Literature DB >> 27306625

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

Tara Purvis1, Kelvin Hill2, Monique Kilkenny2, Nadine Andrew2, Dominique Cadilhac2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe stroke research activity in Australian acute public hospitals and determine if participation in research provides better quality of care and outcomes for patients with stroke.
METHODS: This was an observational study using data from hospitals that participated in the National Stroke Foundation (Australia) acute services audit program in 2009, 2011, and 2013. This included self-reported organizational features and a retrospective clinical audit of up to 40 medical records of patients with stroke from each hospital. Multilevel random effects logistic regression with level defined as hospital and adjustments for hospital, demographic, clinical, and stroke severity factors were undertaken.
RESULTS: A total of 240 hospitals submitted organizational data. Hospitals with a stroke unit (70% vs 7%, p < 0.001) and >200 stroke admissions per year (80% vs 17%, p < 0.001) reported greater involvement in research studies. Of 9,537 patients audited at 129 hospitals, 469 (5%) consented to participate in research. Patients who participated in research compared to nonparticipants were likely to be younger (median age 73 years; 25th percentile [Q1]: 63, 75th percentile [Q3]: 80, vs median age 76 years Q1: 64, Q3: 83; p < 0.001) and receive important clinical practices such as a swallow screen/assessment prior to oral intake (62% vs 56%; p < 0.01). An independent association with reduced in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.30, 95% confidence interval 0.12, 0.76) was evident if participating in research regardless of access to stroke unit care.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who participate in stroke research receive better in-hospital care and are more likely to survive compared to nonresearch participants. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that patients with stroke who participate in research receive better quality of care and have reduced in-hospital mortality.
© 2016 American Academy of Neurology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27306625      PMCID: PMC4940070          DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002834

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurology        ISSN: 0028-3878            Impact factor:   9.910


  28 in total

Review 1.  The impact of the process of clinical research on health service outcomes.

Authors:  P Selby; P Autier
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 32.976

2.  Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients.

Authors:  J M Bamford; P A Sandercock; C P Warlow; J Slattery
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 7.914

3.  Clinical trial participation improves outcome: a matched historical cohort study.

Authors:  John R Baker; Alain C Vandal; Joey Yeoh; Irene Zeng; Selwyn Wong; Stuart N Ryan
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 4.  Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a "trial effect".

Authors:  D A Braunholtz; S J Edwards; R J Lilford
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Predicting outcome after acute and subacute stroke: development and validation of new prognostic models.

Authors:  Carl Counsell; Martin Dennis; Michael McDowall; Charles Warlow
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 7.914

6.  Quality in Acute Stroke Care (QASC): process evaluation of an intervention to improve the management of fever, hyperglycemia, and swallowing dysfunction following acute stroke.

Authors:  Peta Drury; Christopher Levi; Catherine D'Este; Patrick McElduff; Elizabeth McInnes; Jennifer Hardy; Simeon Dale; N Wah Cheung; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Clare Quinn; Jeanette Ward; Malcolm Evans; Dominique Cadilhac; Rhonda Griffiths; Sandy Middleton
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 5.266

Review 7.  Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: conceptual framework and structured review.

Authors:  Jeffrey M Peppercorn; Jane C Weeks; E Francis Cook; Steven Joffe
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2004-01-24       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 8.  Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke.

Authors: 
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-10-17

9.  Does random treatment assignment cause harm to research participants?

Authors:  Cary P Gross; Harlan M Krumholz; Gretchen Van Wye; Ezekiel J Emanuel; David Wendler
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  The Hawthorne Effect: a randomised, controlled trial.

Authors:  Rob McCarney; James Warner; Steve Iliffe; Robbert van Haselen; Mark Griffin; Peter Fisher
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2007-07-03       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  5 in total

1.  Observational studies and the chicken and egg issue in stroke.

Authors:  Tara Purvis; Dominique A Cadilhac
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 42.937

Review 2.  How Nurses Can Partner With National Institutes of Health StrokeNet to Deliver Best Research and Care to Stroke Patients.

Authors:  Jamey Frasure; Judith Spilker
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 7.914

3.  The association of hospital research publications and clinical quality.

Authors:  David M Shahian; Dan McCloskey; Xiu Liu; Elizabeth Schneider; David Cheng; Elizabeth A Mort
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 3.734

4.  Stroke: Are care and outcomes better for participants of stroke trials?

Authors:  Mary Joan Macleod; Carl E Counsell
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 42.937

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

Authors:  Normaliza Ab Malik; Sa'ari Mohamad Yatim; Otto Lok Tao Lam; Lijian Jin; Colman Patrick Joseph McGrath
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 5.428

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.