Situationally-sensitive knowledge translation and relational decision making in hyperacute stroke: a qualitative study

Experiences with information provision and preferences for decision making of patients with acute stroke

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to gain insight into experiences of patients with acute stroke regarding information provision and their preferred involvement in decision-making processes during the initial period of hospitalisation.

METHODS

A sequential explanatory design was used in two independent cohorts of patients with stroke, starting with a survey after discharge from hospital (cohort 1) followed by observations and structured interviews during hospitalisation (cohort 2). Quantitative data were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

In total, 72 patients participated in this study (52 in cohort 1 and 20 in cohort 2). During hospitalisation, the majority of the patients were educated about acute stroke and their treatment. Approximately half of the patients preferred to have an active role in the decision-making process, whereas only 21% reported to be actively involved. In cohort 2, 60% of the patients considered themselves capable to carefully consider treatment options.

CONCLUSIONS

Active involvement in the acute decision-making process is preferred by approximately half of the patients with acute stroke and most of them consider themselves capable of doing so. However, they experience a limited degree of actual involvement.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians can facilitate patient engagement by explicitly emphasising when a decision has to be made in which the patient's opinion is important.

Practice variation in the informed consent procedure for thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke: a survey among neurologists and neurology residents

Background

Obtaining informed consent for intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke can be challenging, and little is known about if and how the informed consent procedure is performed by neurologists in clinical practice. This study examines the procedure of informed consent for intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke in high-volume stroke centers in the Netherlands.

Methods

In four high volume stroke centers, neurology residents and attending neurologists received an online questionnaire concerning informed consent for thrombolysis with tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA). The respondents were asked to report their usual informed consent practice for tPA treatment and their considerations on whether informed consent should be obtained.

Results

From the 203 invited clinicians, 50% (n = 101) completed the questionnaire. One-third of the neurology residents (n = 21) and 21% of the neurologists (n = 8) reported that they always obtain informed consent for tPA treatment. If a patient is not capable of providing informed consent, 30% of the residents (n = 19) reported that they start tPA treatment without informed consent. In these circumstances, 53% of the neurologists (n = 20) reported that the resident under their supervision would start tPA treatment without informed consent. Most neurologists (n = 21; 55%) and neurology residents (n = 45; 72%) obtained informed consent within one minute. None of the respondents used more than five minutes for informed consent. Important themes regarding obtaining informed consent for treatment were patients’ capacity, and medical, ethical and legal considerations.

Conclusion

The current practice of informed consent for thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke varies among neurologists and neurology residents. If informed consent is obtained, most clinicians stated to obtain informed consent within one minute. In the future, a shortened information provision process may be applied, making a shift from informed consent to informed refusal, while still considering the patient’s capacity, stroke severity, and possible treatment delays.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-021-00684-6.

Palliative care after stroke: A review

BACKGROUND

Palliative care is an integral aspect of stroke unit care. In 2016, the American Stroke Association published a policy statement on palliative care and stroke. Since then there has been an expansion in the literature on palliative care and stroke.

AIM

Our aim was to narratively review research on palliative care and stroke, published since 2015.

RESULTS

The literature fell into three broad categories: (a) scope and scale of palliative care needs, (b) organization of palliative care for stroke, and (c) shared decision making. Most literature was observational. There was a lack of evidence about interventions that address specific palliative symptoms or improve shared decision making. Racial disparities exist in access to palliative care after stroke. There was a dearth of literature from low- and middle-income countries.

CONCLUSION

We recommend further research, especially in low- and middle-income countries, including research to explore why racial disparities in access to palliative care exist. Randomized trials are needed to address specific palliative care needs after stroke and to understand how best to facilitate shared decision making.

Treatment decision-making in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis: a patient's perspective

OBJECTIVES

To examine the treatment decision-making process of patients with dcSSc in the context of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

METHODS

A qualitative semi-structured interview study was done in patients before or after HSCT, or patients who chose another treatment than HSCT. Thematic analysis was used. Shared decision-making (SDM) was assessed with the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9).

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients [16 male/nine female, median age 47 (range 27-68) years] were interviewed: five pre-HSCT, 16 post-HSCT and four following other treatment. Whereas the SDM-Q-9 showed the decision-making process was perceived as shared [median score 81/100 (range 49-100)], we learned from the interviews that the decision was predominantly made by the rheumatologist, and patients were often steered towards a treatment option. Strong guidance of the rheumatologist was appreciated because of a lack of accessible, reliable and SSc-specific information, due to the approach of the decision-making process of the rheumatologist, the large consequence of the decision and the trust in their doctor. Expectations of outcomes and risks also differed between patients. Furthermore, more than half of patients felt they had no choice but to go for HSCT, due to rapid deterioration of health and the perception of HSCT as 'the holy grail'.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study that provides insight into the decision-making process in dcSSc. This process is negatively impacted by a lack of disease-specific education about treatment options. Additionally, we recommend exploring patients' preferences and understanding of the illness to optimally guide decision-making and to provide tailor-made information.

Financial Burden of Stroke Reflected in a Pilot Center for the Implementation of Thrombolysis

Stroke represents a serious illness and is extremely relevant from the public health point of view, implying important social and economic burdens. Introducing new procedures or therapies that reduce the costs both in the acute phase of the disease and in the long term becomes a priority for health systems worldwide. The present study quantifies and compares the direct costs for ischemic stroke in patients with thrombolysis treatment versus conservative treatment over a 24-month period from the initial diagnosis, in one of the 7 national pilot centres for the implementation of thrombolytic treatment. The significant reduction (p < 0.001) of the hospitalization period, especially of the days in the intensive care unit (ICU) for stroke, resulted in a significant reduction (p < 0.001) of the total average costs in the patients with thrombolysis, both at the first hospitalization and for the subsequent hospitalizations, during the period followed in the study. It was also found that the percentage of patients who were re-hospitalized within the first 24-months after stroke was significantly lower (p < 0.001) among thrombolyzed patients. The present study demonstrates that the quick intervention in cases of stroke is an efficient policy regarding costs, of Romanian Public Health System, Romania being the country with the highest rates of new strokes and deaths due to stroke in Europe.

Legal medicine implications in fibrinolytic therapy of acute ischemic stroke

Background

Before the advent of fibrinolytic therapy as a gold standard method of care for cases of acute ischemic stroke in Romania, issues regarding legal medicine aspects involved in this area of medical expertise were already presented and, in the majority of cases, the doctors seem to be unprepared for these situations.

Main text

The present research illustrates some of the cases in which these aspects were involved, that adressed a clinical center having 6 years of professional experience in the application of fibrinolytic treatment for stroke. The following cases report either situations in which the afore mentioned therapy was not rightfully administrated or legal aspects regarding the obtainment of informed consent.

Conclusion

Obtaining informed consent is a mandatory procedure, which takes time, to the detriment of application of fibrinolytic treatment.

The Interaction with Disabled Persons Scale: translation and cross-cultural validation into Greek

AIM

Cross-cultural adaptation of the Interaction with Disabled Persons Scale (IDPS) into Greek.

METHODS

The IDPS was forward and back-translated by two bilingual physiotherapists and a Greek-English translator, respectively. Greek-speaking health professionals provided modifications in order to develop the final version of the Scale. Health professionals filled in the Greek version of the IDPS and the Caring Behaviors Inventory (for criterion validity). The factors of the Greek IDPS were extracted as well. After 8-10 days, the scale was re-distributed to the same health professionals (test-retest reliability) and to a general population sample (discriminant validity).

