Barriers and Enablers to Implementing Clinical Treatment Protocols for Fever, Hyperglycaemia, and Swallowing Dysfunction in the Quality in Acute Stroke Care (QASC) Project-A Mixed Methods Study

Timely delivery of care in neurological emergencies: can standardized management protocols help?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the evidence that supports the implementation of goal-directed care bundle protocols to improve outcomes from neurocritical conditions, and of the possible advantage of specific over generalized protocols.

RECENT FINDINGS

Articles from January 1, 2023 to July 31, 2024 were searched to evaluate the effectiveness of standardized management in neurological emergencies. The use of care bundles and standardized protocols with time- and target-related metrics has shown benefit in patients with acute stroke and traumatic brain injury.

SUMMARY

A goal-directed care protocol to guide standard management implemented by a multidisciplinary team can improve outcomes from neurological emergencies. However, implementation challenges need to be addressed before wide adoption of protocolized care for maximum benefit to populations.

From guidelines to clinical practice in care for ischaemic stroke patients: A systematic review and expert opinion

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Guidelines help physicians to provide optimal care for stroke patients, but implementation is challenging due to the quantity of recommendations. Therefore a practical overview related to applicability of recommendations can be of assistance.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed on ischaemic stroke guidelines published in scientific journals, covering the whole acute care process for patients with ischaemic stroke. After data extraction, experts rated the recommendations on dimensions of applicability, that is, actionability, feasibility and validity, on a 9-point Likert scale. Agreement was defined as a score of ≥8 by ≥80% of the experts.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles were identified and 48 recommendations were ultimately extracted. Papers were included only if they described the whole acute care process for patients with ischaemic stroke. Data extraction and analysis revealed variation in terms of both content and comprehensiveness of this description. Experts reached agreement on 34 of 48 (70.8%) recommendations in the dimension actionability, for 16 (33.3%) in feasibility and for 15 (31.3%) in validity. Agreement on all three dimensions was reached for seven (14.6%) recommendations: use of a stroke unit, exclusion of intracerebral haemorrhage as differential diagnosis, administration of intravenous thrombolysis, performance of electrocardiography/cardiac evaluation, non-invasive vascular examination, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis and administration of statins if needed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Substantial variation in agreement was revealed on the three dimensions of the applicability of recommendations. This overview can guide stroke physicians in improving the care process and removing barriers where implementation may be hampered by validity and feasibility.

Recommendations for Implementing the INTERACT3 Care Bundle for Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Latin America: Results of a Delphi Method

INTRODUCTION

The third Intensive Care Bundle with Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage Trial (INTERACT3) showed that the implementation of a care bundle improves outcomes after acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We aimed to establish consensus-based recommendations for the broader integration of the care bundle across Latin American countries (LAC).

METHODS

A 3-phase Delphi study allowed a panel of 32 healthcare workers from 14 LAC to sequentially rank statements relevant to 7 domains (training, resources/infrastructure, patient education, blood pressure, temperature, glycemic control, and anticoagulation reversal). The pre-defined consensus threshold was 75%.

RESULTS

A total of 43 statements reached consensus by the third round, with 12 new statements emerging through rounds. The highest-ranked statements in each domain emphasized critical aspects, but successful implementation requires appropriate resourcing. Key priorities were continuous training of all healthcare workers in ICH management, establishing protocols aligned with available resources, and collaborative interdisciplinary care supported by institutional networks. Statements related to anticoagulation reversal had the highest priority.

CONCLUSIONS

Consensus statements are provided to facilitate integration of the INTERACT3 care bundle to reduce disparities in ICH outcomes in LAC.

