Multidisciplinary compliance with guidelines for stroke assessment: Results of a nurse-led evaluation study

Healthcare professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators of implementing clinical practice guidelines for stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify healthcare professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators to clinical practice guideline implementation within stroke rehabilitation.

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, Cochrane library, Academic Search Complete and Scopus. Additional papers were identified through hand searching.

REVIEW METHODS

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols systematic review approach. Any empirical research that provided qualitative data on healthcare professionals' perceived factors influencing clinical guideline implementation in stroke rehabilitation was included. One reviewer screened all titles and abstract reviews (n = 669). Another two reviewers independently screened 30% of title and abstract reviews, followed by full-text reviews (n = 61). Study quality was assessed using the mixed-method appraisal tool.

RESULTS

Data from 10 qualitative, six quantitative and six mixed-method studies published between 2000 and 2022, involving 1576 participants in total, were analysed and synthesised using modified thematic synthesis approach. The majority of participants were therapists n = 1297 (occupational therapists, physiotherapists, speech and language therapists). Organisational factors (time constraints, resources) alongside healthcare professionals' lack of knowledge and skills were the most cited barriers to guideline implementation. Contradictory attitudes and beliefs towards stroke guidelines applicability to real-life clinical practice and their evidence base were reported. Organisational support in the form of training, local protocols, performance monitoring and leadership were reported as perceived facilitators.

CONCLUSION

Barriers and facilitators are multifactorial and were identified at guideline, individual, team and organisational levels. There is a need to translate perceived barriers and facilitators into implementation interventions especially addressing organisational-level barriers.

Implementing clinical guidelines in stroke: a qualitative study of perceived facilitators and barriers

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines are frequently used as a mechanism for implementing evidence-based practice. However research indicates that health professionals vary in the extent to which they adhere to these guidelines. This study aimed to study the perceptions of stakeholders and health professionals on the facilitators and barriers to implementing national stroke guidelines in Ireland.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews using focus groups were conducted with stakeholders (n=3) and multidisciplinary team members from hospitals involved in stroke care (n=7). All focus group interviews were semi-structured, using open-ended questions. Data was managed and analysed using NVivo 9 software.

RESULTS

The main themes to emerge from the focus groups with stakeholders and hospital multidisciplinary teams were very similar in terms of topics discussed. These were resources, national stroke guidelines as a tool for change, characteristics of national stroke guidelines, advocacy at local level and community stroke care challenges. Facilitators perceived by stakeholders and health professionals included having dedicated resources, user-friendly guidelines relevant at local level and having supportive advocates on the ground. Barriers were inadequate resources, poor guideline characteristics and insufficient training and education.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights health professionals' perspectives regarding many key concepts which may affect the implementation of stroke care guidelines. The introduction of stroke clinical guidelines at a national level is not sufficient to improve health care quality as they should be incorporated in a quality assurance cycle with education programmes and feedback from surveys of clinical practice.

Assessing organisational readiness for change: use of diagnostic analysis prior to the implementation of a multidisciplinary assessment for acute stroke care

BACKGROUND

Achieving evidence-based practice in health care is integral to the drive for quality improvement in the National Health Service in the UK. Encapsulated within this policy agenda are challenges inherent in leading and managing organisational change. Not least of these is the need to change the behaviours of individuals and groups in order to embed new practices. Such changes are set within a context of organisational culture that can present a number of barriers and facilitators to change. Diagnostic analysis has been recommended as a precursor to the implementation of change to enable such barriers and facilitators to be identified and a targeted implementation strategy developed. Although diagnostic analysis is recommended, there is a paucity of advice on appropriate methods to use. This paper addresses the paucity and builds on previous work by recommending a mixed method approach to diagnostic analysis comprising both quantitative and qualitative data.

METHODS

Twenty staff members with strategic accountability for stroke care were purposively sampled to take part in semi-structured interviews. Six recently discharged patients were also interviewed. Focus groups were conducted with one group of registered ward-based nurses (n = 5) and three specialist registrars (n = 3) purposively selected for their interest in stroke care. All professional staff on the study wards were sent the Team Climate Inventory questionnaire (n = 206). This elicited a response rate of 72% (n = 148).

RESULTS

A number of facilitators for change were identified, including stakeholder support, organisational commitment to education, strong team climate in some teams, exemplars of past successful organisational change, and positive working environments. A number of barriers were also identified, including: unidisciplinary assessment/recording practices, varying in structure and evidence-base; weak team climate in some teams; negative exemplars of organisational change; and uncertainty created by impending organisational merger.

CONCLUSION

This study built on previous research by proposing a mixed method approach for diagnostic analysis. The combination of qualitative and quantitative data were able to capture multiple perspectives on barriers and facilitators to change. These data informed the tailoring of the implementation strategy to the specific needs of the Trust.