What is known about this topic• Worldwide, there are high numbers of family members caring for people with dementia. Caring for a person with dementia may have significant impacts on the health and well-being of family carers.• There is a need to know what interventions, including those provided by specialist nurses, are most effective in supporting carers. What this paper adds• Specialist nursing support for carers of people with dementia is valued by family carers, but the impact of such initiatives is not clearly established and more needs to be known about at what point in the dementia trajectory the contribution of specialist nurses can make a difference.• Evidence is still mixed about what types of interventions support family carers of people with dementia, but the strongest evidence is for multifactorial interventions. AbstractSpecialist nurses are one way of providing support for family carers of people with dementia, but relatively little is known about what these roles achieve, or if they are more effective than roles that do not require a clinical qualification. The aim of this review was to synthesise the literature on the scope and effectiveness of specialist nurses, known as Admiral Nurses, and set this evidence in the context of other communitybased initiatives to support family carers of people with dementia. We undertook a systematic review of the literature relating to the scope and effectiveness of Admiral Nurses and a review of reviews of interventions to support the family carers of people with dementia. To identify studies, we searched electronic databases, undertook lateral searches and contacted experts. Searches were undertaken in November 2012. Results are reported narratively with key themes relating to Admiral Nurses identified using thematic synthesis. We included 33 items relating to Admiral Nurses (10 classified as research) and 11 reviews evaluating community-based support for carers of people with dementia. There has been little work to evaluate specific interventions provided by Admiral Nurses, but three overarching thematic categories were identified: (i) relational support, (ii) co-ordinating and personalising support and (iii) challenges and threats to the provision of services by Admiral Nurses. There was an absence of clearly articulated goals and service delivery was subject to needs of the host organisation and the local area. The reviews of community-based support for carers of people with dementia included 155 studies but, in general, evidence that interventions reduced caregiver depression or burden was weak, although psychosocial and educational interventions may reduce depression in carers. Community support for carers of people with dementia, such as that provided by Admiral Nurses, is valued by family carers, but the impact of such initiatives is not clearly established.

Objectives: To conduct a systematic review to determine whether there is an association between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) or overactive bladder (OAB) in women. Methods: We systematically reviewed English language observational studies on the effect of MetS (or component factors) on the presence of OAB or LUTS in women. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library with no date restrictions, checked reference lists and undertook citation searches in PubMed and Google Scholar. Studies were assessed for risk of bias. Because of heterogeneity, results were not pooled, but are reported narratively. Results: Of 27 included studies, only three looked at the link between MetS and OAB. The rest looked at links between OAB and components of MetS such as obesity or insulin resistance (n = 10), between MetS and urinary symptoms (n = 3) and between urinary symptoms and components of MetS, such as obesity (n = 14). Evidence is currently limited, but it does suggest that there may be important links between MetS and OAB and components of MetS such as obesity. Conclusions: The literature on MetS and OAB or LUTS in women is limited, and poor quality. However, the evidence available on obesity appears to support MetS as a contributor and predictor of LUTS in women. Many of the women with LUTS will be overweight and will have features of the MetS, if looked for. This provides not only an opportunity to encourage weight loss as an adjunct to therapy for the OAB symptoms but also a window of opportunity to address cardiovascular risk factors and prevent future cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Review criteriaObservational studies examining the link between metabolic syndrome (MetS) (or components of MetS) and the presence of OAB or LUTS were identified through database and lateral searches. Message for the clinicBoth obesity and MetS have been shown to have complex links with LUTS. It is not known whether reducing insulin resistance and central obesity-related chronic inflammation and oxidative stress might prevent the onset of OAB or improve the outcome of current treatment. However, identifying women with MetS who harbour a portfolio of cardiovascular risk factors does provide an opportunity to address future cardiovascular risk, and prevent premature morbidity and mortality; although whether this will have an effect on the storage component of LUTS is unclear. The key variables to address are diet and lifestyle, especially exercise. The investigations should include a blood pressure recording, BMI and waist circumference measurement together with a lipid profile and HbA1c. These results should be transmitted to the GP for action.

BackgroundThe last few decades have seen a growing emphasis on evidence-informed decision-making in health care. Systematic reviews, such as those produced by Cochrane, have been a key component of this movement. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Systematic Review Programme currently supports 20 Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) in the UK and it is important that this funding represents value for money.Aims and objectivesThe overall aim was to identify the impacts and likely impacts on health care, patient outcomes and value for money of Cochrane Reviews published by 20 NIHR-funded CRGs during the years 2007–11.DesignWe sent questionnaires to CRGs and review authors, undertook interviews with guideline developers (GDs) and used bibliometrics and documentary review to get an overview of CRG impact and to evaluate the impact of a sample of 60 Cochrane Reviews. The evaluation was guided by a framework with four categories (knowledge production, research targeting, informing policy development and impact on practice/services).ResultsA total of 3187 new and updated reviews were published on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews between 2007 and 2011, 1502 (47%) of which were produced by the 20 CRGs funded by the NIHR. We found 40 examples where reviews appeared to have influenced primary research and reviews had contributed to the creation of new knowledge and stimulated debate. Twenty-seven of the 60 reviews had 100 or more citations in Google Scholar™ (Google, CA, USA). Overall, 483 systematic reviews had been cited in 247 sets of guidance. This included 62 sets of international guidance, 175 sets of national guidance (87 from the UK) and 10 examples of local guidance. Evidence from the interviews suggested that Cochrane Reviews often play an instrumental role in informing guidance, although reviews being a poor fit with guideline scope or methods, reviews being out of date and a lack of communication between CRGs and GDs were barriers to their use. Cochrane Reviews appeared to have led to a number of benefits to the health service including safer or more appropriate use of medication or other health technologies or the identification of new effective drugs or treatments. However, whether or not these changes were directly as a result of the Cochrane Review and not the result of subsequent clinical guidance was difficult to judge. Potential benefits of Cochrane Reviews included economic benefits through budget savings or the release of funds, improvements in clinical quality, the reduction in the use of unproven or unnecessary procedures and improvements in patient and carer experiences.ConclusionsThis study identified a number of impacts and likely impacts of Cochrane Reviews. The clearest impacts of Cochrane Reviews are on research targeting and health-care policy, with less evidence of a direct impact on clinical practice and the organisation and delivery of NHS services. Although it is important for researchers to consider how they might increase the influence of their work, such impacts are difficult to measure. More work is required to develop suitable methods for defining and quantifying the impact of research.FundingThe NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme.