Selection for inpatient rehabilitation after severe stroke: What factors influence rehabilitation assessor decision making?

Objectives: This study aimed to identify factors that assessors considered important in decision-making regarding suitability for inpatient rehabilitation after acute severe stroke.Design: Multi-site prospective observational cohort study. Subjects: Consecutive acute, severe stroke patients and their assessors for inpatient rehabilitation. Methods: Rehabilitation assessors completed a questionnaire, rating the importance (10 point visual analogue scale) and direction (positive, negative or neutral) of 15 patient related and 2 organisational items potentially affecting their decision regarding patients’ acceptance to rehabilitation. Results: Of the 75 patients referred to rehabilitation and included in this study 61 (81.3%) were accepted for inpatient rehabilitation. The items considered to be most important in the decision to accept the patient for rehabilitation were pre-morbid cognition, pre-morbid mobility and pre-morbid communication. For those not accepted the most important items were current mobility, social support and current cognition. Factor analysis revealed 3 underlying factors, interpreted as post-stroke status, pre-morbid status, and social attributes, accounting for 61.8% of the total variance. All were independently associated with acceptance for rehabilitation (p < 0.05). Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of pre-morbid function and social factors in addition to post-stroke function in the decision making process for acceptance to rehabilitation following severe stroke. Future models for selection for rehabilitation should consider inclusion of these factors

Measures for assessing practice change in medical practitioners

BACKGROUND: There are increasing numbers of randomised trials and systematic reviews examining the efficacy of interventions designed to bring about a change in clinical practice. The findings of this research are being used to guide strategies to increase the uptake of evidence into clinical practice. Knowledge of the outcomes measured by these trials is vital not only for the interpretation and application of the work done to date, but also to inform future research in this expanding area of endeavour and to assist in collation of results in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. METHODS: The objective of this review was to identify methods used to measure change in the clinical practices of health professionals following an intervention aimed at increasing the uptake of evidence into practice. All published trials included in a recent, comprehensive Health Technology Assessment of interventions to implement clinical practice guidelines and change clinical practice (n = 228) formed the sample for this study. Using a standardised data extraction form, one reviewer (SH), extracted the relevant information from the methods and/or results sections of the trials. RESULTS: Measures of a change of health practitioner behaviour were the most common, with 88.8% of trials using these as outcome measures. Measures that assessed change at a patient level, either actual measures of change or surrogate measures of change, were used in 28.8% and 36.7% of studies (respectively). Health practitioners' knowledge and attitudes were assessed in 22.8% of the studies and changes at an organisational level were assessed in 17.6%. CONCLUSION: Most trials of interventions aimed at changing clinical practice measured the effect of the intervention at the level of the practitioner, i.e. did the practitioner change what they do, or has their knowledge of and/or attitude toward that practice changed? Less than one-third of the trials measured, whether or not any change in practice, resulted in a change in the ultimate end-point of patient health status

A pragmatic cluster randomised trial evaluating three implementation interventions

Background Implementation research is concerned with bridging the gap between evidence and practice through the study of methods to promote the uptake of research into routine practice. Good quality evidence has been summarised into guideline recommendations to show that peri-operative fasting times could be considerably shorter than patients currently experience. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of three strategies for the implementation of recommendations about peri-operative fasting. Methods A pragmatic cluster randomised trial underpinned by the PARIHS framework was conducted during 2006 to 2009 with a national sample of UK hospitals using time series with mixed methods process evaluation and cost analysis. Hospitals were randomised to one of three interventions: standard dissemination (SD) of a guideline package, SD plus a web-based resource championed by an opinion leader, and SD plus plan-do-study-act (PDSA). The primary outcome was duration of fluid fast prior to induction of anaesthesia. Secondary outcomes included duration of food fast, patients' experiences, and stakeholders' experiences of implementation, including influences. ANOVA was used to test differences over time and interventions. Results Nineteen acute NHS hospitals participated. Across timepoints, 3,505 duration of fasting observations were recorded. No significant effect of the interventions was observed for either fluid or food fasting times. The effect size was 0.33 for the web-based intervention compared to SD alone for the change in fluid fasting and was 0.12 for PDSA compared to SD alone. The process evaluation showed different types of impact, including changes to practices, policies, and attitudes. A rich picture of the implementation challenges emerged, including inter-professional tensions and a lack of clarity for decision-making authority and responsibility. Conclusions This was a large, complex study and one of the first national randomised controlled trials conducted within acute care in implementation research. The evidence base for fasting practice was accepted by those participating in this study and the messages from it simple; however, implementation and practical challenges influenced the interventions' impact. A set of conditions for implementation emerges from the findings of this study, which are presented as theoretically transferable propositions that have international relevance. Trial registration ISRCTN18046709 - Peri-operative Implementation Study Evaluation (POISE

IMPLEmenting a clinical practice guideline for acute low back pain evidence-based manageMENT in general practice (IMPLEMENT) : cluster randomised controlled trial study protocol