RESULTS

Eighty-seven health professionals (36 ± 7.6 years) and 80 general population participants (44 ± 11.6 years) participated. There was a trend for the Greek IDPS variability to predict the variability of the Caring Behaviors Inventory (r² = 0.05; p = 0.054), but the coefficient of determination was low. An explanatory factor analysis extracted four factors explaining 66.66% of the total variance, confirmed by reliability analysis. The health care professionals had a significantly lower score than the general population in the Greek IDPS (mean difference: -11.0; confidence interval: -7.3 to -14.7), indicating familiarisation with the management of people with disability. The scale reliability and internal consistency were excellent; ICC_(2,1) = 0.92 (confidence interval: 0.87-0.95) and Cronbach's α = 0.96 respectively. No ceiling or floor effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial validity and reliability were observed for the Greek IDPS to assess Greek health professionals' attitudes towards people with disabilities.Implications for rehabilitationThe Greek IDPS version was shown to be comprehensible, and has demonstrated a sufficient amount of validity and reliability for assessing the perceptions and attitudes of Greek health professionals towards people with disabilities.Exploring attitudes towards people with disabilities in Greek-speaking populations, especially health professionals, with a scale such as the Greek IDPS is very important as it can help promote positive changes in approaches towards disability.

A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) is a method used to elicit participants' preferences and the relative importance of different attributes and levels within a decision-making process. DCEs have become popular in healthcare; however, approaches to identify the attributes/levels influencing a decision of interest and to selection methods for their inclusion in a DCE are under-reported. Our objectives were: to explore the development process used to select/present attributes/levels from the identified range that may be influential; to describe a systematic and rigorous development process for design of a DCE in the context of thrombolytic therapy for acute stroke; and, to discuss the advantages of our five-stage approach to enhance current guidance for developing DCEs.

METHODS

A five-stage DCE development process was undertaken. Methods employed included literature review, qualitative analysis of interview and ethnographic data, expert panel discussions, a quantitative structured prioritisation (ranking) exercise and pilot testing of the DCE using a 'think aloud' approach.

RESULTS

The five-stage process reported helped to reduce the list of 22 initial patient-related factors to a final set of nine variable factors and six fixed factors for inclusion in a testable DCE using a vignette model of presentation.

CONCLUSIONS

In order for the data and conclusions generated by DCEs to be deemed valid, it is crucial that the methods of design and development are documented and reported. This paper has detailed a rigorous and systematic approach to DCE development which may be useful to researchers seeking to establish methods for reducing and prioritising attributes for inclusion in future DCEs.

Shared decision-making in stroke: an evolving approach to improved patient care

Shared decision-making (SDM) occurs when patients, families and clinicians consider patients' values and preferences alongside the best medical evidence and partner to make the best decision for a given patient in a specific scenario. SDM is increasingly promoted within Western contexts and is also being explored outside such settings, including in China. SDM and tools to promote SDM can improve patients' knowledge/understanding, participation in the decision-making process, satisfaction and trust in the healthcare team. SDM has also proposed long-term benefits to patients, clinicians, organisations and healthcare systems. To successfully perform SDM, clinicians must know their patients' values and goals and the evidence underlying different diagnostic and treatment options. This is relevant for decisions throughout stroke care, from thrombolysis to goals of care, diagnostic assessments, rehabilitation strategies, and secondary stroke prevention. Various physician, patient, family, cultural and system barriers to SDM exist. Strategies to overcome these barriers and facilitate SDM include clinician motivation, patient participation, adequate time and tools to support the process, such as decision aids. Although research about SDM in stroke care is lacking, decision aids are available for select decisions, such as anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Future research is needed regarding both cultural aspects of successful SDM and application of SDM to stroke-specific contexts.

A systematic review of patient-practitioner communication interventions involving treatment decisions

OBJECTIVES

To examine the: 1) methodological quality of interventions examining strategies to improve patient-practitioner communication involving treatment decisions; 2) effectiveness of strategies to improve patient-practitioner communication involving treatment decisions; and 3) types of treatment decisions (emergency/non-emergency) in the included studies.

METHODS

Medline, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Embase were searched to identify intervention studies. To be included, studies were required to examine patient-practitioner communication related to decision making about treatment. Study methodological quality was assessed using Cochrane's Effective Practice and Organisation of Care risk of bias criteria. Study design, sample characteristics, intervention details, and outcomes were extracted.

