Impact of an outpatient telestroke clinic on management of rural stroke patients.

OBJECTIVE: Report on feasibility, use and effects on investigations and treatment of a neurologist-supported stroke clinic in rural Australia. DESIGN: Data were collected prospectively for consecutive patients referred to atelehealth stroke clinic from November 2018 to August 2021. SETTINGS, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Patients attended the local hospital, with a rural stroke care coordinator, and were assessed by stroke neurologist over videoconference. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The following feasibility outcomes on the first appointments were analysed: (1) utility (a) change in medication, (b) request of additional investigations, (c) enrolment/offering clinical trials or d) other; (2) acceptability (attendance rate); and (3) process of care (waiting time to first appointment, distance travelled). RESULTS: During the study period, 173 appointments were made; 125 (73.5%) were first appointments. The median age was 70 [63-79] years, and 69 patients were male. A diagnosis of stroke or transient ischemic attack was made by the neurologist in 106 patients. A change in diagnosis was made in 23 (18.4%) patients. Of the first appointments, 102 (81.6%) resulted in at least one intervention: medication was changed in 67 (53.6%) patients, additional investigations requested in 72 (57.6%), 15 patients (12%) were referred to a clinical trial, and other interventions were made in 23 patients. The overall attendance rate of booked appointments was high. The median waiting time and distance travelled (round-trip) for a first appointment were 38 [24-53] days and 60.8 [25.6-76.6] km respectively. CONCLUSION: The telestroke clinic was very well attended, and it led to high volume of interventions in rural stroke patients.

Improving Practice for Urinary Continence Care on Adult Acute Medical and Rehabilitation Wards: A Multi-Site, Co-Created Implementation Study.

Many adult inpatients experience urinary continence issues; however, we lack evidence on effective interventions for inpatient continence care. We conducted a before and after implementation study. We implemented our guideline-based intervention using strategies targeting identified barriers and evaluated the impact on urinary continence care provided by inpatient clinicians. Fifteen wards (acute = 3, rehabilitation = 7, acute and rehabilitation = 5) at 12 hospitals (metropolitan = 4, regional = 8) participated. We screened 2298 consecutive adult medical records for evidence of urinary continence symptoms over three 3-month periods: before implementation (T0: n = 849), after the 6-month implementation period (T1: n = 740), and after a 6-month maintenance period (T2: n = 709). The records of symptomatic inpatients were audited for continence assessment, diagnosis, and management plans. All wards contributed data at T0, and 11/15 wards contributed at T1 and T2 (dropouts due to COVID-19). Approximately 26% of stroke, 33% acute medical, and 50% of rehabilitation inpatients were symptomatic. The proportions of symptomatic patients (T0: n = 283, T1: n = 241, T2: n = 256) receiving recommended care were: assessment T0 = 38%, T1 = 63%, T2 = 68%; diagnosis T0 = 30%, T1 = 70%, T2 = 71%; management plan T0 = 7%, T1 = 24%, T2 = 24%. Overall, there were 4-fold increased odds for receiving assessments and management plans and 6-fold greater odds for diagnosis. These improvements were sustained at T2. This intervention has improved inpatient continence care.

Improving Assessment, Diagnosis, and Management of Urinary Incontinence and Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms on Acute and Rehabilitation Wards That Admit Adult Patients: Protocol for a Before-and-After Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence (UI) and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are commonly experienced by adult patients in hospitals (inpatients). Although peak bodies recommend that health services have systems for optimal UI and LUTS care, they are often not delivered. For example, results from the 2017 Australian National Stroke Audit Acute Services indicated that of the one-third of acute stroke inpatients with UI, only 18% received a management plan. In the 2018 Australian National Stroke Audit Rehabilitation Services, half of the 41% of patients with UI received a management plan. There is little reporting of effective inpatient interventions to systematically deliver optimal UI/LUTS care. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether our UI/LUTS practice-change package is feasible and effective for delivering optimal UI/LUTS care in an inpatient setting. The package includes our intervention that has been synthesized from the best-available evidence on UI/LUTS care and a theoretically informed implementation strategy targeting identified barriers and enablers. The package is targeted at clinicians working in the participating wards. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, real-world, before- and after-implementation study conducted at 12 hospitals (15 wards: 7/15, 47% metropolitan, 8/15, 53% regional) in Australia. Data will be collected at 3 time points: before implementation (T0), immediately after the 6-month implementation period (T1), and again after a 6-month maintenance period (T2). We will undertake medical record audits to determine any change in the proportion of inpatients receiving optimal UI/LUTS care, including assessment, diagnosis, and management plans. Potential economic implications (cost and consequences) for hospitals implementing our intervention will be determined. RESULTS: This study was approved by the Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (HNEHREC Reference No. 18/10/17/4.02). Preimplementation data collection (T0) was completed in March 2020. As of November 2020, 87% (13/15) wards have completed implementation and are undertaking postimplementation data collection (T1). CONCLUSIONS: Our practice-change package is designed to reduce the current inpatient UI/LUTS evidence-based practice gap, such as those identified through national stroke audits. This study has been designed to provide clinicians, managers, and policy makers with the evidence needed to assess the potential benefit of further wide-scale implementation of our practice-change package. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/22902.