The Quality in Acute Stroke Care (QASC) global scale-up using a cascading facilitation framework: a qualitative process evaluation

BACKGROUND

Variation in hospital stroke care is problematic. The Quality in Acute Stroke (QASC) Australia trial demonstrated reductions in death and disability through supported implementation of nurse-led, evidence-based protocols to manage fever, hyperglycaemia (sugar) and swallowing (FeSS Protocols) following stroke. Subsequently, a pre-test/post-test study was conducted in acute stroke wards in 64 hospitals in 17 European countries to evaluate upscale of the FeSS Protocols. Implementation across countries was underpinned by a cascading facilitation framework of multi-stakeholder support involving academic partners and a not-for-profit health organisation, the Angels Initiative (the industry partner), that operates to promote evidence-based treatments in stroke centres. .We report here an a priori qualitative process evaluation undertaken to identify factors that influenced international implementation of the FeSS Protocols using a cascading facilitation framework.

METHODS

The sampling frame for interviews was: (1) Executives/Steering Committee members, consisting of academics, the Angels Initiative and senior project team, (2) Angel Team leaders (managers of Angel Consultants), (3) Angel Consultants (responsible for assisting facilitation of FeSS Protocols into multiple hospitals) and (4) Country Co-ordinators (senior stroke nurses with country and hospital-level responsibilities for facilitating the introduction of the FeSS Protocols). A semi-structured interview elicited participant views on the factorsthat influenced engagement of stakeholders with the project and preparation for and implementation of the FeSS Protocol upscale. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively within NVivo.

RESULTS

Individual (n = 13) and three group interviews (3 participants in each group) were undertaken. Three main themes with sub-themes were identified that represented key factors influencing upscale: (1) readiness for change (sub-themes: negotiating expectations; intervention feasible and acceptable; shared goal of evidence-based stroke management); (2) roles and relationships (sub-themes: defining and establishing roles; harnessing nurse champions) and (3) managing multiple changes (sub-themes: accommodating and responding to variation; more than clinical change; multi-layered communication framework).

CONCLUSION

A cascading facilitation model involving a partnership between evidence producers (academic partners), knowledge brokers (industry partner, Angels Initiative) and evidence adopters (stroke clinicians) overcame multiple challenges involved in international evidence translation. Capacity to manage, negotiate and adapt to multi-level changes and strategic engagement of different stakeholders supported adoption of nurse-initiated stroke protocols within Europe. This model has promise for other large-scale evidence translation programs.

Interventions for the uptake of evidence-based recommendations in acute stroke settings