Background: Evidence generated from reliable research is not frequently implemented into clinical practice. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are a potential vehicle to achieve this. A recent systematic review of implementation strategies of guideline dissemination concluded that there was a lack of evidence regarding effective strategies to promote the uptake of guidelines. Recommendations from this review, and other studies, have suggested the use of interventions that are theoretically based because these may be more effective than those that are not. An evidencebased clinical practice guideline for the management of acute low back pain was recently developed in Australia. This provides an opportunity to develop and test a theory-based implementation intervention for a condition which is common, has a high burden, and for which there is an evidence-practice gap in the primary care setting. Aim: This study aims to test the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention for implementing a clinical practice guideline for acute low back pain in general practice in Victoria, Australia. Specifically, our primary objectives are to establish if the intervention is effective in reducing the percentage of patients who are referred for a plain x-ray, and improving mean level of disability for patients three months post-consultation. Methods/Design: This study protocol describes the details of a cluster randomised controlled trial. Ninety-two general practices (clusters), which include at least one consenting general practitioner, will be randomised to an intervention or control arm using restricted randomisation. Patients aged 18 years or older who visit a participating practitioner for acute non-specific low back pain of less than three months duration will be eligible for inclusion. An average of twenty-five patients per general practice will be recruited, providing a total of 2,300 patient participants. General practitioners in the control arm will receive access to the guideline using the existing dissemination strategy. Practitioners in the intervention arm will be invited to participate in facilitated face-to-face workshops that have been underpinned by behavioural theory. Investigators (not involved in the delivery of the intervention), patients, outcome assessors and the study statistician will be blinded to group allocation. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012606000098538 (date registered 14/03/2006).The trial is funded by the NHMRC by way of a Primary Health Care Project Grant (334060). JF has 50% of her time funded by the Chief Scientist Office3/2006). of the Scottish Government Health Directorate and 50% by the University of Aberdeen. PK is supported by a NHMRC Health Professional Fellowship (384366) and RB by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (334010). JG holds a Canada Research Chair in Health Knowledge Transfer and Uptake. All other authors are funded by their own institutions

Effective implementation of research into practice: an overview of systematic reviews of the health literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of interventions has been developed to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>A review of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase the use of research in clinical practice. A search for relevant systematic reviews was conducted of Medline and the Cochrane Database of Reviews 1998-2009. 13 systematic reviews containing 313 primary studies were included. Four strategy types are identified: audit and feedback; computerised decision support; opinion leaders; and multifaceted interventions. Nine of the reviews reported on multifaceted interventions. This review highlights the small effects of single interventions such as audit and feedback, computerised decision support and opinion leaders. Systematic reviews of multifaceted interventions claim an improvement in effectiveness over single interventions, with effect sizes ranging from small to moderate. This review found that a number of published systematic reviews fail to state whether the recommended practice change is based on the best available research evidence.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This overview of systematic reviews updates the body of knowledge relating to the effectiveness of key mechanisms for improving clinical practice and service development. Multifaceted interventions are more likely to improve practice than single interventions such as audit and feedback. This review identified a small literature focusing explicitly on getting research evidence into clinical practice. It emphasizes the importance of ensuring that primary studies and systematic reviews are precise about the extent to which the reported interventions focus on changing practice based on research evidence (as opposed to other information codified in guidelines and education materials).</p

Revision joint replacement surgeries of the hip and knee across geographic region and socioeconomic status in the western region of Victoria: a cross-sectional multilevel analysis of registry data

Background: Residents of rural and regional areas, compared to those in urban regions, are more likely to experience geographical difficulties in accessing healthcare, particularly specialist services. We investigated associations between region of residence, socioeconomic status (SES) and utilisation of all-cause revision hip replacement or revision knee replacement surgeries. Methods: Conducted in western Victoria, Australia, as part of the Ageing, Chronic Disease and Injury study, data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (2011–2013) for adults who underwent a revision hip replacement (n = 542; 54% female) or revision knee replacement (n = 353; 54% female) were extracted. We cross-matched residential addresses with 2011 census data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), and using an ABS-derived composite index, classified region of residence according to local government areas (LGAs), and area-level SES into quintiles. For analyses, the control population (n = 591,265; 51% female) was ABS-determined and excluded adults already identified as cases. Mixed-effects logistic regression was performed. Results: We observed that 77% of revision hip surgeries and 83% of revision knee surgeries were performed for residents in the three most socially disadvantaged quintiles. In adjusted multilevel models, total variances contributed by the variance in LGAs for revisions of the hip or knee joint were only 1% (SD random effects ±0.01) and 3% (SD ± 0.02), respectively. No differences across SES or sex were observed. Conclusions: No differences in utilisation were identified between SES groups in the provision of revision surgeries of the hip or knee, independent of small between-LGA differences.Sharon L. Brennan-Olsen, Sara Vogrin, Stephen Graves, Kara L. Holloway-Kew, Richard S. Page, M. Amber Sajjad, Mark A. Kotowicz, Patricia M. Livingston, Mustafa Khasraw, Sharon Hakkennes, Trisha L. Dunning, Susan Brumby, Alasdair G. Sutherland, Jason Talevski, Darci Green, Thu-Lan Kelly, Lana J. Williams, and Julie A. Pasc

Developing theory-informed behaviour change interventions to implement evidence into practice : a systematic approach using the Theoretical Domains Framework

PMID: 22531013 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] PMCID: PMC3443064 Free PMC ArticlePeer reviewedPublisher PD

Ageing, chronic disease and injury: a study in western Victoria (Australia)

Background : An increasing burden of chronic disease and associated health service delivery is expected due to the ageing Australian population. Injuries also affect health and wellbeing and have a long-term impact on health service utilisation. There is a lack of comprehensive data on disease and injury in rural and regional areas of Australia. The aim of the Ageing, Chronic Disease and Injury study is to compile data from various sources to better describe the patterns of chronic disease and injury across western Victoria. Design : Ecological study. Methods : Information on demographics, socioeconomic indicators and lifestyle factors are obtained from health surveys and government departments. Data concerning chronic diseases and injuries will be sourced from various registers, health and emergency services, local community health centres and administrative databases and compiled to generate profiles for the study region and for sub-populations within the region. Expected impact for public health: This information is vital to establish current and projected population needs to inform policy and improve targeted health services delivery, care transition needs and infrastructure development. This study provides a model that can be replicated in other geographical settings