RESULTS

Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. No studies were rated low risk on all nine risk of bias criteria. Two of the three interventions aimed at changing patient behaviour, two of the five practitioner directed, and one of the three patient-practitioner directed interventions demonstrated an effect on decision-making outcomes. No studies examined emergency treatment decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing studies have a high risk of bias and are poorly reported. There is some evidence to suggest patient-directed interventions may be effective in improving decision-making outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

It is imperative that an evidence-base is developed to inform clinical practice.

Factors that influence clinicians' decisions to offer intravenous alteplase in acute ischemic stroke patients with uncertain treatment indication: Results of a discrete choice experiment

Background Treatment with intravenous alteplase for eligible patients with acute ischemic stroke is underused, with variation in treatment rates across the UK. This study sought to elucidate factors influencing variation in clinicians' decision-making about this thrombolytic treatment. Methods A discrete choice experiment using hypothetical patient vignettes framed around areas of clinical uncertainty was conducted with UK-based clinicians. Mixed logit regression analyses were conducted on the data. Results A total of 138 clinicians completed the discrete choice experiment. Seven patient factors were individually predictive of increased likelihood of immediately offering IV alteplase (compared to reference levels in brackets): stroke onset time 2 h 30 min [50 min]; pre-stroke dependency mRS 3 [mRS 4]; systolic blood pressure 185 mm/Hg [140 mm/Hg]; stroke severity scores of NIHSS 5 without aphasia, NIHSS 14 and NIHSS 23 [NIHSS 2 without aphasia]; age 85 [68]; Afro-Caribbean [white]. Factors predictive of withholding treatment with IV alteplase were: age 95 [68]; stroke onset time of 4 h 15 min [50 min]; severe dementia [no memory problems]; SBP 200 mm/Hg [140 mm/Hg]. Three clinician-related factors were predictive of an increased likelihood of offering IV alteplase (perceived robustness of the evidence for IV alteplase; thrombolyzing more patients in the past 12 months; and high discomfort with uncertainty) and one with a decreased likelihood (high clinician comfort with treating patients outside the licensing criteria). Conclusions Both patient- and clinician-related factors have a major influence on the use of alteplase to treat patients with acute ischemic stroke. Clinicians' views of the evidence, comfort with uncertainty and treating patients outside the license criteria are important factors to address in programs that seek to reduce variation in care quality regarding treatment with IV alteplase. Further research is needed to further understand the differences in clinical decision-making about treating patients with acute ischemic stroke with IV alteplase.

Factors that influence variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke: results of a discrete choice experiment

Background

Intravenous thrombolysis for patients with acute ischaemic stroke is underused (only 80% of eligible patients receive it) and there is variation in its use across the UK. Previously, variation might have been explained by structural differences; however, continuing variation may reflect differences in clinical decision-making regarding the eligibility of patients for treatment. This variation in decision-making could lead to the underuse, or result in inappropriate use, of thrombolysis.

Objectives

To identify the factors which contribute to variation in, and influence, clinicians’ decision-making about treating ischaemic stroke patients with intravenous thrombolysis.

Methods

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) using hypothetical patient vignettes framed around areas of clinical uncertainty was conducted to better understand the influence of patient-related and clinician-related factors on clinical decision-making. An online DCE was developed following an iterative five-stage design process. UK-based clinicians involved in final decision-making about thrombolysis were invited to take part via national professional bodies of relevant medical specialties. Mixed-logit regression analyses were conducted.

Results

A total of 138 clinicians responded and opted to offer thrombolysis in 31.4% of cases. Seven patient factors were individually predictive of the increased likelihood of offering thrombolysis (compared with reference levels in brackets): stroke onset time of 2 hours 30 minutes (50 minutes); pre-stroke dependency modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) of 3 (mRS4); systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 185 mmHg (140 mmHg); stroke severity scores of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) 5 without aphasia, NIHSS 14 and NIHSS 23 (NIHSS 2 without aphasia); age 85 years (65 years); and Afro-Caribbean (white). Factors predictive of not offering thrombolysis were age 95 years; stroke onset time of 4 hours 15 minutes; severe dementia (no memory problems); and SBP of 200 mmHg. Three clinician-related factors were predictive of an increased likelihood of offering thrombolysis (perceived robustness of the evidence for thrombolysis; thrombolysing more patients in the past 12 months; and high discomfort with uncertainty) and one factor was predictive of a decreased likelihood of offering treatment (clinicians’ being comfortable treating patients outside the licensing criteria).

