Correction: Identification of Anterior Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke During the Emergency Call: Protocol for a Controlled, Nonrandomized Trial.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/51683.].

The non-paretic-hand-to-opposite-ear test: A simple test to detect aphasia and neglect and an indicator of large anterior vessel occlusion in patients with suspected acute stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Aphasia and neglect in combination with hemiparesis are reliable indicators of large anterior vessel occlusion (LAVO). Prehospital identification of these symptoms is generally considered difficult by emergency medical service (EMS) personnel. Therefore, we evaluated the simple non-paretic-hand-to-opposite-ear (NPE) test to identify aphasia and neglect with a single test. As the NPE test includes a test for arm paresis, we also evaluated the diagnostic ability of the NPE test to detect LAVO in patients with suspected stroke. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, we performed the NPE test in 1042 patients with suspected acute stroke between May 2021 and May 2022. We analyzed the correlation between the NPE test and the aphasia/neglect items of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Additionally, the predictive values of the NPE test for LAVO detection were calculated. RESULTS: The NPE test showed a strong, significant correlation with both aphasia and neglect. A positive NPE test result predicted LAVO with a sensitivity of 0.70, a specificity of 0.88, and an accuracy of 0.85. Logistic regression analysis showed an odds ratio of 16.14 (95% confidence interval 10.82-24.44) for predicting LAVO. CONCLUSION: The NPE test is a simple test for the detection of both aphasia and neglect. With its predictive values for LAVO detection being comparable to the results of LAVO scores in the prehospital setting, this simple test might be a promising test for prehospital LAVO detection by EMS personnel. Further prospective prehospital validation is needed.

Identification of Anterior Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke During the Emergency Call: Protocol for a Controlled, Nonrandomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular thrombectomy (ET), combined with intravenous thrombolysis if possible, is an effective treatment option for patients with stroke who have confirmed anterior large vessel occlusion (aLVO). However, ET is mainly limited to comprehensive stroke centers (CSCs), resulting in a lack of ET capacity in remote, sparsely populated areas. Most stroke networks use the "Drip and Ship" or "Mothership" strategy, resulting in either delayed ET or intravenous thrombolysis, respectively. OBJECTIVE: This study protocol introduces the Leitstellen-Basierte Erkennung von Schlaganfall-Patienten für eine Thrombektomie und daraufhin abgestimmte Optimierung der Rettungskette (LESTOR) strategy, developed to optimize the preclinical part of the stroke chain of survival to improve the clinical outcome of patients with suspected aLVO stroke. This involves refining the dispatch strategy for identifying patients with acute aLVO stroke using a phone-based aLVO query. This includes dispatching emergency physicians and emergency medical services (EMS) to urban emergency sites, as well as dispatching helicopter EMS to remote areas. If a highly suspected aLVO is identified after a standardized aLVO score evaluation during a structured examination at the emergency scene, prompt transport to a CSC should be prioritized. METHODS: The LESTOR study is a controlled, nonrandomized study implementing the LESTOR strategy, with a stepped-wedge, cluster trial design in 6 districts in southwest Germany. In an interprofessional, iterative approach, an aLVO query or dispatch protocol intended for use by dispatchers, followed by a coordinated aLVO examination score for use by EMS, is being developed, evaluated, and pretested in a simulation study. After the training of all participating health care professionals with the corresponding final aLVO query, the LESTOR strategy is being implemented stepwise. Patients otherwise receive usual stroke care in both the control and intervention groups. The primary outcome is the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days in patients with stroke receiving endovascular treatment. We will use a generalized linear mixed model for data analysis. This study is accompanied by a cost-effectiveness analysis and a qualitative process evaluation. RESULTS: This paper describes and discusses the protocol for this controlled, nonrandomized LESTOR study. Enrollment was completed in June 2023. Data analysis is ongoing and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2024. The project started in April 2020 and will end in February 2024. CONCLUSIONS: We expect that the intervention will improve the clinical outcome of patients with aLVO stroke, especially outside the catchment areas of CSCs. The results of the accompanying process evaluation and the cost-effectiveness analysis will provide further insights into the implementation process and allow for a better interpretation of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00022152; https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00022152. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/51683.

Rehabilitation facilities' research needs and knowledge transfer in Southwest Germany: Data of the REHA-KNOWS study.

The REHA-KNOWS study was conducted to identify research needs, to explore attitudes and barriers towards health services research as well as to investigate knowledge transfer strategies in rehabilitation facilities in Southwest Germany. We designed a short online survey with 18 questions. From March to May 2023, we surveyed representatives of rehabilitation facilities in two German Federal States (Baden-Wuerttemberg and Saarland) using an online questionnaire provided via UniparkⓇ. The dataset contains all responses from n=88 individuals. We applied a list-based sampling approach and contacted n=206 rehabilitation facilities in total. Data collection started on March 2nd and the last response was received on May 2nd. As this sampling strategy allows multiple answers per facility, we applied an anonymized coding system to identify the affiliation of each respondent. In total, the 88 responses come from 74 centers. The dataset includes information on characteristics of the facility where the respondents work, the perceived benefits and barriers regarding health services research in practice, the need for research on specific topics and the transfer strategies established within the facilities. Analyses of these topics were performed in a descriptive and exploratory manner. This data offers the potential to be linked with data resulting from future research in this field in other Federal States of Germany. Further subgroup analyses can be performed with this dataset for specific research questions.

[Research partners in health services research: need, acceptance and feasibility of preparatory trainings]. / Forschungspartner*innen in der Versorgungsforschung: Bedarf, Akzeptanz und Umsetzbarkeit von vorbereitenden Schulungen.

AIM: The aim of this online survey was to assess the need, acceptance and practical feasibility of a training program for research partners in health services research by patients and the public. METHOD: In January 2023, we sent the survey to patient associations and groups nationwide via Patient Advisory Board members of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF). The survey included both closed and open questions. The research team analysed the information provided by the participants (n=125) descriptively and used content analysis according to Kuckartz and Rädiker (2022). RESULTS: The majority (90.4%) of respondents considered patient and the public involvement in the planning and implementation of scientific studies to be very or extremely important. 41.5% (17.9%) of respondents indicated that more than 10% (more than 25%) of patients would be willing to participate in free training and be available as research partners. More than three-quarters (76.8%) of respondents agreed that training was very or extremely important. Participants preferred written information (57.3%), short online training (56.5%) and short digital information sessions (53.2%). Frequently cited barriers to delivering training include travel costs (60%), time (53.3%) and the need for extensive prior information (48.3%). Participants' suggestions for successful training implementation included comprehensibility of the training program and its organisation (location, duration and format). CONCLUSION: In addition to the high training needs of research partners, the results also reveal some obstacles. A compact, comprehensible and digital information event with written information material increases acceptance. Researchers should take these results into account when designing and implementing training programs.