Factors Associated With Transition From Community to Permanent Residential Aged Care Following Stroke: A Linked Registry Data Study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding factors that influence the transition to permanent residential aged care following a stroke or transient ischemic attack may inform strategies to support people to live at home longer. We aimed to identify the demographic, clinical, and system factors that may influence the transition from living in the community to permanent residential care in the 6 to 18 months following stroke/transient ischemic attack. METHODS: Linked data cohort analysis of adults from Queensland and Victoria aged ≥65 years and registered in the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (2012-2016) with a clinical diagnosis of stroke/transient ischemic attack and living in the community in the first 6 months post-hospital discharge. Participant data were linked with primary care, pharmaceutical, aged care, death, and hospital data. Multivariable survival analysis was performed to determine demographic, clinical, and system factors associated with the transition to permanent residential care in the 6 to 18 months following stroke, with death modeled as a competing risk. RESULTS: Of 11 176 included registrants (median age, 77.2 years; 44% female), 520 (5%) transitioned to permanent residential care between 6 and 18 months. Factors most associated with transition included the history of urinary tract infections (subhazard ratio [SHR], 1.41 [95% CI, 1.16-1.71]), dementia (SHR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.14-2.42]), increasing age (65-74 versus 85+ years; SHR, 1.75 [95% CI, 1.31-2.34]), living in regional Australia (SHR, 31 [95% CI, 1.08-1.60]), and aged care service approvals: respite (SHR, 4.54 [95% CI, 3.51-5.85]) and high-level home support (SHR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.30-2.48]). Protective factors included being dispensed antihypertensive medications (SHR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.53-0.87]), seeing a cardiologist (SHR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.57-0.91]) following stroke, and less severe stroke (SHR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.58-0.88]). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide an improved understanding of factors that influence the transition from community to permanent residential care following stroke and can inform future strategies designed to delay this transition.

The population effect of a national policy to incentivize chronic disease management in primary care in stroke: a population-based cohort study using an emulated target trial approach.

Background: Governments are investing in primary care policies that support chronic disease management. Large scale population-based evaluations are lacking. We aim to determine the effectiveness of government-funded chronic disease management policies to improve long-term outcomes (survival, hospital presentations, and preventive medication adherence) following stroke/Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA). Methods: Using a population-based cohort we utilized the target trial methodology. Participants were identified through the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (January 2012-December 2016) from 42 hospitals in the states of Victoria and Queensland and linked with state and national hospital, primary care, pharmaceutical, aged care, and death datasets. Registrants living in the community, not receiving palliative care and who survived to 18 months following stroke/TIA were included. The comparison was a Medicare claim for policy-supported chronic disease management, 7-18 months following stroke/TIA versus usual care. Outcomes were modelled using multi-level, mixed-effects inverse probability of treatment weighted regression. Findings: 12,368 registrants were eligible (42% female, median age 70 years, 26% TIA), 45% had a chronic disease management claim. The difference in mean outcomes for participants with a claim, compared to those without, showed a 26% lesser mortality rate (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62, 0.87) and a greater adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] of being adherent with preventive medications: antithrombotics (aOR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.26); lipid-lowering (aOR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.13, 1.33). Impacts on hospital presentations were variable. Interpretation: Government policies that financially support primary care physicians to provide structured chronic disease management improve survival in the long-term following stroke/TIA. Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council Australia.

Prospective application of theoretical implementation frameworks to improve health care in hospitals - a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Health Service implementation projects are often guided by theoretical implementation frameworks. Little is known about the effectiveness of these frameworks to facilitate change in processes of care and patient outcomes within the inpatient setting. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of the application of theoretical implementation frameworks in inpatient healthcare settings to change processes of care and associated patient outcomes. METHOD: We conducted a search in CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, EMCARE and Cochrane Library databases from 1st January 1995 to 15th June 2021. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and exclusion criteria to potentially eligible studies. Eligible studies: implemented evidence-based care into an in-patient setting using a theoretical implementation framework applied prospectively; used a prospective study design; presented process of care or patient outcomes; and were published in English. We extracted theoretical implementation frameworks and study design against the Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research (WIDER) Checklist and implementation strategies mapped to the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) taxonomy. We summarised all interventions using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. We appraised study quality using the Item bank on risk of bias and precision of observational studies and the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for cluster randomised trials. We extracted process of care and patient outcomes and described descriptively. We conducted meta-analysis for process of care and patient outcomes with reference to framework category. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one used a pre-post (no comparison), two a pre-post with a comparison, and two a cluster randomised trial design. Eleven theoretical implementation frameworks were prospectively applied: six process models; five determinant frameworks; and one classic theory. Four studies used two theoretical implementation frameworks. No authors reported their justification for selecting a particular framework and implementation strategies were generally poorly described. No consensus was reached for a preferred framework or subset of frameworks based on meta-analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: Rather than the ongoing development of new implementation frameworks, a more consistent approach to framework selection and strengthening of existing approaches is recommended to further develop the implementation evidence base. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42019119429.

Development and field testing of a standardised goal setting package for person-centred discharge care planning in stroke.

Objective: Develop and test a person-centred goal-setting package for discharge care planning in acute and rehabilitation stroke units. Methods: A multidisciplinary, expert working group (n = 15), and consumer group (n = 4) was convened. A multistage iterative approach was used to develop and test the package. Stages included: (i) contextual understanding, (ii) package development, and (iii) clinician training and field-testing in acute and rehabilitation settings. Observational field notes were taken and clinicians' perspectives captured using semi-structured focus groups post-testing. Results: The final package included a 34-item menu aligned with a manual containing: guideline summaries; common goals; goal metrics based on the SMART Goal Evaluation Method (SMART-GEM); evidence-based strategies; and worked examples. Twenty-three clinicians attended training. Clinician observations (n = 5) indicated that: the package could be incorporated into practice; a range of person-centred goals were set; and opportunities provided to raise additional issues. Clinician feedback (n = 8) suggested the package was useful and facilitated person-centred goal-setting. Enablers included potential for incorporation into existing processes and beliefs that it promoted person-centred care. Barriers included additional time. Conclusion: The package demonstrated potential to facilitate comprehensive person-centred goal-setting for patients with stroke. Innovation: We developed an innovative approach to support structured person-centred goal setting in clinical and research settings.