BACKGROUND

There is a growing body of research evidence to guide acute stroke care. Receiving care in a stroke unit improves access to recommended evidence-based therapies and patient outcomes. However, even in stroke units, evidence-based recommendations are inconsistently delivered by healthcare workers to patients with stroke. Implementation interventions are strategies designed to improve the delivery of evidence-based care.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of implementation interventions (compared to no intervention or another implementation intervention) on adherence to evidence-based recommendations by health professionals working in acute stroke units. Secondary objectives were to assess factors that may modify the effect of these interventions, and to determine if single or multifaceted strategies are more effective in increasing adherence with evidence-based recommendations.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Joanna Briggs Institute and ProQuest databases to 13 April 2022. We searched the grey literature and trial registries and reviewed reference lists of all included studies, relevant systematic reviews and primary studies; contacted corresponding authors of relevant studies and conducted forward citation searching of the included studies. There were no restrictions on language and publication date.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials and cluster-randomised trials. Participants were health professionals providing care to patients in acute stroke units; implementation interventions (i.e. strategies to improve delivery of evidence-based care) were compared to no intervention or another implementation intervention. We included studies only if they reported on our primary outcome which was quality of care, as measured by adherence to evidence-based recommendations, in order to address the review aim.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. We compared single implementation interventions to no intervention, multifaceted implementation interventions to no intervention, multifaceted implementation interventions compared to single implementation interventions and multifaceted implementation interventions to another multifaceted intervention. Our primary outcome was adherence to evidence-based recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven cluster-randomised trials with 42,489 patient participants from 129 hospitals, conducted in Australia, the UK, China, and the Netherlands. Health professional participants (numbers not specified) included nursing, medical and allied health professionals. Interventions in all studies included implementation strategies targeting healthcare workers; three studies included delivery arrangements, no studies used financial arrangements or governance arrangements. Five trials compared a multifaceted implementation intervention to no intervention, two trials compared one multifaceted implementation intervention to another multifaceted implementation intervention. No included studies compared a single implementation intervention to no intervention or to a multifaceted implementation intervention. Quality of care outcomes (proportions of patients receiving evidence-based care) were included in all included studies. All studies had low risks of selection bias and reporting bias, but high risk of performance bias. Three studies had high risks of bias from non-blinding of outcome assessors or due to analyses used. We are uncertain whether a multifaceted implementation intervention leads to any change in adherence to evidence-based recommendations compared with no intervention (risk ratio (RR) 1.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 3.61; 4 trials; 76 clusters; 2144 participants, I2 =92%, very low-certainty evidence). Looking at two specific processes of care, multifaceted implementation interventions compared to no intervention probably lead to little or no difference in the proportion of patients with ischaemic stroke who received thrombolysis (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.37, 2 trials; 32 clusters; 1228 participants, moderate-certainty evidence), but probably do increase the proportion of patients who receive a swallow screen within 24 hours of admission (RR 6.76, 95% CI 4.44 to 10.76; 1 trial; 19 clusters; 1,804 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Multifaceted implementation interventions probably make little or no difference in reducing the risk of death, disability or dependency compared to no intervention (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; 3 trials; 51 clusters ; 1228 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably make little or no difference to hospital length of stay compared with no intervention (difference in absolute change 1.5 days; 95% CI -0.5 to 3.5; 1 trial; 19 clusters; 1804 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We do not know if a multifaceted implementation intervention compared to no intervention result in changes to resource use or health professionals' knowledge because no included studies collected these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether a multifaceted implementation intervention compared to no intervention improves adherence to evidence-based recommendations in acute stroke settings, because the certainty of evidence is very low.

Post-operative delirium in the patient with hip fracture: The journey from hospital arrival to discharge

Delirium- an acute disorder of attention and cognition- is the commonest complication following hip fracture. Patients with hip fracture are particularly vulnerable to delirium, and many of the lessons from the care of the patient with hip fracture will extend to other surgical cohorts. Prevention and management of delirium for patients presenting with hip fracture, extending along a continuum from arrival through to the post-operative setting. Best practice guidelines emphasize multidisciplinary care including management by an orthogeriatric service, regular delirium screening, and multimodal interventions. The evidence base for prevention is strongest in terms of multifaceted interventions, while once delirium has set in, early recognition and identification of the cause are key. Integration of effective strategies is often suboptimal, and may be supported by approaches such as interactive teaching methodologies, routine feedback, and clear protocol dissemination. Partnering with patients and carers will support person centered care, improve patient experiences, and may improve outcomes. Ongoing work needs to focus on implementing recognized best practice, in order to minimize the health, social and economic costs of delirium.

Using mixed-methods in evidence-based nursing: a scoping review guided by a socio-ecological perspective

Background

Increased pressure for evidence-based practice in nursing necessitates that researchers use effective approaches. Mixed-methods research (MMR) has potential to improve the knowledge and implementation of evidence-based nursing (EBN) by generating outcome-based and contextually-focused evidence.

Aims

To identify methodological trends in how MMR is used in EBN research.

Methods

Searches were completed in PubMed, CINAHL, and Google Scholar using the terms "nursing", "mixed-methods", and "evidence-based". Seventy-two articles using MMR to address EBN and published 2000-2021 were reviewed across content themes and methodological domains of the Socio-Ecological Framework for MMR.

Results

Mixed-methods research has been used to study how EBN strategies are perceived, developed and assessed, and implemented or evaluated. A few studies provided an MMR definition reflecting the methods perspective, and the dominant MMR rationale was gaining a comprehensive understanding of the issue. The leading design was concurrent, and half of studies intersected MMR with evaluation, action/participatory, and/or case-study approaches. Research quality was primarily assessed using criteria specific to quantitative and qualitative approaches.

