1
|
Winterbottom L, Geller D, Goldberg C, Nilsen DM, Mahoney D, Gillen G. Occupational Therapy and Activities of Daily Living Interventions to Improve Performance in Activities of Daily Living for Adults With Stroke (2012-2019). Am J Occup Ther 2023; 77:24110. [PMID: 37220005 DOI: 10.5014/ajot.2023.77s10007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Systematic Review Briefs provide a summary of the findings from systematic reviews developed in conjunction with the American Occupational Therapy Association's Evidence-Based Practice Program. Each Systematic Review Brief summarizes the evidence on a theme related to a systematic review topic. This Systematic Review Brief presents findings for occupational therapy and activities of daily living (ADL) interventions to improve ADL outcomes for adults with stroke.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren Winterbottom
- Lauren Winterbottom, MS, OTR/L, is Research Occupational Therapist, Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center; and an Instructor, Programs in Occupational Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center
| | - Daniel Geller
- Daniel Geller, EdD, MPH, OTR/L, is Assistant Professor, Programs in Occupational Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center
| | - Carly Goldberg
- Carly Goldberg, MS, OTR/L, is Advanced Clinician, Inpatient Rehabilitation Unit, New York Presbyterian - Columbia University Irving Medical Center; and an Instructor, Programs in Occupational Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center
| | - Dawn M Nilsen
- Dawn M. Nilsen, EdD, OTR/L, FAOTA, is Professor and Interim Program Director, Programs in Occupational Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center; and Per Diem Occupational Therapist, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Irving Medical Center
| | - Danielle Mahoney
- Danielle Mahoney, OTD, OTR/L, is Assistant Professor, Programs in Occupational Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center
| | - Glen Gillen
- Glen Gillen, EdD, OTR/L, FAOTA, is Professor, Programs in Occupational Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sarkodie SK, Wason JMS, Grayling MJ. A hybrid approach to comparing parallel-group and stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trials with a continuous primary outcome when there is uncertainty in the intra-cluster correlation. Clin Trials 2023; 20:59-70. [PMID: 36086822 PMCID: PMC9940131 DOI: 10.1177/17407745221123507] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS To evaluate how uncertainty in the intra-cluster correlation impacts whether a parallel-group or stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial design is more efficient in terms of the required sample size, in the case of cross-sectional stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trials and continuous outcome data. METHODS We motivate our work by reviewing how the intra-cluster correlation and standard deviation were justified in 54 health technology assessment reports on cluster-randomized trials. To enable uncertainty at the design stage to be incorporated into the design specification, we then describe how sample size calculation can be performed for cluster- randomized trials in the 'hybrid' framework, which places priors on design parameters and controls the expected power in place of the conventional frequentist power. Comparison of the parallel-group and stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial designs is conducted by placing Beta and truncated Normal priors on the intra-cluster correlation, and a Gamma prior on the standard deviation. RESULTS Many Health Technology Assessment reports did not adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guideline of indicating the uncertainty around the assumed intra-cluster correlation, while others did not justify the assumed intra-cluster correlation or standard deviation. Even for a prior intra-cluster correlation distribution with a small mode, moderate prior densities on high intra-cluster correlation values can lead to a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial being more efficient because of the degree to which a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial is more efficient for high intra-cluster correlations. With careful specification of the priors, the designs in the hybrid framework can become more robust to, for example, an unexpectedly large value of the outcome variance. CONCLUSION When there is difficulty obtaining a reliable value for the intra-cluster correlation to assume at the design stage, the proposed methodology offers an appealing approach to sample size calculation. Often, uncertainty in the intra-cluster correlation will mean a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial is more efficient than a parallel-group cluster-randomized trial design.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel K Sarkodie
- Samuel K Sarkodie, Population Health
Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, 4th Floor Ridley Building 1, Queen
