Rural versus metropolitan comparison of processes of care in the community-based management of TIA and minor stroke in Australia (an analysis from the INSIST study).

OBJECTIVES: To compare processes of care and clinical outcomes of community-based management of TIAs and minor strokes (TIAMS) between rural and metropolitan Australia. DESIGN: Inception cohort study between 2012 and 2016 with 12-month follow-up after index event (sub-study of INSIST). SETTING: Hunter and Manning valley regions of New South Wales, within the referral territory of the John Hunter Hospital Acute Neurovascular Clinic (JHHANC). PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients of 16 participating general practices, presenting with possible TIAMS to either primary or secondary care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Processes of care (referrals, key management processes, time-based metrics) and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Of 613 participants with possible TIAMS who completed the baseline interview, 298 were adjudicated as having TIAMS (119 from rural, 179 from metropolitan). Mean age was 72.3 years (SD, 10.7) and 127 (43%) were women. Rural participants were more likely to be managed solely by a general practitioner (GP) than metropolitan participants (34% v 20%) and less likely to be referred to a JHHANC specialist (13% v 38%) or have brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [24% v 51%]. Those rural participants who were referred, also waited longer (both p < 0.001). Recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction and death at 12 months were not significantly different between rural and metropolitan participants. CONCLUSIONS: Although TIAMS prognosis in rural settings where solely GP care is common is very good, the processes of care in such areas are inferior to metropolitan. This suggests there is further scope to support rural GPs to optimise care of TIAMS patients.

What is important in supporting self-management in community stroke rehabilitation? A Q methodology study.

PURPOSE: Supported self-management (SSM) is an important part of adapting to life after stroke however it is a complex concept. It is unclear what SSM in stroke consists of or how stroke survivors, families, and clinicians can most effectively work together to support person-centred self-management. In this study, we aimed to explore what was most important in making SSM work in community stroke rehabilitation. METHODS: We conducted a Q-methodology study with stroke survivors (n = 20), community-based stroke clinicians (n = 20), and team managers (n = 8) across four health boards in Scotland, United Kingdom. Participants ranked 32 statements according to their importance in making SSM work. Factor analysis was used to identify shared viewpoints. RESULTS: We identified four viewpoints: (i) A person-centred approach to build self-confidence and self-worth; (ii) Feeling heard, understood, and supported by everybody; (iii) Preparation of appropriate resources; and (iv) Right thing, right place, right time for the individual. Important across all viewpoints were: a trusting supportive relationship; working in partnership; focusing on meaningful goals; and building self-confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Differing views exist on what is most important in SSM. These views could be used to inform quality improvement strategies to support the delivery of SSM that considers the preferences of stroke survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONClinicians should be aware of their own viewpoint of supported self-management and consider how their perspective may differ from stroke survivors' and colleagues' perspectives of what's important to support self-management.Working in partnership with stroke survivors plus developing a trusting and supportive relationship with them are core components of supporting self-management in the longer term after stroke.Building a sense of self-worth and self-confidence, a focus on meaningful goals, training and support for staff, and tailoring support to people's needs at the right time are important considerations for supporting longer-term engagement in self-management.