool proved satisfactory for recording and measuring adherence in the trial.ConclusionThere remains a need for a standardised approach to adherence measurement in the field of complex interventions. We have shown that it is possible to produce a simple, feasible measure for assessing adherence in the OK Diabetes trial.
Diabetic Medicine | 2018
Allan House; Louise D. Bryant; Amy M. Russell; Alexandra Wright-Hughes; Liz Graham; Rebecca Walwyn; Judy Wright; Claire Hulme; John L O'Dwyer; Gary Latchford; Alison Stansfield; Ramzi Ajjan; Amanda Farrin
To undertake a feasibility randomized controlled trial of supported self‐management vs treatment as usual in a population of adults with obesity, Type 2 diabetes and an intellectual disability.
Trials | 2014
Michelle Collinson; David Owens; Paul Blenkiron; Kayleigh Burton; Liz Graham; Simon Hatcher; Allan House; Katie Martin; Louise Pembroke; David Protheroe; Sandy Tubeuf; Amanda Farrin
BackgroundAround 150,000 people each year attend hospitals in England due to self-harm, many of them more than once. Over 5,000 people die by suicide each year in the UK, a quarter of them having attended hospital in the previous year because of self-harm. Self-harm is a major identifiable risk factor for suicide. People receive variable care at hospital; many are not assessed for their psychological needs and little psychological therapy is offered. Despite its frequent occurrence, we have no clear research evidence about how to reduce the repetition of self-harm. Some people who have self-harmed show less active ways of solving problems, and brief problem-solving therapies are considered the most promising psychological treatments.Methods/DesignThis is a pragmatic, individually randomised, controlled, feasibility study comparing interpersonal problem-solving therapy plus treatment-as-usual with treatment-as-usual alone, for adults attending a general hospital following self-harm. A total of 60 participants will be randomised equally between the treatment arms, which will be balanced with respect to the type of most recent self-harm event, number of previous self-harm events, gender and age. Feasibility objectives are as follows: a) To establish and field test procedures for implementing the problem-solving intervention; b) To determine the feasibility and best method of participant recruitment and follow up; c) To assess therapeutic delivery; d) To assess the feasibility of obtaining the definitive trial’s primary and secondary outcomes; e) To assess the perceived burden and acceptability of obtaining the trial’s self-reported outcome data; f) To inform the sample size calculation for the definitive trial.DiscussionThe results of this feasibility study will be used to determine the appropriateness of proceeding to a definitive trial and will allow us to design an achievable trial of interpersonal problem-solving therapy for adults who self-harm.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials (ISRCTN54036115)
Health Technology Assessment | 2018
Allan House; Louise D. Bryant; Amy M. Russell; Alexandra Wright-Hughes; Liz Graham; Rebecca Walwyn; Judy Wright; Claire Hulme; John O’Dwyer; Gary Latchford; Shaista Meer; Jacqueline Birtwistle; Alison Stansfield; Ramzi Ajjan; Amanda Farrin
BACKGROUND Obesity and type 2 diabetes are common in adults with a learning disability. It is not known if the principles of self-management can be applied in this population. OBJECTIVES To develop and evaluate a case-finding method and undertake an observational study of adults with a learning disability and type 2 diabetes, to develop a standardised supported self-management (SSM) intervention and measure of adherence and to undertake a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) of SSM versus treatment as usual (TAU). DESIGN Observational study and an individually randomised feasibility RCT. SETTING Three cities in West Yorkshire, UK. PARTICIPANTS In the observational study: adults aged > 18 years with a mild or moderate learning disability, who have type 2 diabetes that is not being treated with insulin and who are living in the community. Participants had mental capacity to consent to research and to the intervention. In the RCT participants had glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels of > 6.5% (48 mmol/mol), a body mass index (BMI) of > 25 kg/m2 or self-reported physical activity below national guideline levels. INTERVENTIONS Standardised SSM. TAU supported by an easy-read booklet. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES (1) The number of eligible participants identified and sources of referral; (2) current living and support arrangements; (3) current health state, including level of HbA1c, BMI and waist circumference, blood pressure and lipids; (4) mood, preferences for change; (5) recruitment and retention in RCT; (6) implementation and adherence to the intervention; (7) completeness of data collection and values for candidate primary outcomes; and (8) qualitative data on participant experience of the research process and intervention. RESULTS In the observational study we identified 147 eligible consenting participants. The mean age was 54.4 years. In total, 130 out of 147 (88%) named a key supporter, with 113 supporters (77%) being involved in diabetes management. The mean HbA1c level was 54.5 mmol/mol [standard deviation (SD) 14.8 mmol/mol; 7.1%, SD 1.4%]. The BMI of 65% of participants was > 30 kg/m2 and of 21% was > 40 kg/m2. Many participants reported low mood, dissatisfaction with lifestyle and diabetes management and an interest in change. Non-response rates were high (45/147, 31%) for medical data requested from the primary care team. In the RCT, 82 participants were randomised. The mean baseline HbA1c level was 56 mmol/mol (SD 16.5 mmol/mol; 7.3%, SD 1.5%) and the mean BMI was 34 kg/m2 (SD 7.6 kg/m2). All SSM sessions were completed by 35 out of 41 participants. The adherence measure was obtained in 37 out of 41 participants. The follow-up HbA1c level and BMI was obtained for 75 out of 82 (91%) and 77 out of 82 (94%) participants, respectively. Most participants reported a positive experience of the intervention. A low response rate and difficulty understanding the EuroQol-5 Dimensions were challenges in obtaining data for an economic analysis. LIMITATIONS We recruited from only 60% of eligible general practices, and 90% of participants were on a general practice learning disability register, which meant that we did not recruit many participants from the wider population with milder learning disability. CONCLUSIONS A definitive RCT is feasible and would need to recruit 194 participants per arm. The main barrier is the resource-intensive nature of recruitment. Future research is needed into the effectiveness of obesity treatments in this population, particularly estimating the longer-term outcomes that are important for health benefit. Research is also needed into improving ways of assessing quality of life in adults with a learning disability. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41897033. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 26. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Trials | 2011
David Cottrell; Liz Graham; Amanda Farrin
Objectives The HTA-funded SHIFT Trial (Self-Harm Intervention: Family Therapy) aims to recruit 832 young people following self-harm, along with their primary care givers. Recruitment is scheduled to take place over 3 years, across three ‘Hubs’ in the UK – Greater Manchester, London and Yorkshire – each involving approximately 15 Child & Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Due to the complexities of set-up and the involvement of many clinicians in largely research-naive services, recruitment has been slower than anticipated. The TMG thus agreed an intensive strategy to enhance the existing recruitment plan.