Victoria Road, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Peryer G, Kelly S, Blake J, Burton JK, Irvine L, Cowan A, Akdur G, Killett A, Brand SL, Musa MK, Meyer J, Gordon AL, Goodman C. Contextual factors influencing complex intervention research processes in care homes: a systematic review and framework synthesis. Age Ageing 2022; 51:6540144. [PMID: 35231097 PMCID: PMC8887840 DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afac014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Care homes are complex settings to undertake intervention research. Barriers to research implementation processes can threaten studies’ validity, reducing the value to residents, staff, researchers and funders. We aimed to (i) identify and categorise contextual factors that may mediate outcomes of complex intervention studies in care homes and (ii) provide recommendations to minimise the risk of expensive research implementation failures. Methods We conducted a systematic review using a framework synthesis approach viewed through a complex adaptive systems lens. We searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ASSIA databases and grey literature. We sought process evaluations of care home complex interventions published in English. Narrative data were indexed under 28 context domains. We performed an inductive thematic analysis across the context domains. Results We included 33 process evaluations conducted in high-income countries, published between 2005 and 2019. Framework synthesis identified barriers to implementation that were more common at the task and organisational level. Inductive thematic analysis identified (i) avoiding procedural drift and (ii) participatory action and learning as key priorities for research teams. Research team recommendations include advice for protocol design and care home engagement. Care home team recommendations focus on internal resources and team dynamics. Collaborative recommendations apply to care homes’ individual context and the importance of maintaining positive working relationships. Discussion Researchers planning and undertaking research with care homes need a sensitive appreciation of the complex care home context. Study implementation is most effective where an intervention is co-produced, with agreed purpose and adequate resources to incorporate within existing routines and care practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guy Peryer
- School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
- NIHR Applied Research Collaboration, East of England, England, UK
| | - Sarah Kelly
- Cambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, East Forvie Site, Cambridge CB2 0SZ, UK
- THIS Institute (The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute), University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge CB2 0AH, UK
| | - Jessica Blake
- Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK
| | - Jennifer K Burton
- Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, New Lister Building, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow G31 2ER, UK
| | - Lisa Irvine
- Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK
| | - Andy Cowan
- Cambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, East Forvie Site, Cambridge CB2 0SZ, UK
| | - Gizdem Akdur
- Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK
| | - Anne Killett
- School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
- NIHR Applied Research Collaboration, East of England, England, UK
| | - Sarah L Brand
- St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, University of Exeter, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK
- NIHR Applied Research Collaboration, South West Peninsula, England, UK
| | - Massirfufulay Kpehe Musa
- Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK
| | - Julienne Meyer
- National Care Forum/Care for Older People, School of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, City, University of London, London, UK
| | - Adam L Gordon
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
- NIHR Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands (ARC-EM), Nottingham, UK
| | - Claire Goodman
- Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK
- NIHR Applied Research Collaboration, East of England, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Buck D, Tucker S, Roe B, Hughes J, Challis D. Hospital admissions and place of death of residents of care homes receiving specialist healthcare services: A systematic review without meta-analysis. J Adv Nurs 2021; 78:666-697. [PMID: 34532884 DOI: 10.1111/jan.15043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2021] [Revised: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
AIM To synthesize evidence on the ability of specialist care home support services to prevent hospital admission of older care home residents, including at end of life. DESIGN Systematic review, without meta-analysis, with vote counting based on direction of effect. DATA SOURCES Fourteen electronic databases were searched from January 2010 to January 2019. Reference lists of identified reviews, study protocols and included documents were scrutinized for further studies. REVIEW METHODS Papers on the provision of specialist care home support that addressed older, long-term care home residents' physical health needs and provided comparative data on hospital admissions were included. Two reviewers undertook study selection and quality appraisal independently. Vote counting by direction of effect and binomial tests determined service effectiveness. RESULTS Electronic searches identified 79 relevant references. Combined with 19 citations from an earlier review, this gave 98 individual references relating to 92 studies. Most were from the UK (22), USA (22) and Australia (19). Twenty studies were randomized controlled