Improved in-hospital outcomes and care for patients in stroke research: An observational study

Measuring Representativeness in Clinical Trials

Representativeness in randomized clinical trials remains a critical concern, affecting the external validity of trial results, equitable access to the risks and benefits of research participation, and public trust in clinical research. Although representative participation by members of groups traditionally underrepresented in clinical trials is just a surrogate for true diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in clinical trials, it can be quantified, allowing stakeholders to add empirical rigor to diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging efforts. Multiple ways to measure representativeness have been proposed, including the participation-to-prevalence ratio, raw participation proportions or numbers for relevant subgroups, and enrollment fraction for relevant subgroups. These methods have strengths and weaknesses and may be appropriate to report in certain circumstances, depending on why stakeholders seek to assess representativeness. Stakeholders-including regulatory agencies, journal editors, clinical trial investigators, and trial sponsors-may use quantitative measures of representativeness to establish trial enrollment standards, monitor equitable participation in ongoing trials, and condition funding or drug or device approval on achieving specific representativeness targets. However, using quantitative measures of representativeness in this way could have unintended consequences, including researchers "gaming" recruitment strategies to meet target numbers, overlooking nuanced variations within communities, and potentially incentivizing problematic and exploitative recruitment strategies. Although no single method of measuring representativeness offers a comprehensive solution for increasing diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in all randomized clinical trials, a carefully designed, multifaceted approach to measuring representativeness may provide stakeholders with useful perspectives for measuring progress in increasing the diversity of clinical trial participation. For stakeholders seeking a single number to assess the representativeness of a trial enrolling patients with a disease state with well-delineated demographics, the participation-to-prevalence ratio is ideal; however, for a more nuanced view of representativeness, the combination of enrollment fraction in subgroups of relevance plus a full report of the demographics of patients approached for enrollment may be more appropriate.

From 'strong recommendation' to practice: A pre-test post-test study examining adherence to stroke guidelines for fever, hyperglycaemia, and swallowing (FeSS) management post-stroke

Background

The Quality in Acute Stroke Care (QASC) Trial demonstrated that assistance to implement protocols to manage Fever, hyperglycaemia (Sugar) and Swallowing (FeSS) post-stroke reduced death and disability. In 2017, a 'Strong Recommendation' for use of FeSS Protocols was included in the Australian Clinical Guidelines for Stroke Management. We aimed to: i) compare adherence to FeSS Protocols pre- and post-guideline inclusion; ii) determine if adherence varied with prior participation in a treatment arm of a FeSS Intervention study, or receiving treatment in a stroke unit; and compare findings with our previous studies.

Methods

Pre-test post-test study using Australian acute stroke service audit data comparing 2015/2017 (pre-guideline) versus 2019/2021 (post-guideline) adherence. Primary outcome was adherence to all six FeSS indicators (composite), with mixed-effects logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, stroke type and severity (ability to walk on admission), stroke unit care, hospital prior participation in a FeSS Intervention study, and correlation of outcomes within hospital. Additional analysis examined interaction effects.

Results

Overall, 112 hospitals contributed data to ≥1 one Audit cycle for both periods (pre=7011, post=7195 cases); 42 hospitals had participated in any treatment arm of a FeSS Intervention study. Adherence to FeSS Protocols post-guideline increased (pre: composite measure 35% vs post: composite measure 40 %, aOR:1.2 95 %CI: 1.2, 1.3). Prior participation in a FeSS Intervention study (aOR:1.6, 95 %CI: 1.2, 2.0) and stroke unit care (aOR 2.3, 95 %CI: 2.0, 2.5) were independently associated with greater adherence to FeSS Protocols. There was no change in adherence over time based on prior participation in a FeSS Intervention study (p = 0.93 interaction), or stroke unit care (p = 0.07 interaction).

Conclusions

There is evidence of improved adherence to FeSS Protocols following a 'strong recommendation' for their use in the Australian stroke guidelines. Change in adherence was similar independent of hospital prior participation in a FeSS Intervention study, or stroke unit care. However, maintenance of higher pre-guideline adherence for hospitals prior participation in a FeSS Intervention study suggests that research participation can facilitate greater guideline adherence; and confirms superior care received in stroke units. Nevertheless, less than half of Australian patients are being cared for according to the FeSS Protocols, providing impetus for additional strategies to increase uptake.

Efficacy and safety of very early rehabilitation for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Early rehabilitation after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) contributes to functional recovery. However, the optimal time for starting rehabilitation remains a topic of ongoing investigation. This article aims to shed light on the safety and efficacy of very early rehabilitation (VER) initiated within 48 h of stroke onset.

Methods

A systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was conducted from inception to January 20, 2024. Relevant literature on VER in patients with AIS was reviewed and the data related to favorable and adverse clinical outcomes were collected for meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was conducted at different time points, namely at discharge and at three and 12 months. Statistical analyses were performed with the help of the Meta Package in STATA Version 15.0.

