Organisational barriers to thrombolysis treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

The role of stroke nurses in thrombolysis administration in Australia and the United Kingdom: A cross-sectional survey of current practice

BACKGROUND

The role of stroke nurses in patient selection and administration of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) for acute ischaemic stroke is evolving.

OBJECTIVES

To compare differences in stroke nurses' practices related to rt-PA administration in Australia and the United Kingdom (UK) and to examine whether these differences influence rt-PA treatment rates.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, self-administered questionnaire administered to a lead stroke clinician from hospitals known to provide rt-PA for acute ischaemic stroke. Chi-square tests were used to analyse between-country differences in ten pre-specified rt-PA practices. Non-parametric equality of medians test was used to assess within-country differences for likelihood of undertaking practices and association with rt-PA treatment rates. Reporting followed STROBE checklist.

RESULTS

Response rate 68%; (Australia: 74% [n = 63/85]; UK: 65% [n = 93/144]). There were significant differences between countries for 7/10 practices. UK nurses were more likely to: request CT scan; screen patient for rt-PA suitability; gain informed consent; use telemedicine to assess, diagnose or treat; assist in the decision for rt-PA with Emergency Department physician or neurologist; and undergo training in rt-PA administration. Reported median hospital rt-PA treatment rates were 12% in the UK and 7.8% in Australia: (7.8%). In Australia, there was an association between higher treatment rates and nurses involvement in 5/10 practices; read and interpret CT scans; screen patient for rt-PA suitability; gain informed consent; assess suitability for rt-PA with neurologist/stroke physician; undergo training in rt-PA administration. There was no relationship between UK treatment rates and likelihood of a stroke nurse to undertake any of the ten rt-PA practices.

CONCLUSION

Stroke nurses' active role in rt-PA administration can improve rt-PA treatment rates. Models of care that broaden stroke nurses' scope of practice to maximise rt-PA treatment rates for ischaemic stroke patients are needed.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This study demonstrates that UK and Australian nurses play an important role in thrombolysis practices; however, they are underused. Formalising and extending the role of stroke nurses in rt-PA administration could potentially increase thrombolysis rates with clinical benefits for patients.

Adopting evidence-based guidelines for acute stroke care: barriers and enablers for health professionals

An evidence summary based on the systematic review: Baatiema L, Otim ME, Mnatzaganian G, de-Graft Aikins A, Coombes J, Somerset S. Health professionals' views on the barriers and enablers to evidence-based practice for acute stroke care: a systematic review. Implement Sci. 2017;12:74. 10.1186/s13012-017-0599-3

Evidence-based practice is the keystone of clinical practice, policy and management. Despite this, a knowledge-to-practice gap still exists, and it is estimated to take 17 years for evidence to be translated into clinical practice. The reasons for slow translation in acute stroke care are not completely understood.

Can a multicomponent multidisciplinary implementation package change physicians' and nurses' perceptions and practices regarding thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke? An exploratory analysis of a cluster-randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The Thrombolysis ImPlementation in Stroke (TIPS) trial tested the effect of a multicomponent, multidisciplinary, collaborative intervention designed to increase the rates of intravenous thrombolysis via a cluster randomized controlled trial at 20 Australian hospitals (ten intervention, ten control). This sub-study investigated changes in self-reported perceptions and practices of physicians and nurses working in acute stroke care at the participating hospitals.

METHODS

A survey with 74 statements was administered during the pre- and post-intervention periods to staff at 19 of the 20 hospitals. An exploratory factor analysis identified the structure of the survey items and linear mixed modeling was applied to the final survey domain scores to explore the differences between groups over time.

RESULT

The response rate was 45% for both the pre- (503 out of 1127 eligible staff from 19 hospitals) and post-intervention (414 out of 919 eligible staff from 18 hospitals) period. Four survey domains were identified: (1) hospital performance indicators, feedback, and training; (2) personal perceptions about thrombolysis evidence and implementation; (3) personal stroke skills and hospital stroke care policies; and (4) emergency and ambulance procedures. There was a significant pre- to post-intervention mean increase (0.21 95% CI 0.09; 0.34; p < 0.01) in scores relating to hospital performance indicators, feedback, and training; for the intervention hospitals compared to control hospitals. There was a corresponding increase in mean scores regarding perceptions about the thrombolysis evidence and implementation (0.21, 95% CI 0.06; 0.36; p < 0.05). Sub-group analysis indicated that the improvements were restricted to nurses' responses.

CONCLUSION

TIPS resulted in changes in some aspects of nurses' perceptions relating to the evidence for intravenous thrombolysis and its implementation and hospital performance indicators, feedback, and training. However, there is a need to explore further strategies for influencing the views of physicians given limited statistical power in the physician sample.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12613000939796, UTN: U1111-1145-6762.

