Communication partner training with familiar partners of people with aphasia: A systematic review and synthesis of barriers and facilitators to implementation

Establishing Quality Indicators and Implementation Priorities for Post-Stroke Aphasia Services Through End-User Involvement

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are no agreed quality standards for post-stroke aphasia services. Therefore, it is unknown if care reflects best practices or meets the expectations of people living with aphasia. We aimed to (1) shortlist, (2) operationalise and (3) prioritise best practice recommendations for post-stroke aphasia care.

METHODS

Three phases of research were conducted. In Phase 1, recommendations with strong evidence and/or known to be important to people with lived experience of aphasia were identified. People with lived experience and health professionals rated the importance of each recommendation through a two-round e-Delphi exercise. Recommendations were then ranked for importance and feasibility and analysed using a graph theory-based voting system. In Phase 2, shortlisted recommendations from Phase 1 were converted into quality indicators for appraisal and voting in consensus meetings. In Phase 3, priorities for implementation were established by people with lived experience and health professionals following discussion and anonymous voting.

FINDINGS

In Phase 1, 23 best practice recommendations were identified and rated by people with lived experience (n = 26) and health professionals (n = 81). Ten recommendations were shortlisted. In Phase 2, people with lived experience (n = 4) and health professionals (n = 17) reached a consensus on 11 quality indicators, relating to assessment (n = 2), information provision (n = 3), communication partner training (n = 3), goal setting (n = 1), person and family-centred care (n = 1) and provision of treatment (n = 1). In Phase 3, people with lived experience (n = 5) and health professionals (n = 7) identified three implementation priorities: assessment of aphasia, provision of aphasia-friendly information and provision of therapy.

INTERPRETATION

Our 11 quality indicators and 3 implementation priorities are the first step to enabling systematic, efficient and person-centred measurement and quality improvement in post-stroke aphasia services. Quality indicators will be embedded in routine data collection systems, and strategies will be developed to address implementation priorities.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Protocol development was informed by our previous research, which explored the perspectives of 23 people living with aphasia about best practice aphasia services. Individuals with lived experience of aphasia participated as expert panel members in our three consensus meetings. We received support from consumer advisory networks associated with the Centre for Research Excellence in Aphasia Rehabilitation and Recovery and the Queensland Aphasia Research Centre.

Communication partner training for student health and social care professionals engaging with people with stroke acquired communication difficulties: A protocol for a realist review

Background

Stroke acquired communication impairments impede effective communication. Consequently, in stroke care, communicative interactions can be challenging for both patients and staff and can predispose patients to increased risk of preventable adverse events. Communication partner training (CPT) can mitigate such negative outcomes by optimising communicative interactions. Providing CPT to student health and social care professionals (SH&SCPs) has the potential to enhance their clinical expertise and experiences and enhance the future clinical care of patients with stroke acquired communication impairments. This research aims to expand our understanding of how CPT is operationalised for SH&SCPs in higher education institutions and determine: what works; for whom; in what contexts; how and why?

Methods

This review is Phase 1 of a research project employing a realist approach with public and patient involvement (PPI). It incorporates five iterative steps: 1.) Clarifying the scope; 2.) Searching for evidence; 3.) Selecting and appraising evidence; 4.) Data extraction; 5.) Synthesising data and developing a middle range theory explaining how CPT is expected to work for SH&SCPs. An advisory panel, including PPI advisors, content advisors, student advisors, realist advisors and educationalist advisor has been set up to consult throughout the review and collaboratively agree the middle range theory.

Discussion

While there is an evolving evidence base for CPT, including stroke specific CPT for SH&SCPs, it is acknowledged that there are challenges to its implementation in complex real-world settings. In combining empirical evidence with theoretical understanding, realist review permits synthesis of data from diverse sources and goes beyond determining efficacy to explore generative causation and solutions for real world practice. A middle range realist programme theory that coherently explains how CPT is expected to work when teaching SH&SCPs to communicate with people with stroke acquired communication impairments will provide educators with new insights into CPT development and implementation in their higher education institutions.