Trials | 2018
Liz Graham; Robert Cicero; David Dave Clarke; Bonnie Cundill; Alison Ellwood; Amanda Farrin; Jill Fisher; Madeline Goodwin; Rebecca Hawkins; Karen Hull; Claire Hulme; Dominic Trépel; Rachel Williams; Anne Forster
BackgroundResidents of care homes have high levels of disability and poor mobility, but the promotion of health and wellbeing within care homes is poorly realised. Residents spend the majority of their time sedentary which leads to increased dependency and, coupled with poor postural management, can have many adverse outcomes including pressure sores, pain and reduced social interaction. The intervention being tested in this project (the Skilful Care Training Package) aims to increase the awareness and skills of care staff in relation to poor posture in the older, less mobile adult and highlight the benefits of activity, and how to skilfully assist activity, in this group to enable mobility and reduce falls risk. Feasibility work will be undertaken to inform the design of a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial.MethodsThis is a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial, aiming to recruit at least 12–15 residents at each of 10 care homes across Yorkshire. Care homes will be randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to receive either the Skilful Care Training Package alongside usual care or to continue to provide usual care alone. Assessments will be undertaken by blinded researchers with participating residents at baseline (before care home randomisation) and at three and six months post randomisation. Data relating to changes in physical activity, mobility, posture, mood and quality of life will be collected. Data at the level of the home will also be collected and will include staff experience of care and changes in the numbers and types of adverse events residents experience (for example, hospital admissions, falls). Details of NHS service usage will be collected to inform the economic analysis. An embedded process evaluation will explore intervention delivery and its acceptability to staff and residents.DiscussionParticipant uptake, engagement and retention are key feasibility outcomes. Exploration of barriers and facilitators to intervention delivery will inform intervention optimisation. Study results will inform progression to a definitive trial and add to the body of evidence for good practice in care home research.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN50080330. Registered on 27 March 2017.
Trials | 2015
Liz Graham; Claire Surr; Sharon Jones; Amanda Farrin; Rebecca Walwyn; Robert Cicero
The DCM™ EPIC trial requires participating care homes to identify two staff members willing to be trained in the DCM™ intervention and thereafter implement three DCM ‘mapping cycles’ during the trial. These staff are known as ‘mappers’. This is no small undertaking, and early pilot work highlighted the need to include additional measures to enhance adherence to some elements of intervention uptake and delivery. Various strategies were thus implemented which comprise: a) provision of enhanced information to prospective staff mappers, b) requirement for staff to detail their understanding of DCM™, c) DCM™ expert contact with mappers ahead of randomisation to ensure eligibility and suitability, d) an expert-supported first cycle of mapping, e) review of mapper and expert feedback after the first cycle to ensure areas of concern can be addressed prior to the next cycle, f) CTU contact with mappers to flag the timing of the next mapping cycle, and address any concerns. To achieve the above, trials unit staff act as a central point of contact, reviewing mapper consent and materials, monitoring each stage of the process and contacting DCM™ experts and the Chief Investigator to flag issues and problems in a timely manner. Although enhancing intervention compliance in this way can be seen to be altering the implementation of the intervention and thus reducing its generalizability, it will be discussed that intervention optimisation is necessary to minimise the likelihood of negative results attributable to poor implementation rather than intervention ineffectiveness.
Trials | 2015
Amanda Farrin; Suzanne Hartley; Liz Graham; Rachael Kelley; Claire Surr; Alys Wyn Griffiths; Louise D. Bryant
Implementing clinical trials involving participants with diminished capacity, such as elderly residents in care homes, stroke survivors, those with a learning disability, can be challenging in terms of balancing complex service and patient needs with methodological rigor. The key challenges identified here are the appropriate tailoring of recruitment approaches, data collection and participant risk monitoring. Optimising the consent process for those with varying levels of comprehension and communication is complex. For example, conducting research with participants with dementia requires special consideration around the salient points for inclusion in information sheets (including multiple versions to cater for varying levels of capacity) and utilising different formats to aid communications. Consideration also needs to be given to optimising provision of information to consultees where capacity is lacking. Data collection strategies need to be adapted to ensure understanding, to utilise appropriate data sources and maximise data return. Participants may have limited ability to provide self-report data, and the way in which they are able to respond will vary. Simplified tools, visual prompt aids, or the collection of proxy data should all be considered. There is also the need to be vigilant for other issues arising from research with this population, such as safe guarding concerns, which will require specialised researcher training and clear onward reporting processes. We will describe and discuss how trials involving populations at risk of diminished capacity have adapted their recruitment strategies, data collection approaches, and linked with service providers to ensure participant safety.