Literature DB >> 33138735

Addressing inactivity after stroke: The Collaborative Rehabilitation in Acute Stroke (CREATE) study.

Fiona Jones1, Karolina Gombert-1, Stephanie Honey2, Geoffrey Cloud3,4, Ruth Harris5, Alastair Macdonald6, Christopher McKevitt7, Glenn Robert4, David Clarke2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Stroke patients are often inactive outside of structured therapy sessions - an enduring international challenge despite large scale organizational changes, national guidelines and performance targets. We examined whether experienced-based co-design (EBCD) - an improvement methodology - could address inactivity in stroke units. AIMS: To evaluate the feasibility and impact of patients, carers, and staff co-designing and implementing improvements to increase supervised and independent therapeutic patient activity in stroke units and to compare use of full and accelerated EBCD cycles.
METHODS: Mixed-methods case comparison in four stroke units in England.
RESULTS: Interviews were held with 156 patients, staff, and carers in total; ethnographic observations for 364 hours, behavioral mapping of 68 patients, and self-report surveys from 179 patients, pre- and post-implementation of EBCD improvement cycles.Three priority areas emerged: (1) 'Space' (environment); (2) 'Activity opportunities' and (3) 'Communication'. More than 40 improvements were co-designed and implemented to address these priorities across participating units. Post-implementation interview and ethnographic observational data confirmed use of new social spaces and increased activity opportunities. However, staff interactions remained largely task-driven with limited focus on enabling patient activity. Behavioral mapping indicated some increases in social, cognitive, and physical activity post-implementation, but was variable across sites. Survey responses rates were low at 12-38% and inconclusive.
CONCLUSION: It was feasible to implement EBCD in stroke units. This resulted in multiple improvements in stroke unit environments and increased activity opportunities but minimal change in recorded activity levels. There was no discernible difference in experience or outcome between full and accelerated EBCD; this methodology could be used across hospital stroke units to assist staff and other stakeholders to co-design and implement improvement plans.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Stroke; co-design; inactivity

Year:  2020        PMID: 33138735     DOI: 10.1177/1747493020969367

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Stroke        ISSN: 1747-4930            Impact factor:   5.266


  4 in total

1.  Co-designing organisational improvements and interventions to increase inpatient activity in four stroke units in England: a mixed-methods process evaluation using normalisation process theory.

Authors:  David Clarke; Karolina Gombert-Waldron; Stephanie Honey; Geoffrey Cloud; Ruth Harris; Alastair Macdonald; Christopher McKevitt; Glenn Robert; Fiona Jones
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Exploring liminality in the co-design of rehabilitation environments: The case of one acute stroke unit.

Authors:  Sara Donetto; Fiona Jones; David J Clarke; Geoffrey C Cloud; Karolina Gombert-Waldron; Harris Ruth; Alastair Macdonald; Christopher McKevitt; Glenn Robert
Journal:  Health Place       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 4.078

3.  Experiences of patients with poststroke spasticity throughout a botulinum toxin treatment cycle: Results from a prospective ethnographic study.

Authors:  Jorge Jacinto; Andreas Lysandropoulos; Marjorie Leclerc; Françoise Calvi-Gries
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-08-23       Impact factor: 4.086

4.  What is the feasibility and patient acceptability of a digital system for arm and hand rehabilitation after stroke? A mixed-methods, single-arm feasibility study of the 'OnTrack' intervention for hospital and home use.

Authors:  Gianpaolo Fusari; Ella Gibbs; Lily Hoskin; Anna Lawrence-Jones; Daniel Dickens; Roberto Fernandez Crespo; Melanie Leis; Jennifer Crow; Elizabeth Taylor; Fiona Jones; Ara Darzi
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-09-28       Impact factor: 3.006

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.