Literature DB >> 18813879

Quality of stroke care at an Irish Regional General Hospital and Stroke Rehabilitation Unit.

T Walsh1, J Browne, E Ugwu, R O' Riordan, D Lyons.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robust international data support the effectiveness of stroke unit (SU) care. Despite this, most stroke care in Ireland are provided outside of this setting. Limited data currently exist on the quality of care provided. AIM: The aim of this study is to examine the quality of care for patients with stroke in two care settings-Regional General Hospital (RGH) and Stroke Rehabilitation Unit (SRU).
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the stroke records of consecutive patients admitted to the SRU between May-November 2002 and April-November 2004 was performed applying the UK National Sentinel Audit of Stroke (NSAS) tool.
RESULTS: The results of the study reveal that while SRU processes of care was 74% compliant with standards; compliance with stroke service organisational standards was only 15 and 43% in the RGH and SRU, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The quality of stroke care in our area is deficient. Comprehensive reorganisation of stroke services is imperative.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18813879     DOI: 10.1007/s11845-008-0193-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ir J Med Sci        ISSN: 0021-1265            Impact factor:   1.568


  10 in total

1.  Can differences in management processes explain different outcomes between stroke unit and stroke-team care?

Authors:  A Evans; I Perez; F Harraf; A Melbourn; J Steadman; N Donaldson; L Kalra
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-11-10       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Reliability and validity of the Intercollegiate Stroke Audit Package.

Authors:  P H Gompertz; P Irwin; R Morris; D Lowe; Z Rutledge; A G Rudd; M G Pearson
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 2.431

3.  Collaborative systematic review of the randomised trials of organised inpatient (stroke unit) care after stroke. Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-04-19

4.  Stroke units in their natural habitat: can results of randomized trials be reproduced in routine clinical practice? Riks-Stroke Collaboration.

Authors:  B Stegmayr; K Asplund; K Hulter-Asberg; B Norrving; M Peltonen; A Terént; P O Wester
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 7.914

5.  Does the organization of postacute stroke care really matter?

Authors:  P Langhorne; P Duncan
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 7.914

6.  National stroke audit: a tool for change?

Authors:  A G Rudd; D Lowe; P Irwin; Z Rutledge; M Pearson
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-09

7.  Stroke unit care and outcome: results from the 2001 National Sentinel Audit of Stroke (England, Wales, and Northern Ireland).

Authors:  A G Rudd; A Hoffman; P Irwin; D Lowe; M G Pearson
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2004-11-29       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 8.  How do stroke units improve patient outcomes? A collaborative systematic review of the randomized trials. Stroke Unit Trialists Collaboration.

Authors: 
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 7.914

9.  Benefit of a stroke unit: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  B Indredavik; F Bakke; R Solberg; R Rokseth; L L Haaheim; I Holme
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 7.914

10.  Improving stroke rehabilitation. A controlled study.

Authors:  L Kalra; P Dale; P Crome
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 7.914

  10 in total
  1 in total

1.  Dedicated orthogeriatric service reduces hip fracture mortality.

Authors:  C Y Henderson; E Shanahan; A Butler; B Lenehan; M O'Connor; D Lyons; J P Ryan
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 1.568

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.