Stroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Stroke Division, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 4;7(8):e016010. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016010.
Provision of a discharge care plan and prevention therapies is often suboptimal. Our objective was to design and pilot test an interdisciplinary, organisational intervention to improve discharge care using stroke as the case study using a mixed-methods, controlled before-after observational study design.
Acute care public hospitals in Queensland, Australia (n=15). The 15 hospitals were ranked against a benchmark based on a composite outcome of three discharge care processes. Clinicians from a 'top-ranked' hospital participated in a focus group to elicit their success factors. Two pilot hospitals then participated in the organisational intervention that was designed with experts and consumers.
Hospital clinicians involved in discharge care for stroke and patients admitted with acute stroke or transient ischaemic attack.
A four-stage, multifaceted organisational intervention that included data reviews, education and facilitated action planning.
Three discharge processes collected in Queensland hospitals within the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry were used to select study hospitals: (1) discharge care plan; (2) antihypertensive medication prescription and (3) antiplatelet medication prescription (ischaemic events only). Primary measure: composite outcome. Secondary measures: individual adherence changes for each discharge process; sensitivity analyses. The performance outcomes were compared 3 months before the intervention (preintervention), 3 months postintervention and at 12 months (sustainability).
Data from 1289 episodes of care from the two pilot hospitals were analysed. Improvements from preintervention adherence were: antiplatelet therapy (88%vs96%, p=0.02); antihypertensive prescription (61%vs79%, p<0.001); discharge planning (72%vs94%, p<0.001); composite outcome (73%vs89%, p<0.001). There was an insignificant decay effect over the 12-month sustainability period (composite outcome: 89% postintervention vs 85% sustainability period, p=0.08).
Discharge care in hospitals may be effectively improved and sustained through a staged and peer-informed, organisational intervention. The intervention warrants further application and trialling on a larger scale.
提供出院护理计划和预防治疗往往不尽如人意。我们的目的是设计并试点测试一种跨学科的组织干预措施,以改善使用中风作为案例研究的出院护理,采用混合方法、对照前后观察研究设计。
澳大利亚昆士兰州的急性护理公立医院(n=15)。根据三项出院护理流程的综合结果,将这 15 家医院与基准进行排名。来自“排名最高”医院的临床医生参加了焦点小组,以了解他们的成功因素。然后,两家试点医院参与了由专家和消费者设计的组织干预措施。
参与中风出院护理的医院临床医生和因急性中风或短暂性脑缺血发作而入院的患者。
一个包括数据审查、教育和促进行动计划的四阶段、多方面的组织干预措施。
使用澳大利亚中风临床登记处在昆士兰州医院收集的三项出院流程来选择研究医院:(1)出院护理计划;(2)抗高血压药物处方;(3)抗血小板药物处方(仅缺血事件)。主要测量指标:综合结果。次要测量指标:每个出院流程的个体依从性变化;敏感性分析。在干预前(干预前)、干预后 3 个月和 12 个月(可持续性)比较绩效结果。
对来自两家试点医院的 1289 个护理疗程的数据进行了分析。干预前依从性的改善包括:抗血小板治疗(88%vs96%,p=0.02);抗高血压处方(61%vs79%,p<0.001);出院计划(72%vs94%,p<0.001);综合结果(73%vs89%,p<0.001)。在 12 个月的可持续性期间,没有明显的衰减效应(综合结果:干预后 89%vs可持续性期间 85%,p=0.08)。
通过分阶段和同行知情的组织干预措施,医院的出院护理可以得到有效改善和持续。该干预措施值得进一步在更大规模上应用和试验。