Limitations

We anticipated a sample size of 150–200. Nonetheless, the final sample of 138 is good considering that the total population of eligible UK clinicians is relatively small. Furthermore, data from the Royal College of Physicians suggest that our sample is representative of clinicians involved in decision-making about thrombolysis.

Conclusions

There was considerable heterogeneity among respondents in thrombolysis decision-making, indicating that clinicians differ in their thresholds for treatment across a number of patient-related factors. Respondents were significantly more likely to treat 85-year-old patients than patients aged 68 years and this probably reflects acceptance of data from Third International Stroke Trial that report benefit for patients aged > 80 years. That respondents were more likely to offer thrombolysis to patients with severe stroke than to patients with mild stroke may indicate uncertainty/concern about the risk/benefit balance in treatment of minor stroke. Findings will be disseminated via peer-review publication and presentation at national/international conferences, and will be linked to training/continuing professional development (CPD) programmes.

Future work

The nature of DCE design means that only a subset of potentially influential factors could be explored. Factors not explored in this study warrant future research. Training/CPD should address the impact of non-medical influences on decision-making using evidence-based strategies.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Perceived Appropriateness of Shared Decision-making in the Emergency Department: A Survey Study

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to describe perceptions of practicing emergency physicians (EPs) regarding the appropriateness and medicolegal implications of using shared decision-making (SDM) in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of EPs at a large, national professional meeting to assess perceived appropriateness of SDM for different categories of ED management (e.g., diagnostic testing, treatment, disposition) and in common clinical scenarios (e.g., low-risk chest pain, syncope, minor head injury). A 21-item survey instrument was iteratively developed through review by content experts, cognitive testing, and pilot testing. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

We approached 737 EPs; 709 (96%) completed the survey. Two-thirds (67.8%) of respondents were male; 51% practiced in an academic setting and 44% in the community. Of the seven management decision categories presented, SDM was reported to be most frequently appropriate for deciding on invasive procedures (71.5%), computed tomography (CT) scanning (56.7%), and post-ED disposition (56.3%). Among the specific clinical scenarios, use of thrombolytics for acute ischemic stroke was felt to be most frequently appropriate for SDM (83.4%), followed by lumbar puncture to rule out subarachnoid hemorrhage (73.8%) and CT head for pediatric minor head injury (69.9%). Most EPs (66.8%) felt that using and documenting SDM would decrease their medicolegal risk while a minority (14.2%) felt that it would increase their risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptance of SDM among EPs appears to be strong across management categories (diagnostic testing, treatment, and disposition) and in a variety of clinical scenarios. SDM is perceived by most EPs to be medicolegally protective.

Development of a decision analytic model to support decision making and risk communication about thrombolytic treatment

Background

Individualised prediction of outcomes can support clinical and shared decision making. This paper describes the building of such a model to predict outcomes with and without intravenous thrombolysis treatment following ischaemic stroke.

Methods

A decision analytic model (DAM) was constructed to establish the likely balance of benefits and risks of treating acute ischaemic stroke with thrombolysis. Probability of independence, (modified Rankin score mRS ≤ 2), dependence (mRS 3 to 5) and death at three months post-stroke was based on a calibrated version of the Stroke-Thrombolytic Predictive Instrument using data from routinely treated stroke patients in the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke (SITS-UK) registry. Predictions in untreated patients were validated using data from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA). The probability of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage in treated patients was incorporated using a scoring model from Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke-Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST) data.

Results

The model predicts probabilities of haemorrhage, death, independence and dependence at 3-months, with and without thrombolysis, as a function of 13 patient characteristics. Calibration (and inclusion of additional predictors) of the Stroke-Thrombolytic Predictive Instrument (S-TPI) addressed issues of under and over prediction. Validation with VISTA data confirmed that assumptions about treatment effect were just. The C-statistics for independence and death in treated patients in the DAM were 0.793 and 0.771 respectively, and 0.776 for independence in untreated patients from VISTA.