trials and six clinical controlled trials. The review suggested interventions addressing residents' general health needs (p < .001), assessment and management services (p < .0001) and non-training initiatives involving medical staff (p < .0001) can reduce hospital admissions, while there was also promising evidence for services targeting residents at imminent risk of hospital entry or post-hospital discharge and training-only initiatives. End-of-life care services may enable residents to remain in the home at end of life (p < .001), but the high number of weak-rated studies undermined confidence in this result. CONCLUSION This review suggests specialist care home support services can reduce hospital admissions. More robust studies of services for residents at end of life are urgently needed. IMPACT The review addressed the policy imperative to reduce the avoidable hospital admission of older care home residents and provides important evidence to inform service design. The findings are of relevance to commissioners, providers and residents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah Buck
- Social Care and Society, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Sue Tucker
- Social Care and Society, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Brenda Roe
- Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
| | - Jane Hughes
- Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - David Challis
- Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Hamel C, Garritty C, Hersi M, Butler C, Esmaeilisaraji L, Rice D, Straus S, Skidmore B, Hutton B. Models of provider care in long-term care: A rapid scoping review. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0254527. [PMID: 34270578 PMCID: PMC8284811 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2021] [Accepted: 06/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION One of the current challenges in long-term care homes (LTCH) is to identify the optimal model of care, which may include specialty physicians, nursing staff, person support workers, among others. There is currently no consensus on the complement or scope of care delivered by these providers, nor is there a repository of studies that evaluate the various models of care. We conducted a rapid scoping review to identify and map what care provider models and interventions in LTCH have been evaluated to improve quality of life, quality of care, and health outcomes of residents. METHODS We conducted this review over 10-weeks of English language, peer-reviewed studies published from 2010 onward. Search strategies for databases (e.g., MEDLINE) were run on July 9, 2020. Studies that evaluated models of provider care (e.g., direct patient care), or interventions delivered to facility, staff, and residents of LTCH were included. Study selection was performed independently, in duplicate. Mapping was performed by two reviewers, and data were extracted by one reviewer, with partial verification by a second reviewer. RESULTS A total of 7,574 citations were screened based on the title/abstract, 836 were reviewed at full text, and 366 studies were included. Studies were classified according to two main categories: healthcare service delivery (n = 92) and implementation strategies (n = 274). The condition/ focus of the intervention was used to further classify the interventions into subcategories. The complex nature of the interventions may have led to a study being classified in more than one category/subcategory. CONCLUSION Many healthcare service interventions have been evaluated in the literature in the last decade. Well represented interventions (e.g., dementia care, exercise/mobility, optimal/appropriate medication) may present opportunities for future systematic reviews. Areas with less research (e.g., hearing care, vision care, foot care) have the potential to have an impact on balance, falls, subsequent acute care hospitalization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Candyce Hamel
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Chantelle Garritty
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Mona Hersi
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Claire Butler
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Leila Esmaeilisaraji
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Danielle Rice
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Sharon Straus
- Department of Medicine, University of Toronto and St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Becky Skidmore
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Brian Hutton
- Knowledge Synthesis Group, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Forster A, Ozer S, Crocker TF, House A, Hewison J, Roberts E, Dickerson J, Carter G, Hulme C, Fay M, Richardson G, Wright A, McKevitt C, McEachan R, Foy R, Barnard L, Moreau L, Prashar A, Clarke D, Hardicre N, Holloway I, Brindle R, Hall J, Burton LJ, Atkinson R, Hawkins RJ, Brown L, Cornwall N, Dawkins B, Meads D, Schmitt L, Fletcher M, Speed M, Grenfell K, Hartley S, Young J, Farrin A. Longer-term health and social care strategies for stroke survivors and their carers: the LoTS2Care research programme including cluster feasibility RCT. PROGRAMME GRANTS FOR APPLIED RESEARCH 2021. [DOI: 10.3310/pgfar09030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
Background
It is reported that the longer-term outcomes for stroke survivors are poor, with a range of unmet needs identified.