Results

A total of 14 randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies and 3,039 participants were included in the analysis. VER demonstrated a significant association with mortality [risk ratio (RR) = 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.00, 1.61)], ability of daily living [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 6.90, 95% CI (0.22, 13.57)], and limb motor function [WMD = 5.02, 95% CI (1.63, 8.40)]. However, no significant difference was observed between the VER group and the control group in adverse events [RR = 0.89, 95% CI (0.79, 1.01)], severity of stroke [WMD = 0.52, 95% CI (-0.04, 1.08)], degree of disability [RR = 1.06, 95% CI (0.93, 1.20)], or recovery of walking [RR = 0.98, 95% CI (0.94, 1.03)] after stroke. Subgroup analysis revealed that VER reduced the risk of adverse events in the late stage (at three and 12 months) [RR = 0.86, 95% CI (0.74, 0.99)] and degree of disability at 12 months [RR = 1.28, 95% CI (1.03, 1.60)], and improved daily living ability at 3 months [WMD = 4.26, 95% CI (0.17, 8.35)], while increasing severity of stroke during hospitalization [WMD = 0.81, 95% CI (0.01, 1.61)].

Conclusion

VER improves activities of daily living (ADLs) and lowers the incidence of long-term complications in stroke survivors. However, premature or overly intense rehabilitation may increase mortality in patients with AIS during the acute phase. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024508180.

Systematic review registration

This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/). PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024508180.

Comparing acute hospital outcomes for people with post-stroke aphasia who do and do not require an interpreter

BACKGROUND

People with communication differences are known to have poorer hospital outcomes than their peers. However, the combined impact of aphasia and cultural/linguistic differences on care and outcomes after stroke remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association between cultural/linguistic differences, defined as those requiring an interpreter, and the provision of acute evidence-based stroke care and in-hospital outcomes for people with aphasia.

METHODS

Cross-sectional, observational data collected in the Stroke Foundation National Audit of Acute Services (2017, 2019, 2021) were used. Multivariable regression models compared evidence-based care and in-hospital outcomes (e.g., length of stay) by interpreter status. Models were adjusted for sex, hospital location, stroke type and severity, with clustering by hospital.

RESULTS

Among 3122 people with aphasia (median age 78, 49% female) from 126 hospitals, 193 (6%) required an interpreter (median age 78, 55% female). Compared to people with aphasia not requiring an interpreter, those requiring an interpreter had similar care access but less often had their mood assessed (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32, 0.76), were more likely to have physiotherapy assessments (96% vs 90% p = 0.011) and carer training (OR 4.83, 95% CI 1.70, 13.70), had a 2 day longer median length of stay (8 days vs 6 days, p = 0.003), and were less likely to be independent on discharge (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33, 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Some differences exist in the management and outcomes for people with post-stroke aphasia who require an interpreter. Further research to explore their needs and the practical issues underpinning their clinical care pathways is required.

What is "usual care" in the rehabilitation of upper limb sensory loss after stroke? Results from a national audit and knowledge translation study

PURPOSE

To characterise the assessments and treatments that comprise "usual care" for stroke patients with somatosensory loss, and whether usual care has changed over time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Comparison of cross-sectional, observational data from (1) Stroke Foundation National Audit of Acute (2007-2019) and Rehabilitation (2010-2018) Stroke Services and (2) the SENSe Implement multi-site knowledge translation study with occupational therapists and physiotherapists (n = 115). Descriptive statistics, random effects logistic regression, and content analysis were used.

RESULTS

Acute hospitals (n = 172) contributed 24 996 cases across audits from 2007 to 2019 (median patient age 76 years, 54% male). Rehabilitation services (n = 134) contributed organisational survey data from 2010 to 2014, with 7165 cases (median 76 years, 55% male) across 2016-2018 clinical audits (n = 127 services). Somatoensory assessment protocol use increased from 53% (2007) to 86% (2019) (odds ratio 11.4, 95% CI 5.0-25.6). Reported use of sensory-specific retraining remained stable over time (90-93%). Therapist practice reports for n = 86 patients with somatosensory loss revealed 16% did not receive somatosensory rehabilitation. The most common treatment approaches were sensory rehabilitation using everyday activities (69%), sensory re-education (68%), and compensatory strategies (64%).

CONCLUSION

Sensory assessment protocol use has increased over time while sensory-specific training has remained stable. Sensory rehabilitation in the context of everyday activities is a common treatment approach. Clinical trial registration number: ACTRN12615000933550IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONOnly a small proportion of upper limb assessments conducted with stroke patients focus specifically on sensation; increased use of standardised upper limb assessments for sensory loss is needed.Stroke patients assessed as having upper limb sensory loss frequently do not receive treatment for their deficits.Therapists typically use everyday activities to treat upper limb sensory loss and may require upskilling in sensory-specific retraining to benefit patients.