Conclusions

Mixed-methods research has great potential to enhance EBN research by generating more clinically useful findings and helping nurses understand how to identify and implement the best available research evidence in practice.

Implementation Science Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to complete a scoping review of implementation science (IS) research in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) over time and to determine characteristics of IS research in CSD.

METHOD

A scoping review was conducted of PubMed and Education Resources Information Center for sources published in English that (a) included CSD practitioners, (b) addressed IS research, and (c) identified a specific evidence-based practice. Resulting sources were systematically examined for study aim, patient populations, implementation framework utilized, setting of the study, implementation strategy examined, and implementation outcome measured.

RESULTS

The majority of the 82 studies that underwent a full-text review (80.5%) were published in 2014 or later. One fourth of the studies were concept papers, and another one fourth focused on context assessment (25.6% of studies, each), 11% focused on designing implementation strategies, and 36.6% focused on testing implementation strategies. The patient population most frequently represented aphasia (21.3%), and most studies (34.4%) were conducted in inpatient medical settings. Nearly half (42.6%) of the nonconcept studies lacked an IS framework. Among implementation strategies identified, approximately one third of studies focused on education and/or training plus another strategy and one fourth focused on education and/or training alone. Implementation outcomes measured typically represented early stages of implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review of IS research in CSD described the landscape of IS studies in CSD. IS is intersecting with CSD at a rapid rate, especially since 2014. Future IS research in CSD should adopt an implementation framework a priori and consider the broad range of implementation strategies and outcomes to support the uptake of research into typical practice settings.

An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Most studies examining complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) stakeholder engagement with evidence-based practice have relied on quantitative research methods, which often fail to capture the nuances of this phenomena. Using qualitative methods, this study aimed to explore the experiences of CAM stakeholders regarding the barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research.

METHODS

This research was guided by a qualitative descriptive framework. CAM practitioners and researchers of multiple CAM disciplines from across Australia and New Zealand were invited to share their personal perspectives of the study phenomena. Semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Rigour strategies were applied to ensure the credibility of results. The transcript was analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

CAM stakeholders identified an array of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research within their disciplines. The barriers and enablers that emerged were found to be inter-connected with two similar constructs: capacity and culture. Captured within the construct of capacity were five themes-lack of resources, inadequate governance/leadership, lack of competency, bias directed from outside and within CAM, and lack of time for research. Within the construct of culture were two themes-intrinsic perceptions in CAM, and lack of communication within and outside CAM.

CONCLUSIONS

Promoting evidence-based practice and engaging with research in CAM continues to face challenges. This study, for the first time, has highlighted the multitude of interlinked barriers that confront CAM stakeholders when engaging with research. These findings highlight the need for a concerted and targeted approach to tackle these challenges.

Four-hour swallow screening target for stroke - from guidelines to practice: A mixed methods knowledge translation study

Purpose: To conduct systematic analysis of compliance with swallow screening against a 4-hour target timeframe and determine barriers and facilitators to compliance.Method: Knowledge translation approach using mixed methods. Quantitative data from a medium sized metropolitan hospital was extracted from 12-months of medical records to review timing of swallow screening from stroke admission using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data involved 14 semi-structured interviews of speech-language pathologists, registered nurses and medical officers and were analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework.Result: 74% of eligible patients (271/365) received a swallow screen by trained nursing staff; 189 (52%) were within the 4-hour target. Screening was facilitated by quality training of nurses, strong belief in the benefits for patients and availability of the specialist stroke nurse. Quantitative analysis, confirmed through participant interviews as barriers, revealed that the strongest predictors of not meeting the 4-hour target were overnight admissions and not being admitted to the dedicated stroke unit.Conclusion: 52% of swallow screenings were performed within the 4-hour target timeframe recommended as best practice in the Australian and UK stroke guidelines. Barriers identified may assist other institutions improve compliance with the 4-hour timeframe that will likely be adopted internationally.