Conclusions

We have produced a DAM that provides an estimation of the likely benefits and risks of thrombolysis for individual patients, which has subsequently been embedded in a computerised decision aid to support better decision-making and informed consent.

Development of a computerised decision aid for thrombolysis in acute stroke care

BACKGROUND

Thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke improves prognosis, although there is a risk of bleeding complications leading to early death/severe disability. Benefit from thrombolysis is time dependent and treatment must be administered within 4.5 hours from onset of symptoms, which presents unique challenges for development of tools to support decision making and patient understanding about treatment. Our aim was to develop a decision aid to support patient-specific clinical decision-making about thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke, and clinical communication of personalised information on benefits/risks of thrombolysis by clinicians to patients/relatives.

METHODS

Using mixed methods we developed a COMPuterised decision Aid for Stroke thrombolysiS (COMPASS) in an iterative staged process (review of available tools; a decision analytic model; interactive group workshops with clinicians and patients/relatives; and prototype usability testing). We then tested the tool in simulated situations with final testing in real life stroke thrombolysis decisions in hospitals. Clinicians used COMPASS pragmatically in managing acute stroke patients potentially eligible for thrombolysis; their experience was assessed using self-completion forms and interviews. Computer logged data assessed time in use, and utilisation of graphical risk presentations and additional features. Patients'/relatives' experiences of discussions supported by COMPASS were explored using interviews.

RESULTS

COMPASS expresses predicted outcomes (bleeding complications, death, and extent of disability) with and without thrombolysis, presented numerically (percentages and natural frequencies) and graphically (pictographs, bar graphs and flowcharts). COMPASS was used for 25 patients and no adverse effects of use were reported. Median time in use was 2.8 minutes. Graphical risk presentations were shared with 14 patients/relatives. Clinicians (n = 10) valued the patient-specific predictions of benefit from thrombolysis, and the support of better risk communication with patients/relatives. Patients (n = 2) and relatives (n = 6) reported that graphical risk presentations facilitated understanding of benefits/risks of thrombolysis. Additional features (e.g. dosage calculator) were suggested and subsequently embedded within COMPASS to enhance usability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our structured development process led to the development of a gamma prototype computerised decision aid. Initial evaluation has demonstrated reasonable acceptability of COMPASS amongst patients, relatives and clinicians. The impact of COMPASS on clinical outcomes requires wider prospective evaluation in clinical settings.

Advance preferences regarding thrombolysis in patients at risk for stroke: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

It is difficult to obtain informed consent for thrombolysis in stroke patients given the emergency setting, the need for a speedy decision and the effects of neurological deficits.

AIM

To determine the advance preferences for thrombolysis of patients at risk for stroke following discussion of the potential risks and benefits.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

Data on benefits and risks of thrombolysis within 3 h and between 3 and 4.5 h after stroke were presented orally, in writing and pictorially to patients attending geriatric and stroke services in a teaching hospital with specified stroke risk factors and preferences for thrombolysis were recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 121 participants, 108 (89.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 82.4-93.7) would opt for thrombolysis within the 3-h period and 100 (82.6%; 95% CI 74.9-88.4) within the 3- to 4.5-h period after acute stroke (P = 0.04, McNemar's test for correlated proportions). Previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack was more common among those who agreed to thrombolysis (54.1% vs. 30.4%, P = 0.04) and those who opted for thrombolysis were significantly more likely to agree to have their preferences recorded and used in the event of a stroke than those who refused thrombolysis (88.8% vs. 30.4%, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Advance discussion of the potential risks and benefits of thrombolysis in at-risk patients may improve decision making if thrombolysis is being considered and the patient can no longer make a decision.