Staff perspectives from Australian hospitals seeking to improve implementation of thrombolysis care for acute stroke

Background:

Intravenous thrombolysis is one of few evidence-based treatments for acute stroke. Treatment uptake is low outside major stroke care centres. There is a need for greater understanding of barriers encountered by clinicians when seeking to increase thrombolysis rates.

Aim:

The aim of this study is to describe physicians’ and nurses’ perceptions regarding thrombolysis for acute stroke at hospitals in the earlier stages of thrombolysis implementation.

Methods:

A cross-sectional paper survey completed by physicians’ and nurses’ was distributed to 1127 staff at stroke care units, emergency departments or equivalent stroke care facilities at 19 Australian hospitals, as part of a cluster randomised controlled trial for thrombolysis implementation and systems improvement.

Results:

Of 1127 potential participants, 503 (148 physicians and 355 nurses) completed surveys (45% response rate). Over 90% agreed that thrombolysis improved the odds of independent survival. However, 42% to 58% agreed that there were limitations in the evidence base. A small proportion of staff indicated deficits in technical competencies. Interactive or competency-based training was reported by less than two-thirds of the sample. Challenges such as quick bed availability were identified. Emergency department physicians were less positive towards the treatment compared with nurses (p < 0.001), stroke care unit physicians were more positive than nurses (p = 0.047) and older clinicians were more positive than younger clinicians (p = 0.007).

Conclusion:

Australian hospitals seeking to address barriers to stroke thrombolysis implementation may benefit from the availability of interactive and competency-based training, staff performance feedback, support to make beds available quickly and bypass arrangements to quickly deliver acute stroke patients to appropriate facilities.

Understanding delays in acute stroke care: a systematic review of reviews

Background

Stroke is the leading cause of adult long-term disability in Western countries. Intravenous thrombolytic therapy with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator is safe and effective within the first 4.5 h after the onset of stroke. Various factors delaying acute stroke care have been identified in the literature. This review aimed to provide an overview of factors delaying acute stroke care and attempted to show how they interact in a synthetic framework.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of literature reviews published in Medline and DORIS until 2016 on factors influencing acute stroke pathway timeframe.

Results

We analyzed 31 reviews that cover all factors of delays from stroke onset to treatment. We identified 27 factors that had a significant impact on acute stroke care and can be categorized into four distinct categories: patient-related factors, training, resources and lack of coordination. We also reported associations between factors observed in both between categories (mainly between patients and organizational/logistical factors) and within categories.

Conclusion

This review provides a wide overview of factors influencing acute stroke pathway. Since it was observed that the identified factors were interrelated, they needed to be analyzed in a systematic way. We hence created a synthetic framework that combines several categories of factors while assuming that factor weight varies from a study context to another. Better knowledge on underlying mechanisms between factors would provide crucial improvement of the interventions aiming at reducing delays in both pre-hospital and inhospital stages. For future research, we recommend adopting a systemic perspective on factors influencing acute stroke pathway.

The progress of telestroke in China

Stroke remains the leading cause of death in China. The disparity of distribution in specialists and hospitals affects access to timely stroke care. Telestroke, the use of telemedicine for stroke, may be the solution to access to stroke care. Telestroke can improve the rate of successful intravenous thrombolysis and shorten the time to treatment. Here we review the progress of telestroke in China.

Health professionals' views on the barriers and enablers to evidence-based practice for acute stroke care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Adoption of contemporary evidence-based guidelines for acute stroke management is often delayed due to a range of key enablers and barriers. Recent reviews on such barriers focus mainly on specific acute stroke therapies or generalised stroke care guidelines. This review examined the overall barriers and enablers, as perceived by health professionals which affect how evidence-based practice guidelines (stroke unit care, thrombolysis administration, aspirin usage and decompressive surgery) for acute stroke care are adopted in hospital settings.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic search of databases was conducted using MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database from 1990 to 2016. The population of interest included health professionals working clinically or in roles responsible for acute stroke care. There were no restrictions to the study designs. A quality appraisal tool for qualitative studies by the Joanna Briggs Institute and another for quantitative studies by the Centre for Evidence-Based Management were used in the present study. A recent checklist to classify barriers and enablers to health professionals' adherence to evidence-based practice was also used.

RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria out of a total of 9832 search results. The main barriers or enablers identified included poor organisational or institutional level support, health professionals' limited skills or competence to use a particular therapy, low level of awareness, familiarity or confidence in the effectiveness of a particular evidence-based therapy, limited medical facilities to support evidence uptake, inadequate peer support among health professionals', complex nature of some stroke care therapies or guidelines and patient level barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite considerable evidence supporting various specific therapies for stroke care, uptake of these therapies is compromised by barriers across organisational, patients, guideline interventions and health professionals' domains. As a result, we recommend that future interventions and health policy directions should be informed by these findings in order to optimise uptake of best practice acute stroke care. Further studies from low- to middle-income countries are needed to understand the barriers and enablers in such settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol was registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews, PROSPERO 2015 (Registration Number: CRD42015023481 ).

