Pulmonary rehabilitation relieves dyspnoea and fatigue, improves emotional function and enhances the sense of control that individuals have over their condition. These improvements are moderately large and clinically significant. Rehabilitation serves as an important component of the management of COPD and is beneficial in improving health-related quality of life and exercise capacity. It is our opinion that additional RCTs comparing pulmonary rehabilitation and conventional care in COPD are not warranted. Future research studies should focus on identifying which components of pulmonary rehabilitation are essential, its ideal length and location, the degree of supervision and intensity of training required and how long treatment effects persist. This endeavour is important in the light of the new subgroup analysis, which showed a difference in treatment effect on the CRQ between hospital-based and community-based programmes but no difference between exercise only and more complex pulmonary rehabilitation programmes.

PURPOSE Cognitive impairment after critical illness is common and debilitating. We developed a cognitive therapy program for critically ill patients and assessed the feasibility and safety of administering combined cognitive and physical therapy early during a critical illness. METHODS We randomized 87 medical and surgical ICU patients with respiratory failure and/or shock in a 1:1:2 manner to three groups: usual care, early once-daily physical therapy, or early once-daily physical therapy plus a novel, progressive, twice-daily cognitive therapy protocol. Cognitive therapy included orientation, memory, attention, and problem solving exercises, and other activities. We assessed feasibility outcomes of the early cognitive plus physical therapy intervention. At 3-months, we also assessed cognitive, functional and health-related quality of life outcomes. Data are presented as median [interquartile range] or frequency (%). RESULTS Early cognitive therapy was a delivered to 41/43 (95%) of cognitive plus physical therapy patients on 100% [92–100%] of study days beginning 1.0 [1.0–1.0] day following enrollment. Physical therapy was received by 17/22 (77%) of usual care patients, by 21/22 (95%) of physical therapy only patients and 42/43 (98%) of cognitive plus physical therapy patients on 17% [10–26%], 67% [46–87%] and 75% [59–88%] of study days, respectively. Cognitive, functional and health-related quality of life outcomes did not differ between groups at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS This pilot study demonstrates that early rehabilitation can be extended beyond physical therapy to include cognitive therapy. Future work to determine optimal patient selection, intensity of treatment and benefits of cognitive therapy in the critically ill is needed.

This study found that reminiscence enhanced the experience of living in long-term care for residents with dementia and working in long-term care settings for staff.

Reminiscence may, in certain circumstances, be an effective care option for people with dementia in long-stay settings with potential to impact positively on the quality of life of residents.

Very little high quality work has been completed exploring palliative care interventions in advanced dementia. There were only two included studies in this review, with variation in the interventions and in the settings that made it impossible to conduct a meta-analysis of data for any outcome. Thus, we conclude that there is insufficient evidence to assess the effect of palliative care interventions in advanced dementia. The fact that there are six ongoing studies at the time of this review indicates an increased interest in this area by researchers, which is welcome and needed.

Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all the potential studies we identified as a result of the search strategy. We resolved any disagreement through discussion or, when required, consulted with the rest of the review team. We independently extracted data and conducted assessment of methodological quality, using standard Cochrane methods. Main results We identified two studies of palliative care interventions for people with advanced dementia. We did not pool data due to the heterogeneity between the two trials in terms of the interventions and the settings. The two studies measured 31 different outcomes, yet they did not measure the same outcome. There are six ongoing studies that we expect to include in future versions of this review. Both studies were at high risk of bias, in part because blinding was not possible. This and small sample sizes meant that the overall certainty of all the evidence was very low.

Six subjects with DSM-III defined unipolar major depressive disorder had positron emission tomography scans using 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (2FDG) before and after treatment with imipramine. Their 12 scans were compared to the scans of six controls matched for age. Significant reductions in metabolism for subjects in the depressed group were found on scans for both the anterior and right frontal regions. significant reductions in metabolism occurred more often in the right hemisphere than the left. No significant changes in metabolism could be attributed to imipramine. In addition, absolute metabolic rates were not related to the degree of depression pre- and post-treatment. The findings suggest that hypometabolism in the frontal cortex and right hemisphere may occur in major depressive disorders.

The research community is responding with speed to the COVID-19 pandemic, with rapid response mechanisms to fund research, shortened application turnaround times, and expedited research ethics processes. Public and patient involvement (PPI) is under pressure in this rapid response research, where it is easy for researchers and funders to dismiss PPI as non-essential, an added extra, a “nice to have”.  In this open letter, we, researchers and PPI contributors, argue that PPI is important, now more than ever. The pandemic is impacting everyone in society, with normal rules of engagement discarded. The solution to overcoming this virus will come from many different sources and many changes will emerge to healthcare delivery and to how we live our lives. It is essential that the research to find solutions is shaped by all who will be impacted: the public and the patient must be central contributors and their voice must be hear.