Nursing Policies and Protocols: Do Nurses Really Use Them?

BACKGROUND

Nursing policies and protocols exist to promote high-quality, safe, and effective nursing practice; however, there is little evidence demonstrating how nurses actually use them to inform their everyday, routine practice.

PURPOSE

The purposes were to explore the extent to which nurses use nursing policies and protocols to guide their routine practice, and identify barriers and facilitators affecting the frequency with which nurses use nursing policies and protocols.

METHODS

Licensed nurses (N = 235) providing direct care to inpatients and outpatients in a large medical center participated in an 18-question online survey.

RESULTS

Most nurses access policies and protocols once a month or more; the greatest barrier to more frequent access was length of the policy or protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

Organizations should make policies and protocols succinct, current, and easily accessible. Studies are needed to determine how policies and procedures can best meet the needs of stakeholders, including health care organizations, staff, and patients.

Delirium Reduction by Analgesia Management in Hip Fracture surgery (DRAM-HF): Exploration of perceived facilitators and barriers

OBJECTIVES

In tandem with the implementation of a multidisciplinary protocol which was successful in reducing delirium after hip fracture surgery (DRAM-HF), we sought to investigate enablers and barriers to same.

METHODS

Single-centre, prospective, before-and-after questionnaire targeted at health-care professionals involved in DRAM-HF. We assessed respondent-reported enablers and barriers to the multidisciplinary protocol, using 0-100 agreement scales and free-text responses.

RESULTS

A total of 134 preintervention and 124 postintervention responses were collated (out of 200, response rates 67% and 62%, respectively). Preintervention support for DRAM-HF was 100% (n = 130) and postintervention 95.9% (n = 116). Study design was well received with a mean score of 76.7 (SD 19.7) for being easy to understand. Support for additional computer alert systems was also high (mean 73.6, SD 23.9). Free-text responses emphasised the need for integration of ward pharmacists into medication optimisation (n = 31) and upskilling nurse practitioners (n = 23).

CONCLUSION

Whilst generally supported, DRAM-HF implementation may be streamlined by optimising electronic delivery, offering targeted education and expanding roles.

Validity and reliability of Evidence-Based Practice Leadership Scale and Evidence-Based Work Environment Scale in Turkish

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Evidence-Based Practice Leadership Scale (EBPLS) and Work Environment Scale (EBPWES) translated into Turkish so that they are used in nursing research.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This methodological study was conducted with nurses. Language and content validity, item analyses were used to test the validity and reliability of the scales.

FINDINGS

The confirmatory factor analysis results demonstrate that t values of each item in both scales are significant (P < .05). All model and data fit indices are higher than the acceptable level. Thus, CFA has shown that the scales with model-data fit are valid.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The characteristics of nurse leaders and the suitability of the working environment are crucial for the maintenance of evidence-based practices. EBPLS and EBPWES will be effective and reliable tools in our country and an effective tool for contributing to the maintenance and development of evidence-based practices. The analyses indicate that the Turkish versions of the EBPLS and the EBPWES are acceptable, valid, and reliable for Turkish nurses.

Perceived barriers and enablers for implementing water protocols in acute stroke care: A qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

Purpose: To identify perceived enablers and barriers that may influence the implementation of water protocols (WPs) as an intervention for dysphagia in acute stroke settings. Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine nurses, eight speech-language pathologists (SLPs), five doctors and four dietitians working in acute stroke units in a major city in Australia. Data were thematically analysed and themes were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Result: Ten barriers and nine enablers were identified. Key barriers were: nurses lack oral care skills and agency nurses lack stroke-specific skills; only SLPs are perceived to be involved with WPs; WP rules will not get followed and may lead to adverse patient outcomes; WPs increase nursing workload; transient workforce impacts efficiency of implementation; and established culture of using thickened fluids. Key enablers were: patients would benefit from WPs; communication and education systems are already in place; acute hospital brings unique benefits; and peer support and modelling support implementation. Conclusion: The perceptions of barriers and enablers to implementation of WPs can be used to inform future studies designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of WPs and subsequently facilitate their uptake in acute stroke as an alternate dysphagia management strategy.