Objectives
The aims were to develop and test a longer-term stroke care strategy focused on improving the quality of life of stroke survivors and their carers by addressing unmet needs, and maintenance and enhancement of participation (i.e. involvement in life situations).
Design
Five overlapping workstreams were undertaken – (1) refinement of content by semistructured interviews with stroke survivors and their carers and by a review of the literature to inform content and delivery of the care strategy; (2) exploration of service models by national survey and focus groups with purposely selected services; (3) intervention development by interaction with a reference group of stroke survivors, carers, and health and social care professionals; (4) refinement and pilot implementation of the developed intervention in three stroke services (case studies); and (5) a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial in 10 stroke services across England and Wales.
Setting
The intervention development work and feasibility trial were in stroke services (inclusive of primary, secondary, community and social care provision) across England and Wales.
Participants
Participants were stroke survivors resident in the community and their carers, and health and social care professionals in the included stroke services.
Data sources
Interviews with 28 stroke survivors and their carers at least 9 months post stroke ascertained their needs and the barriers to and facilitators of addressing those needs. Additional literature reviews identified 23 needs. No evidence-based interventions to address these needs were reported; self-management was highlighted as a possible delivery mechanism. In workstream 2, a national survey revealed that the most common model of stroke service provision was care up to 12 months post stroke, reported by 46 (40%) services. Thirty-five (30%) services provided care up to 6 months post stroke and 35 (30%) provided care beyond 12 months, thus identifying 6 months post stroke as an appropriate delivery point for a new intervention. Through focus groups in a range of services, stroke survivors’ perceived unmet needs and the barriers to and enablers of service provision were identified.
Intervention
Using information obtained in workstreams 1 and 2 and working closely with a stakeholder reference group, we developed an intervention based on the unmet needs prioritised by stroke survivors and their carers (workstream 3). In workstream 4, action groups (clinicians, stroke survivors and researchers) were established in three stroke services that led implementation in their service and contributed to the iterative refinement of the intervention, associated training programme and implementation materials. The intervention (called New Start) was delivered at 6 months post stroke. Key components were problem-solving self-management with survivors and carers, help with obtaining usable information, and helping survivors and their carers build sustainable, flexible support networks.
Results
A cluster randomised feasibility trial (workstream 5) was successfully implemented in 10 stroke services across England and Wales, with associated process and health economic evaluations. Five services were randomised to provide New Start, while five continued with usual care; 269 participants were recruited. Progression criteria – in terms of our pre-determined (red, amber, green) criteria for progress to a full trial: target stroke survivor recruitment rates were achieved, on average, across sites (24.1 per site over 6 months, green); 216 (80.3%) registered stroke survivors returned follow-up questionnaires at 9 months (84.1% in the intervention arm and 75.8% in the usual care arm, green); according to data reported by sites, overall, 95.2% of registered stroke survivors were offered at least one session of the intervention (green); all five intervention sites had at least two facilitators deemed competent, delivered the New Start intervention and provided it to stroke survivors (green). However, at some sites, there were concerns regarding the number of stroke survivors being offered, accepting and receiving the intervention. Only small differences in outcomes and costs were observed between the New Start and usual care groups, and considerable uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness remains.
Conclusions
We report a complex programme of work that has described the longer-term needs of stroke survivors and highlighted evidence and service gaps. Working closely with stroke survivors, an intervention was developed that has been refined in three services and feasibility tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Further refinement of the target population and optimisation of the intervention materials is required prior to a full randomised controlled trial evaluation.
Future work
Optimisation of the intervention, and clearer specification of recipients, are required prior to a full trial evaluation.
Trial registration
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN38920246.