The Hazard of Negative (Not Neutral) Trials on Treatment of Acute Stroke: A Review

Importance

While there are a limited number of beneficial treatments for acute stroke (eg, stroke units, reperfusion, aspirin, hemicraniectomy), there are more negative (as opposed to neutral) interventions spanning multiple different mechanisms of action. To reduce the risk of future negative studies, it is vital to understand why previous interventions appeared to cause harm.

Observations

The limited number of beneficial treatments for acute ischemic stroke are far outnumbered by negative (not neutral) interventions that worsened outcomes in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), including those with putative neuroprotectant, anticoagulant, anti-inflammatory, free radical-scavenging, hemorrhagic, or vasoactive activity. Other agents reduced thrombolytic efficiency or exhibited neuropsychiatric or cardiac toxicity. In intracerebral hemorrhage, platelet transfusion was hazardous. Although reperfusion treatments should be given as soon as possible, very early intervention with other strategies may instead be hazardous, as has been seen with physical therapy and vasodepressors.

Conclusions and Relevance

The lessons learned from negative stroke RCTs are vital for designing future studies. Multicenter preclinical studies are necessary, and animals that die must be included in analyses. Randomized clinical trials must assess multiple neurological, vascular, cardiac, and general safety effects, whether these are on target or off target. All preclinical trials and RCTs must be published in full. Learning from the past will help to reduce the number of negative stroke RCTs in the future.

Attention control comparisons with SLT for people with aphasia following stroke: methodological concerns raised following a systematic review

Objective:

Attention control comparisons in trials of stroke rehabilitation require care to minimize the risk of comparison choice bias. We compared the similarities and differences in SLT and social support control interventions for people with aphasia.

Data sources:

Trial data from the 2016 Cochrane systematic review of SLT for aphasia after stroke

Methods:

Direct and indirect comparisons between SLT, social support and no therapy controls. We double-data extracted intervention details using the template for intervention description and replication. Standardized mean differences and risk ratios (95% confidence intervals (CIs)) were calculated.

Results:

Seven trials compared SLT with social support ( n  =  447). Interventions were matched in format, frequency, intensity, duration and dose. Procedures and materials were often shared across interventions. Social support providers received specialist training and support. Targeted language rehabilitation was only described in therapy interventions. Higher drop-out ( P  =  0.005, odds ratio (OR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.32–0.81) and non-adherence to social support interventions ( P  <  0.00001, OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09–0.37) indicated an imbalance in completion rates increasing the risk of control comparison bias.

Conclusion:

Distinctions between social support and therapy interventions were eroded. Theoretically based language rehabilitation was the remaining difference in therapy interventions. Social support is an important adjunct to formal language rehabilitation. Therapists should continue to enable those close to the person with aphasia to provide tailored communication support, functional language stimulation and opportunities to apply rehabilitation gains. Systematic group differences in completion rates is a design-related risk of bias in outcomes observed.

Effectiveness of a Web-Based Health Education Program to Promote Oral Hygiene Care Among Stroke Survivors: Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Oral hygiene care is of key importance among stroke patients to prevent complications that may compromise rehabilitation or potentially give rise to life-threatening infections such as aspiration pneumonia.

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a Web-based continuing professional development (CPD) program on “general intention” of the health carers to perform daily mouth cleaning for stroke patients using the theory of planned behavior (TPB).

Methods

A double-blind cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted among 547 stroke care providers across 10 hospitals in Malaysia. The centers were block randomized to receive either (1) test intervention (a Web-based CPD program on providing oral hygiene care to stroke patients using TPB) or (2) control intervention (a Web-based CPD program not specific to oral hygiene). Domains of TPB: “attitude,” “subjective norm” (SN), “perceived behavior control” (PBC), “general intention” (GI), and “knowledge” related to providing oral hygiene care were assessed preintervention and at 1 month and 6 months postintervention.

Results

The overall response rate was 68.2% (373/547). At 1 month, between the test and control groups, there was a significant difference in changes in scores of attitude (P=.004) and subjective norm (P=.01), but not in other TPB domains (GI, P=.11; PBC, P=.51; or knowledge, P=.08). At 6 months, there were significant differences in changes in scores of GI (P=.003), attitude (P=.009), SN (P<.001) and knowledge (P=.001) between the test and control groups. Regression analyses identified that the key factors associated with a change in GI at 6 months were changes in SN (beta=.36, P<.001) and changes in PBC (beta=.23, P<.001).

Conclusions

The Web-based CPD program based on TPB increased general intention, attitudes, subjective norms, and knowledge to provide oral hygiene care among stroke carers for their patients. Changing subjective norms and perceived behavioral control are key factors associated with changes in general intention to provide oral hygiene care.

Trial Registration

National Medical Research Register, Malaysia NMRR-13-1540-18833 (IIR); https://www.nmrr.gov.my/ fwbLoginPage.jsp