Implementing biomarkers to predict motor recovery after stroke

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in using biomarkers to predict motor recovery and outcomes after stroke. The PREP2 algorithm combines clinical assessment with biomarkers in an algorithm, to predict upper limb functional outcomes for individual patients. To date, PREP2 is the first algorithm to be tested in clinical practice, and other biomarker-based algorithms are likely to follow.

PURPOSE

This review considers how algorithms to predict motor recovery and outcomes after stroke might be implemented in clinical practice.

FINDINGS

There are two tasks: first the prediction information needs to be obtained, and then it needs to be used. The barriers and facilitators of implementation are likely to differ for these tasks. We identify specific elements of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research that are relevant to each of these two tasks, using the PREP2 algorithm as an example. These include the characteristics of the predictors and algorithm, the clinical setting and its staff, and the healthcare environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Active, theoretically underpinned implementation strategies are needed to ensure that biomarkers are successfully used in clinical practice for predicting motor outcomes after stroke, and should be considered in parallel with biomarker development.

Glycemia in Acute Stroke II study: a call to improve post-stroke hyperglycemia management in clinical practice

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to analyze the effect of conventional glucose management, which aimed to maintain glucose levels <155 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L), on glucose control and the outcomes of patients with acute ischaemic stroke (IS) in a clinical practice setting.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients with acute IS. Patients were classified into four groups based on their initial 48-h capillary glucose levels and the administration of and response to corrective treatment: (i) untreated and maximum glucose levels <155 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L) within the first 48 h; (ii) treated and good responders [glucose levels persistently <155 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L)]; (iii) treated and non-responders [any glucose values ≥155 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L) during the 24 h after the start of corrective treatment]; and (iv) untreated with any glucose value ≥155 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L). The primary outcome was death or dependence at 3 months (blinded rater).

RESULTS

A total of 213 patients were included. Ninety-seven (45.5%) patients developed glucose levels ≥155 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L), 69 (71.1%) underwent corrective treatment and 31 patients underwent no corrective treatment at the physician's discretion [28 of whom had isolated values ≥155 mg/dL (8.5 mmol/L)]. Only 11 (16%) patients responded to conventional treatment, whereas 58 (84%) patients were non-responsive. Non-responders showed a twofold higher risk of death or dependence at 3 months (odds ratio, 2.472; 95% confidence interval, 1.096-5.576; P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of response to conventional treatment for glucose management in acute IS is frequent and associated with poor outcomes.

Health professionals' views on the barriers and enablers to evidence-based practice for acute stroke care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Adoption of contemporary evidence-based guidelines for acute stroke management is often delayed due to a range of key enablers and barriers. Recent reviews on such barriers focus mainly on specific acute stroke therapies or generalised stroke care guidelines. This review examined the overall barriers and enablers, as perceived by health professionals which affect how evidence-based practice guidelines (stroke unit care, thrombolysis administration, aspirin usage and decompressive surgery) for acute stroke care are adopted in hospital settings.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic search of databases was conducted using MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database from 1990 to 2016. The population of interest included health professionals working clinically or in roles responsible for acute stroke care. There were no restrictions to the study designs. A quality appraisal tool for qualitative studies by the Joanna Briggs Institute and another for quantitative studies by the Centre for Evidence-Based Management were used in the present study. A recent checklist to classify barriers and enablers to health professionals' adherence to evidence-based practice was also used.

RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria out of a total of 9832 search results. The main barriers or enablers identified included poor organisational or institutional level support, health professionals' limited skills or competence to use a particular therapy, low level of awareness, familiarity or confidence in the effectiveness of a particular evidence-based therapy, limited medical facilities to support evidence uptake, inadequate peer support among health professionals', complex nature of some stroke care therapies or guidelines and patient level barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite considerable evidence supporting various specific therapies for stroke care, uptake of these therapies is compromised by barriers across organisational, patients, guideline interventions and health professionals' domains. As a result, we recommend that future interventions and health policy directions should be informed by these findings in order to optimise uptake of best practice acute stroke care. Further studies from low- to middle-income countries are needed to understand the barriers and enablers in such settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol was registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews, PROSPERO 2015 (Registration Number: CRD42015023481 ).

Testing a systematic approach to identify and prioritise barriers to successful implementation of a complex healthcare intervention

BACKGROUND

Multiple barriers may inhibit the adoption of clinical interventions and impede successful implementation. Use of standardised methods to prioritise barriers to target when selecting implementation interventions is an understudied area of implementation research. The aim of this study was to describe a method to identify and prioritise barriers to the implementation of clinical practice elements which were used to inform the development of the T3 trial implementation intervention (Triage, Treatment [thrombolysis administration; monitoring and management of temperature, blood glucose levels, and swallowing difficulties] and Transfer of stroke patients from Emergency Departments [ED]).

METHODS

A survey was developed based on a literature review and data from a complementary trial to identify the commonly reported barriers for the nine T3 clinical care elements. This was administered via a web-based questionnaire to a purposive sample of Australian multidisciplinary clinicians and managers in acute stroke care. The questionnaire addressed barriers to each of the nine T3 trial clinical care elements. Participants produced two ranked lists: on their perception of: firstly, how influential each barrier was in preventing clinicians from performing the clinical care element (influence attribute); and secondly how difficult the barrier was to overcome (difficulty attribute). The rankings for both influence and difficulty were combined to classify the barriers according to three categories ('least desirable', desirable' or 'most desirable' to target) to assist interpretation.

RESULTS

All invited participants completed the survey; (n = 17; 35% medical, 35% nursing, 18% speech pathology, 12% bed managers). The barriers classified as most desirable to target and overcome were a 'lack of protocols for the management of fever' and 'not enough blood glucose monitoring machines'.

CONCLUSIONS

A structured decision-support procedure has been illustrated and successfully applied to identify and prioritise barriers to target within an implementation intervention. This approach may prove to be a useful in other studies and as an adjunct to undertaking barrier assessments within individual sites when planning implementation interventions.

Towards best practice in acute stroke care in Ghana: a survey of hospital services

Background

Stroke and other non-communicable diseases are important emerging public health concerns in sub-Saharan Africa where stroke-related mortality and morbidity are higher compared to other parts of the world. Despite the availability of evidence-based acute stroke interventions globally, uptake in low-middle income countries (LMIC) such as Ghana is uncertain. This study aimed to identify and evaluate available acute stroke services in Ghana and the extent to which these services align with global best practice.

Methods

A multi-site, hospital-based survey was conducted in 11 major referral hospitals (regional and tertiary - teaching hospitals) in Ghana from November 2015 to April 2016. Respondents included neurologists, physician specialists and medical officers (general physicians). A pre-tested, structured questionnaire was used to gather data on available hospital-based acute stroke services in the study sites, using The World Stroke Organisation Global Stroke Services Guideline as a reference for global standards.

Results

Availability of evidence-based services for acute stroke care in the study hospitals were varied and limited. The results showed one tertiary-teaching hospital had a stroke unit. However, thrombolytic therapy (thrombolysis) using recombinant tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke care was not available in any of the study hospitals. Aspirin therapy was administered in all the 11 study hospitals. Although eight study sites reported having a brain computed tomographic (CT) scan, only 7 (63.6%) were functional at the time of the study. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI scan) services were also limited to only 4 (36.4%) hospitals (only functional in three). Acute stroke care by specialists, especially neurologists, was found in 36.4% (4) of the study hospitals whilst none of the study hospitals had an occupational or a speech pathologist to support in the provision of acute stroke care.

