Suchergebnisse

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the total use of healthcare services in the course of the first year after a stroke between participants who, after the acute care, had received occupational therapy as a client-centred activities of daily living (ADL) intervention (CADL) and participants who had received usual ADL intervention (UADL). DESIGN: A secondary analysis of a multicentre cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT). SETTING: Primary and secondary care in Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were included if they: (1) had received CADL or UADL in the RCT, either as inpatients in geriatric rehabilitation units or in their own homes, and (2) data could be retrieved about their use of healthcare services provided by the county council from computerised registers. INTERVENTIONS: CADL or UADL. OUTCOME MEASURES: Inpatient and outpatient healthcare in the course of the first year after stroke. RESULTS: Participants from 7 of the 16 units included in the RCT met the criteria. Participants in the CADL group (n=26) who received geriatric inpatient rehabilitation had a shorter length of hospital stay (p=0.03) than participants in the UADL group (n=46), and the CADL group with home rehabilitation (n=13) had fewer outpatient contacts (p=0.01) compared with the UADL group (n=25). Multiple regression analyses showed that in four of the models, a higher age was associated with a lower use of healthcare services. The use of healthcare services was also associated (some of the models) with dependence in ADL, stroke severity and type of rehabilitation received, CADL or UADL. CONCLUSIONS: The provision of client-centred occupational therapy after stroke did not appear to increase the use of healthcare services during the first year after stroke.rrrrr TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01417585.

BACKGROUND: Care transitions following stroke should be bridged with collaboration between hospital staff and home rehabilitation teams since well-coordinated transitions can reduce death and disability following a stroke. However, health services are delivered within organisational structures, rather than being based on patients' needs. The aim of this study protocol is to assess the feasibility, operationalised here as fidelity and acceptability, of a codesigned care transition support for people with stroke. METHODS: This study protocol describes the evaluation of a feasibility study using a non-randomised controlled design. The codesigned care transition support includes patient information using videos, leaflets and teach back; what-matters-to me dialogue; a coordinated rehabilitation plan; bridged e-meeting; and a message system for cross-organisational collaboration. Patients with stroke, first time or recurrent, who are to be discharged home from hospital and referred to a rehabilitation team in primary healthcare for continued rehabilitation in the home will be included. One week after stroke, data will be collected on the primary outcome, namely satisfaction with the care transition support, and on the secondary outcome, namely health literacy and medication adherence. Data on use of healthcare will be obtained from a register of healthcare contacts. The outcomes of patients and significant others will be compared with matched controls from other geriatric stroke and acute stroke units, and with matched historic controls from a previous dataset at the intervention and control units. Data on acceptability and fidelity will be assessed through interviews and observations at the intervention units. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approvals have been obtained from the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. The results will be published open-access in peer-reviewed journals. Dissemination also includes presentation at national and international conferences. DISCUSSION: The care transition support addresses a poorly functioning part of care trajectories in current healthcare. The development of this codesigned care transition support has involved people with stroke, significant other, and healthcare professionals. Such involvement has the potential to better identify and reconceptualise problems, and incorporate user experiences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov id: NCT02925871. Date of registration 6 October 2016. PROTOCOL VERSION: 1.