Multidisciplinary care for stroke patients living in the community: A systematic review

Objective: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of multidisciplinary care for stroke patients living in the community. Data sources: Databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library from January 1980 until July 2012. Study selection: Randomized controlled trials focused on multidisciplinary interventions for stroke patients living at home after hospitalization or inpatient rehabilitation were selected. The outcome domains were activities of daily living, social participation and quality of life. A total of 14 studies were included. Data extraction: Two authors independently extracted the data and independently assessed the quality of reporting of the included studies using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement 2010. Data synthesis: None of the studies showed favourable effects of the intervention on activities of daily living and none assessed social participation. Furthermore, two studies reported favourable effects of the intervention in terms of quality of life. These concerned an intervention combining assessment with follow-up care and a rehabilitation intervention. Conclusion: There is little evidence for the effectiveness of multidisciplinary care for stroke patients being discharged home. Additional research should provide more insight into potentially effective multidisciplinary care for community-living stroke patients

Implications of process evaluation for clinical effectiveness and clinical practice in a trial on chronic shoulder complaints.

Contains fulltext : 49476.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)OBJECTIVE: The intervention process was evaluated in a randomised clinical trial on the effectiveness of a behavioural Graded Exercise Therapy (GET) programme for patients with chronic shoulder complaints in primary care settings. This process evaluation was done for three reasons: first, to know whether the programme was performed as planned; second, to know whether or not this treatment is feasible in normal practice; third, to identify needs for improvement of the protocol to facilitate implication. METHODS: We evaluated the extent to which the programme is being applied according to protocol, patient adherence to the programme and the suitability of the programme according to patients and physiotherapists. Twenty participating physiotherapists and 87 patients allocated to GET were asked to evaluate the intervention process. Furthermore, a sample of 10 patients, taken from the total number of 87 patients allocated to GET, was invited to take part in a focus group interview at the end of the study. We evaluated the intervention process using a treatment registration form filled in by the physiotherapists during treatment, evaluation forms filled in independently by physiotherapists and patients 26 weeks after the start of the treatment period, and information gathered during the focus group interview at the end of the study. RESULTS: GET was applied according to protocol to an acceptable extent, and participating patients showed satisfactory adherence to the programme. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical effectiveness of GET in this trial is not influenced by flaws in the application of the programme or by lack of patient adherence. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The programme could be improved in terms of the process of goal-setting, and the implementation of GET could be facilitated if the programme is embedded in a multidisciplinary approach in primary care

Preventive home care of frail older people: a review of recent case management studies.

Preventive actions targeting community-dwelling frail older people will be increasingly important with the growing number of very old and thereby also frail older people. This study aimed to explore and summarize the empirical literature on recent studies of case/care management interventions for community-dwelling frail older people and especially with regard to the content of the interventions and the nurse's role and outcome of it. Very few of the interventions took either a preventive or a rehabilitative approach using psycho-educative interventions focusing, for instance, on self-care activities, risk prevention, health complaints management or how to preserve or strengthen social activities, community involvement and functional ability. Moreover, it was striking that very few included a family-oriented approach also including support and education for informal caregivers. Thus it seems that the content of case/care management needs to be expanded and more influenced by a salutogenic health care perspective. Targeting frail older people seemed to benefit from a standardized two-stage strategy for inclusion and for planning the interventions. A comprehensive geriatric assessment seemed useful as a base. Nurses, preferably trained in gerontological practice, have a key role in case/care management for frail older people. This approach calls for developing the content of case/care management so that it involves a more salutogenic, rehabilitative and family-oriented approach. To this end it may be useful for nurses to strengthen their psychosocial skills or develop close collaboration with social workers. The outcome measures examined in this study represented one of three perspectives: the consumer's perspective, the perspective of health care consumption or the recipient's health and functional ability. Perhaps effects would be expected in all three areas and thus these should be included in evaluative studies in addition to measures for family and/or informal caregiver's strain and satisfaction