Understanding clinicians' decisions to offer intravenous thrombolytic treatment to patients with acute ischaemic stroke: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Intravenous thrombolysis is an effective emergency treatment for acute ischaemic stroke for patients meeting specific criteria. Approximately 12% of eligible patients in England, Wales and Northern Ireland received thrombolysis in the first quarter of 2013, yet as many as 15% are eligible to receive treatment. Suboptimal use of thrombolysis may have been largely attributable to structural factors; however, with the widespread implementation of 24/7 hyper acute stroke services, continuing variation is likely to reflect differences in clinical decision-making, in particular the influence of ambiguous areas within the guidelines, licensing criteria and research evidence. Clinicians' perceptions about thrombolysis may now exert a greater influence on treatment rates than structural/service factors. This research seeks to elucidate factors influencing thrombolysis decision-making by using patient vignettes to identify (1) patient-related and clinician-related factors that may help to explain variation in treatment and (2) associated trade-offs in decision-making based on the interplay of critical factors.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) will be conducted to better understand how clinicians make decisions about whether or not to offer thrombolysis to patients with acute ischaemic stroke. To inform the design, exploratory work will be undertaken to ensure that (1) all potentially influential factors are considered for inclusion; and (2) to gain insights into the 'grey areas' of patient factors. A fractional factorial design will be used to combine levels of patient factors in vignettes, which will be presented to clinicians to allow estimation of the variable effects on decisions to offer thrombolysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Newcastle University Research Ethics Committee. The results will be disseminated in peer review publications and at national conferences. Findings will be translated into continuing professional development activities and will support implementation of a computerised decision aid for thrombolysis (COMPASS) in acute stroke care.

Telephone consultations for tissue plasminogen activator administration in acute stroke

Effective treatment for acute ischemic stroke has been available for 17 years, but wide geographic variability remains in timely access to neurologic expertise and other components of stroke systems of care. Telemedical technology can be used to improve such access, but it is debatable whether neurologists have an ethical obligation to provide consultation regarding tissue plasminogen activator use via the telephone. This article examines whether neurologists are ethically obligated to provide telephone-mediated acute stroke consultation.

A review of decision support, risk communication and patient information tools for thrombolytic treatment in acute stroke: lessons for tool developers

BACKGROUND

Tools to support clinical or patient decision-making in the treatment/management of a health condition are used in a range of clinical settings for numerous preference-sensitive healthcare decisions. Their impact in clinical practice is largely dependent on their quality across a range of domains. We critically analysed currently available tools to support decision making or patient understanding in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke with intravenous thrombolysis, as an exemplar to provide clinicians/researchers with practical guidance on development, evaluation and implementation of such tools for other preference-sensitive treatment options/decisions in different clinical contexts.

METHODS

Tools were identified from bibliographic databases, Internet searches and a survey of UK and North American stroke networks. Two reviewers critically analysed tools to establish: information on benefits/risks of thrombolysis included in tools, and the methods used to convey probabilistic information (verbal descriptors, numerical and graphical); adherence to guidance on presenting outcome probabilities (IPDASi probabilities items) and information content (Picker Institute Checklist); readability (Fog Index); and the extent that tools had comprehensive development processes.

RESULTS

Nine tools of 26 identified included information on a full range of benefits/risks of thrombolysis. Verbal descriptors, frequencies and percentages were used to convey probabilistic information in 20, 19 and 18 tools respectively, whilst nine used graphical methods. Shortcomings in presentation of outcome probabilities (e.g. omitting outcomes without treatment) were identified. Patient information tools had an aggregate median Fog index score of 10. None of the tools had comprehensive development processes.

CONCLUSIONS

Tools to support decision making or patient understanding in the treatment of acute stroke with thrombolysis have been sub-optimally developed. Development of tools should utilise mixed methods and strategies to meaningfully involve clinicians, patients and their relatives in an iterative design process; include evidence-based methods to augment interpretability of textual and probabilistic information (e.g. graphical displays showing natural frequencies) on the full range of outcome states associated with available options; and address patients with different levels of health literacy. Implementation of tools will be enhanced when mechanisms are in place to periodically assess the relevance of tools and where necessary, update the mode of delivery, form and information content.