The lived experiences of nurses in one hyper-acute stroke unit

Hyper-acute stroke units (HASUs) admit all stroke patients across London. As a novel London stroke model, the integration of thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke is an important element of hyper-acute stroke care for patients. In this model, nurses working in a hyper-acute stroke unit are involved in the delivery of thrombolysis treatment. By use of a phenomenological approach, the study investigates the 'lived experiences' of nurses' preparation for their role and explores any factors that affect nurses' participation in thrombolysis treatment. The nurses' roles-which facilitate, support, monitor, anticipate and result in prevention-are central to effective thrombolysis treatment. However, factors such as communication, teamwork, clinical decision, training, staffing and safety affect their thrombolysis roles. Addressing factors that affect nurses' thrombolysis roles could lead to improved communication, collaborative teamwork and better patient outcomes.

Optimizing the management of acute ischaemic stroke: a review of the utilization of intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (tPA)

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Thrombolysis using intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) is the only available evidence-based treatment for acute ischaemic stroke; however, its current utilization is very low. Therefore, the aim of this article is to review the literature regarding the use of intravenous tPA for the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke. The review will also compare utilization rates of thrombolysis in different centres across the world and identify key reasons for the underutilization of thrombolysis in stroke.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA) and Google Scholar were searched for relevant original articles, review papers and other publications over the publication period 1995-2012.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) (1995, N = 624 patients) and ECASS III (2008, N = 821 patients) are two pivotal randomized controlled trials providing evidence for the use of intravenous tPA within 3 h or 3-4.5 h from stroke onset, respectively. Both trials have shown that tPA administration decreases disability at 90 days from stroke. Furthermore, a recent pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials (2010, N = 3670 patients) supports these results, highlighting that early stroke treatment is associated with better outcomes, especially when treatment is started within 90 min of stroke onset (but suggesting that the benefit could be afforded within a 4.5-h time window). Three major observational trials, STARS (2000, N = 389 patients), CASES (2005, N = 1135 patients) and SITS-MOST (2007, N = 6483 patients), have reported acceptable safety and efficacy in clinical practice. However, only a small proportion of acute ischaemic stroke patients receive tPA in clinical practice, because of the limited availability of tPA-utilizing sites and suboptimal use of tPA in sites where it is available.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

tPA reduces disability in stroke patients. Moreover, acceptable safety has been demonstrated in routine clinical practice. However, tPA is significantly underutilized, and specific efforts are needed to encourage appropriate implementation of the stroke treatment guidelines to optimize the use of this important therapy.

Use of telemedicine and other strategies to increase the number of patients that may be treated with intravenous thrombolysis

Stroke is the fourth leading killer in the United States and a leading cause of adult long-term disability. The American Heart Association estimates that only 3% to 5% of patients with acute ischemic stroke are treated with intravenous thrombolysis. A way to improve the rates of treatment with thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke is the creation of telemedicine stroke networks. Data from many studies support the safety of expanding intravenous tissue plasminogen activator use with the help of telemedicine. In this article we discuss the current evidence for the use of telemedicine within stroke systems of care, the importance of coordinating care within the transferring facilities in the telestroke networks, telestroke economics and applicability, and how to potentially use the telestroke systems to increase recruitment of patients into acute stroke thrombolysis trials.

Barriers to the utilization of thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Thrombolysis is currently the only evidence-based pharmacological treatment available for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS); however, its current utilization is suboptimal (administered to <3% of AIS patients). The aim of this article was to identify the potential barriers to the use of thrombolysis via a review of the available literature.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant original articles, review papers and other literature published in the period 1995-2011.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Several barriers to the utilization of thrombolysis in stroke have been identified in the literature and can be broadly classified as 'preadmission' barriers and 'post-admission' barriers. Preadmission barriers include patient and paramedic-related factors leading to late patient presentation for treatment (i.e. outside the therapeutic time window for the administration of thrombolysis). Post-admission barriers include in-hospital factors, such as suboptimal triage of stroke patients and inefficient in-hospital acute stroke care systems, a lack of appropriate infrastructure and expertise to administer thrombolysis, physician uncertainty in prescribing thrombolysis and difficulty in obtaining informed consent for thrombolysis. Suggested strategies to overcome these barriers include public awareness campaigns, prehospital triage by paramedics, hospital bypass protocols and prenotification systems, urgent stroke-unit admission, on-call multidisciplinary acute stroke teams, urgent neuroimaging protocols, telestroke interventions and risk-assessment tools to aid physicians when considering thrombolysis. Additionally, greater pharmacists' engagement is warranted to help identify the people at risk of stroke and support preventative strategies, and provide the public with information regarding the recognition of stroke, as well as facilitate the access and use of thrombolysis.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The most effective interventions appear to be those comprising several strategies and those that target more than one barrier simultaneously. Therefore, optimal utilization of thrombolysis requires a systematic, integrated multidisciplinary approach across the continuum of acute care.