How is hydration assessed and managed in acute stroke? A qualitative study of healthcare staff's knowledge, attitudes and experiences.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore healthcare staff's experiences of how dehydration is identified and managed in hospitalised patients after acute stroke, and facilitators and challenges to optimising hydration. BACKGROUND: Optimal hydration post-stroke reduces the risk of neurological deterioration and other complications. Patients are at risk of dehydration in acute stroke, particularly those with dysphagia. DESIGN: A descriptive qualitative study reported following the COREQ guidelines. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews, utilising patient vignettes, were conducted in 2018 (Apr-Oct) with a purposive sample of 30 multidisciplinary staff members from two UK stroke units. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Content analysis identified common themes which were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Behaviour Change Wheel. RESULTS: The themes were mapped to twelve of the fourteen domains in the Theoretical Domains Framework. Participants believed that inadequate hydration management had potentially serious consequences, and described complex knowledge, skills and cognitive elements to effective hydration care. Participants felt that maintaining hydration was a multidisciplinary responsibility requiring good communication. Although the performance of initial dysphagia screening was reinforced by external audit, other areas of post-stroke hydration management were not; notably, there was no established method of assessing hydration. Barriers to maintaining good hydration included lack of staff, out-of-hours working patterns, low priority given to hydration, patients' comorbidities and complex post-stroke disabilities such as dysphagia, aphasia, inattention and hemiparesis. CONCLUSION: Findings highlighted the importance of assessing and maintaining hydration but identified barriers to, and variation in, clinical practice. To provide optimal care, barriers to the prevention and treatment of dehydration after stroke must be further understood and addressed. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Multidisciplinary teamwork is important in hydration care after stroke, but clarity is required about the specific contributions of each team member. Without this, hydration care becomes 'everybody's and nobody's job'.

A randomized clinical trial of glenohumeral joint steroid injection versus suprascapular nerve block in patients with frozen shoulder: a protocol for the Therapeutic Injections For Frozen Shoulder (TIFFS) study.

Frozen shoulder is a common, painful condition that results in impairment of function. Corticosteroid injections are commonly used for frozen shoulder and can be given as glenohumeral joint (GHJ) injection or suprascapular nerve block (SSNB). Both injection types have been shown to significantly improve shoulder pain and range of motion. It is not currently known which is superior in terms of relieving patients' symptoms. This is the protocol for a randomized clinical trial to investigate the clinical effectiveness of corticosteroid injection given as either a GHJ injection or SSNB. The Therapeutic Injections For Frozen Shoulder (TIFFS) study is a single centre, parallel, two-arm, randomized clinical trial. Participants will be allocated on a 1:1 basis to either a GHJ corticosteroid injection or SSNB. Participants in both trial arms will then receive physiotherapy as normal for frozen shoulder. The primary analysis will compare the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) at three months after injection. Secondary outcomes include OSS at six and 12 months, range of shoulder movement at three months, and Numeric Pain Rating Scale, abbreviated Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, and EuroQol five-level five-dimension health index at three months, six months, and one year after injection. A minimum of 40 patients will be recruited to obtain 80% power to detect a minimally important difference of ten points on the OSS between the groups at three months after injection. The study is registered under ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier NCT04965376. The results of this trial will demonstrate if there is a difference in shoulder pain and function after GHJ injection or SSNB in patients with frozen shoulder. This will help provide effective treatment to patients with frozen shoulder.