Funding
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Forster
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Seline Ozer
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Thomas F Crocker
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Allan House
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Jenny Hewison
- Division of Health Services Research, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | - Josie Dickerson
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Gill Carter
- Patient and public involvement contributor, York, UK
| | - Claire Hulme
- College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | | | - Alan Wright
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Christopher McKevitt
- School of Population Health & Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Rosemary McEachan
- Born in Bradford, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- Division of Primary Care, Palliative Care and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Lorna Barnard
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Lauren Moreau
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Arvin Prashar
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - David Clarke
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Natasha Hardicre
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Ivana Holloway
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Richard Brindle
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Jessica Hall
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Louisa-Jane Burton
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Ross Atkinson
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Rebecca J Hawkins
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Lesley Brown
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Nicola Cornwall
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Bryony Dawkins
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - David Meads
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Laetitia Schmitt
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Marie Fletcher
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Michael Speed
- Patient and public involvement contributor, York, UK
| | - Katie Grenfell
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Suzanne Hartley
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - John Young
- Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK
| | - Amanda Farrin
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
French C, Pinnock H, Forbes G, Skene I, Taylor SJC. Process evaluation within pragmatic randomised controlled trials: what is it, why is it done, and can we find it?-a systematic review. Trials 2020; 21:916. [PMID: 33168067 PMCID: PMC7650157 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-04762-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2020] [Accepted: 09/22/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Process evaluations are increasingly conducted within pragmatic randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of health services interventions and provide vital information to enhance understanding of RCT findings. However, issues pertaining to process evaluation in this specific context have been little discussed. We aimed to describe the frequency, characteristics, labelling, value, practical conduct issues, and accessibility of published process evaluations within pragmatic RCTs in health services research. METHODS We used a 2-phase systematic search process to (1) identify an index sample of journal articles reporting primary outcome results of pragmatic RCTs published in 2015 and then (2) identify all associated publications. We used an operational definition of process evaluation based on the Medical Research Council's process evaluation framework to identify both process evaluations reported separately and process data reported in the trial results papers. We extracted and analysed quantitative and qualitative data to answer review objectives. RESULTS From an index sample of 31 pragmatic RCTs, we identified 17 separate process evaluation studies. These had varied characteristics and only three were labelled 'process evaluation'. Each of the 31 trial results papers also reported process data, with a median of five different process evaluation components per trial. Reported barriers and facilitators related to real-world collection of process data, recruitment of participants to process evaluations, and health services research regulations. We synthesised a wide range of reported benefits of process evaluations to interventions, trials, and wider knowledge. Visibility was often poor, with 13/17 process evaluations not mentioned in the trial results paper and 12/16 process evaluation journal articles not appearing in the trial registry. CONCLUSIONS In our sample of reviewed pragmatic RCTs, the meaning of the label 'process evaluation' appears uncertain, and the scope and significance of the term warrant further research and clarification. Although there were many ways in which the process evaluations added value, they often had poor visibility. Our findings suggest approaches that could enhance the planning and utility of process evaluations in the context of pragmatic RCTs. TRIAL REGISTRATION Not applicable for PROSPERO registration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline French
- Institute of Population Health Sciences, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK.