Conclusion

This study confirms previous reports of limited and variable provision of evidence based stroke services and the low priority for stroke care in resource poor settings. Health policy initiatives to enhance uptake of evidence-based acute stroke services is required to reduce stroke-related mortality and morbidity in countries such as Ghana.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2061-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Early Mobilization after Stroke: Changes in Clinical Opinion Despite an Unchanging Evidence Base

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine whether Australasian health professionals' opinions regarding early mobilization after stroke changed between 2008 and 2014, when a large international trial of early mobilization (A Very Early Rehabilitation Trial, AVERT) was underway.

METHODS

Attendees at the two major Australasian stroke conferences in 2008 and 2014 were surveyed. Participants rated their agreement with statements about the risks and benefits of commencing mobilization within 24 hours of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke using a 5-point Likert scale. Participants in 2014 were asked about their awareness of AVERT. Logistic regressions were performed to determine whether the time point (2008 versus 2014) or awareness of AVERT influenced opinions about early mobilization.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 443 health professionals (2008: N = 202; 2014: N = 241). Most respondents in 2014 reported that early mobilization was beneficial and not harmful to people with ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. Opinions regarding mobilization after ischemic stroke did not change significantly between 2008 and 2014. In 2014, a significantly greater proportion of respondents believed that early mobilization after hemorrhagic stroke was helpful (2008: n = 98 of 202 [49%] versus 2014: n = 170 of 241 [71%], P < .01). Awareness of AVERT was significantly associated with the opinion that early mobilization was beneficial and not harmful to patients with stroke (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Australasian health professionals' opinions of early mobilization after hemorrhagic stroke changed between 2008 and 2014, prior to reporting of the AVERT trial. Our results suggest that awareness of an ongoing research trial can lead to changes in opinions before the efficacy of the experimental intervention is known.

Education-only versus a multifaceted intervention for improving assessment of rehabilitation needs after stroke; a cluster randomised trial

Background

In 2011, more than half of the patients with stroke in Australian hospitals were not assessed for the need for rehabilitation. Further, there were no recommended criteria to guide rehabilitation assessment decisions. Subsequently, a decision-making tool called the Assessment for Rehabilitation Tool (ART) was developed. The ART was designed to assist Australian hospital clinicians to identify the rehabilitation needs of patients with stroke using evidence-based criteria. The ART was released and made freely available for use in 2012. This study evaluated the effectiveness of an education-only intervention (1 onsite education session and distribution of the ART) and a multifaceted intervention (2 or more onsite education sessions, distribution of the ART, audit and feedback, barrier identification, site-specific strategy development, promotion of interdisciplinary teamwork, opinion leaders and reminders) for improving assessments of rehabilitation needs after stroke.

Methods

Ten hospitals in 2 states of Australia were randomly assigned to an education-only or a multifaceted intervention. Medical records were audited by assessors blinded to group allocation before and after the implementation period. Difference in the proportion of patients assessed for rehabilitation before and after the intervention was analysed using mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, with time period as the dependent variable, an interaction between intervention type and time included to test for differences between the interventions, and hospital included as the random effect to account for patient clustering.

Results

Data from 586 patients (284 pre-intervention; 302 post-intervention; age 76 years, 59 % male) showed that the multifaceted intervention was not more effective than education-only in improving the proportion of patients whose rehabilitation needs were assessed (reference category education-only; odds ratio 1.29, 95 % confidence interval 0.63–2.67, p = 0.483). Post-intervention, the odds of a patient’s rehabilitation needs being assessed was 3.69 times greater than pre-intervention (95 % confidence interval 2.57–5.30, p < 0.001). Evidence-based criteria were not consistently used when patients were deemed to have no rehabilitation needs.

Conclusions

A multifaceted intervention was not more effective than education-only in improving the assessment of rehabilitation needs of patients with stroke. Further interventions are required to ensure that all patients are assessed for the need for rehabilitation using evidence-based criteria.

Trial registration

ANZCTR (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry), ACTRN12616000340437

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0487-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.