De Brún Aoife, Flynn Darren, Joyce Kerry, Ternent Laura, Price Christopher, Rodgers Helen, Ford Gary A, Lancsar Emily, Rudd Matthew, Thomson Richard G
Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Ashington, UK.
BMJ Open. 2014 Jul 9;4(7):e005612. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005612.
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.
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.
静脉溶栓是针对符合特定标准的急性缺血性脑卒中患者的一种有效的紧急治疗方法。在2013年第一季度,英格兰、威尔士和北爱尔兰约12%符合条件的患者接受了溶栓治疗,但多达15%的患者有资格接受治疗。溶栓治疗使用不充分可能在很大程度上归因于结构因素;然而,随着全天候超急性卒中服务的广泛实施,持续存在的差异可能反映出临床决策的不同,特别是指南、许可标准和研究证据中模糊领域的影响。现在,临床医生对溶栓的看法可能比结构/服务因素对治疗率产生更大的影响。本研究旨在通过使用患者案例来阐明影响溶栓决策的因素,以确定(1)可能有助于解释治疗差异的患者相关因素和临床医生相关因素,以及(2)基于关键因素相互作用的决策中的相关权衡。
方法/分析:将进行一项离散选择实验(DCE),以更好地了解临床医生如何决定是否对急性缺血性脑卒中患者进行溶栓治疗。为了为设计提供信息,将开展探索性工作,以确保(1)考虑纳入所有潜在影响因素;(2)深入了解患者因素的“灰色区域”。将使用分数析因设计来组合案例中患者因素的水平,这些案例将呈现给临床医生,以估计对提供溶栓决策的可变影响。
本研究已获得纽卡斯尔大学研究伦理委员会的伦理批准。研究结果将在同行评审出版物和全国性会议上发表。研究结果将转化为继续职业发展活动,并将支持在急性卒中护理中实施溶栓治疗的计算机决策辅助工具(COMPASS)。