| | - Hilary Pinnock
- Usher Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Doorway 3, Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK
| | - Gordon Forbes
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), Kings College London, 16 De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK
| | - Imogen Skene
- Emergency Department, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, Whitechapel, London, E1 1FR, UK
| | - Stephanie J C Taylor
- Institute of Population Health Sciences, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Silva EBD, Delboni MCC, Fedosse E. Assessment of individuals with aphasia: an integrative literature review. REVISTA CEFAC 2020. [DOI: 10.1590/1982-0216/202022113218] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective: to analyze which evaluations are used by occupational therapists, speech-language pathologists and physiotherapists on individuals presented with aphasia and what these evaluations address. Methods: the study conducted a national and international documental analysis of evaluations used by professionals working on the neurological rehabilitation of adults and/or elderly individuals with aphasia, published in the last ten years (January 2008/June 2018). This analysis was performed by an integrative review of databases LILACS, SciELO and PubMed, using the descriptors: Health Assessment or Testing, or Protocols, or Psychometrics, or Questionnaires and Rehabilitation, combined with the descriptors: Aphasia, Occupational Therapy, Speech-language Pathology and Physiotherapy. Results: 26 studies were included, most of which were scored as level VI of scientific evidence; the years of 2013 and 2016 presented publication peaks. The studies used 54 evaluation tools, among which 13 were recurrent in the studies, mostly analyzing aspects of communication/language. It is assumed that these data are related to the fact that speech-language pathologists provide care for individuals with aphasia; however, these individuals may present other needs beyond communication, such as those related to human occupation, requiring multiprofessional and integral health care. Among the protocols, the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) was considered the most complete, since it addresses communication, linguistic, human occupation and psycho-affective aspects. Conclusion: this study identified the use of few instruments dedicated to individuals with aphasia related to all aspects that involve life, with predominance of protocols and evaluations that only address disabilities, highlighting the importance of assessments that address subjectivity, evaluating individuals with aphasia in all dimensions of their lives.
Collapse
|
9
|
Goodwin VA, Hill JJ, Fullam JA, Finning K, Pentecost C, Richards DA. Intervention development and treatment success in UK health technology assessment funded trials of physical rehabilitation: a mixed methods analysis. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e026289. [PMID: 31467046 PMCID: PMC6720467 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Physical rehabilitation is a complex process, and trials of rehabilitation interventions are increasing in number but often report null results. This study aimed to establish treatment success rates in physical rehabilitation trials funded by the National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme and examine any relationship between treatment success and the quality of intervention development work undertaken. DESIGN This is a mixed methods study. SETTING This study was conducted in the UK. METHODS The NIHR HTA portfolio was searched for all completed definitive randomised controlled trials of physical rehabilitation interventions from inception to July 2016. Treatment success was categorised according to criteria developed by Djulbegovic and colleagues. Detailed textual data regarding any intervention development work were extracted from trial reports and supporting publications and informed the development of quality ratings. Mixed methods integrative analysis was undertaken to explore the relationship between quantitative and qualitative data using joint displays. RESULTS Fifteen trials were included in the review. Five reported a definitive finding, four of which were in favour of the 'new' intervention. Eight trials reported a true negative (no difference) outcome. Integrative analysis indicated those with lower quality intervention development work were less likely to report treatment success. CONCLUSIONS Despite much effort and funding, most physical rehabilitation trials report equivocal findings. Greater focus on high quality intervention development may reduce the likelihood of a null result in the definitive trial, alongside high quality trial methods and conduct.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria A Goodwin
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Jacqueline J Hill
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - James A Fullam
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Katie Finning
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Claire Pentecost
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - David A Richards
- Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Baker C, Worrall L, Rose M, Hudson K, Ryan B, O'Byrne L. A systematic review of rehabilitation interventions to prevent and treat depression in post-stroke aphasia. Disabil Rehabil 2017; 40:1870-1892. [PMID: 28420284 DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1315181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 78] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Stepped psychological care is the delivery of routine assessment and interventions for psychological problems, including depression. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze and synthesize the evidence of rehabilitation interventions to prevent and treat depression in post-stroke aphasia and adapt the best evidence within a stepped psychological care framework. METHOD Four databases were systematically searched up to March 2017: Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library. RESULTS Forty-five studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Level of evidence, methodological quality and results were assessed. People with aphasia with mild depression may benefit from psychosocial-type treatments (based on 3 level ii studies with small to medium effect sizes). For those without depression, mood may be enhanced through participation in a range of interventions (based on 4 level ii studies; 1 level iii-3 study and 6 level iv studies). It is not clear which interventions may prevent depression in post-stroke aphasia. No evidence was found for the treatment of moderate to severe depression in post-stroke aphasia. CONCLUSIONS This study found some interventions that may improve depression outcomes for those with mild depression or without depression in post-stroke aphasia. Future research is needed to address methodological limitations and evaluate and support the translation of stepped psychological care across the continuum. Implications for Rehabilitation Stepped psychological care after stroke is a framework with levels 1 to 4 which can be used to prevent and treat depression for people with aphasia. A range of rehabilitation interventions may be beneficial to mood at level 1 for people without clinically significant depression (e.g., goal setting and achievement, psychosocial support, communication partner training and narrative therapy). People with mild symptoms of depression may benefit from interventions at level 2 (e.g., behavioral therapy, psychosocial support and problem solving). People with moderate to severe symptoms of depression require specialist mental health/behavioral services in collaboration with stroke care at levels 3 and 4 of stepped psychological care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline Baker
- a School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Australia
| | - Linda Worrall
- a School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Australia
| | - Miranda Rose
- b School of Allied Health, La Trobe University , Melbourne , Australia
| | - Kyla Hudson
- a School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Australia
| | - Brooke Ryan
- a School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Australia
| | - Leana O'Byrne
- a School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland , Brisbane , Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Nagayama H, Tomori K, Ohno K, Takahashi K, Nagatani R, Izumi R, Moriwaki K, Yamauchi K. Cost effectiveness of the occupation-based approach for subacute stroke patients: result of a randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil 2017; 24:337-344. [PMID: 28198661 DOI: 10.1080/10749357.2017.1289686] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The cost effectiveness of occupational therapy for subacute stroke patients is unclear in the extant literature. Consequently, this study determined the cost effectiveness of the occupation-based approach using Aid for Decision-Making in Occupation Choice (ADOC) for subacute stroke patients compared with an impairment-based approach. METHODS We conducted an economic evaluation from a societal perspective alongside a pilot randomized controlled trial, with a single blind assessor for participants in 10 subacute rehabilitation units in Japan. The intervention group received occupation-based goal setting using ADOC, with interventions focused on meaningful occupations. The control group received an impairment-based approach focused on restoring capacities. For both groups, occupational-therapy intervention was administered more than five times per week, for over 40 min each time, and they received physical and speech therapy prior to discharge. The main outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and total costs. Further, sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the influence of parameter uncertainty on the base case results. RESULTS The final number of participants was 24 in each of the two groups. In terms of QALYs, the intervention group is significantly higher than the control group (p = 0.001, difference 95% CI: 0.002-0.008) and total costs are not statistically significant. Applying a willingness-to-pay threshold of JPY 5 million/QALY, the probability of the occupation-based approach using ADOC being cost effective was estimated to be 65.3%. CONCLUSIONS The results show that the occupation-based approach is associated with significantly improved QALYs and has potential cost effectiveness, compared with the impairment-based approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hirofumi Nagayama
- a Department of Occupational Therapy , Kanagawa University of Human Services , Yokosuka , Japan.,g Graduate School of Health Management , Keio University , Fujisawa , Japan
| | - Kounosuke Tomori
- b Unit of Rehabilitation Sciences , Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences , Nagasaki , Japan
| | - Kanta Ohno
- c IMS Itabashi Rehabilitation Hospital , Itabashi , Japan
| | - Kayoko Takahashi
- d Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Allied Health Sciences , Kitasato University , Sagamihara , Japan
| | - Ryutaro Nagatani
- a Department of Occupational Therapy , Kanagawa University of Human Services , Yokosuka , Japan
| | - Ryota Izumi
- e Department of Occupational Therapy , Seirei Christopher University , Hamamatsu , Japan
| | - Kensuke Moriwaki
- f Department of Medical Statistics , Kobe Pharmaceutical University , Kobe , Japan
| | - Keita Yamauchi
- g Graduate School of Health Management , Keio University , Fujisawa , Japan
| |
Collapse
|