SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

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

Jones, F; Gombert-, K; Honey, S; Cloud, G; Harris, R; Macdonald, A; McKevitt, C; Robert, G; Clarke, D (2021) Addressing inactivity after stroke: The Collaborative Rehabilitation in Acute Stroke (CREATE) study. Int J Stroke, 16 (6). pp. 669-682. ISSN 1747-4949 https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493020969367
SGUL Authors: Jones, Fiona

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (4MB) | Preview

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.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2020 World Stroke Organization. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Keywords: Stroke, co-design, inactivity, Caregivers, Hospital Units, Hospitals, Humans, Stroke, Stroke Rehabilitation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Caregivers, Hospital Units, Hospitals, Stroke, Surveys and Questionnaires, Stroke Rehabilitation, Stroke, inactivity, co-design, 1103 Clinical Sciences, 1109 Neurosciences, Neurology & Neurosurgery
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Population Health Research Institute (INPH)
Journal or Publication Title: Int J Stroke
ISSN: 1747-4949
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
August 2021Published
2 November 2020Published Online
3 September 2020Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
13/114/95Department of Healthhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000276
PubMed ID: 33138735
Web of Science ID: WOS:000626689800001
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/115250
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493020969367

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item