• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

共同设计组织改进和干预措施,以提高英格兰四家卒中病房的住院患者活动量:使用常规过程理论的混合方法过程评估。

Co-designing organisational improvements and interventions to increase inpatient activity in four stroke units in England: a mixed-methods process evaluation using normalisation process theory.

机构信息

Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds, UK

Faculty of Health and Social Care Sciences, Kingston University and St George's, University of London, London, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 26;11(1):e042723. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042723.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042723
PMID:33500286
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7839845/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To explore facilitators and barriers to using experience-based co-design (EBCD) and accelerated EBCD (AEBCD) in the development and implementation of interventions to increase activity opportunities for inpatient stroke survivors.

DESIGN

Mixed-methods process evaluation underpinned by normalisation process theory (NPT).

SETTING

Four post-acute rehabilitation stroke units in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Stroke survivors, family members, stroke unit staff, hospital managers, support staff and volunteers. Data informing our NPT analysis comprised: ethnographic observations, n=366 hours; semistructured interviews with 76 staff, 53 stroke survivors and 27 family members pre-EBCD/AEBCD implementation or post-EBCD/AEBCD implementation; and observation of 43 co-design meetings involving 23 stroke survivors, 21 family carers and 54 staff.

RESULTS

Former patients and families valued participation in EBCD/AEBCD perceiving they were equal partners in co-design. Staff engaged with EBCD/AEBCD, reporting it as a valuable improvement approach leading to increased activity opportunities. The structured EBCD/AEBCD approach was influential in enabling coherence and cognitive participation and legitimated staff involvement in the change process. Researcher facilitation of EBCD/AEBCD supported cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring; these were important in implementing and sustaining co-design activities. Observations and interviews post-EBCD/AEBCD cycles confirmed creation and use of new social spaces and increased activity opportunities in all units. EBCD/AEBCD facilitated engagement with wider hospital resources and local communities, further enhancing activity opportunities. However, outside of structured group activity, many individual staff-patient interactions remained task focused.

CONCLUSIONS

EBCD/AEBCD facilitated the development and implementation of environmental changes and revisions to work routines which supported increased activity opportunities in stroke units providing post-acute and rehabilitation care. Former stroke patients and carers contributed to improvements. NPT's generative mechanisms were instrumental in analysis and interpretation of facilitators and barriers at the individual, group and organisational level, and can help inform future implementations of similar approaches.

摘要

目的

探索在开发和实施增加住院脑卒中幸存者活动机会的干预措施中使用基于经验的共同设计(EBCD)和加速 EBCD(AEBCD)的促进因素和障碍。

设计

以规范化进程理论(NPT)为基础的混合方法过程评估。

设置

英格兰的四个急性后康复脑卒中病房。

参与者

脑卒中幸存者、家庭成员、脑卒中病房工作人员、医院管理人员、支持人员和志愿者。为我们的 NPT 分析提供信息的数据包括:人种学观察,n=366 小时;在 EBCD/AEBCD 实施之前或之后,对 76 名工作人员、53 名脑卒中幸存者和 27 名家庭成员进行半结构化访谈;以及对 43 次共同设计会议进行观察,涉及 23 名脑卒中幸存者、21 名家庭照顾者和 54 名工作人员。

结果

前患者和家属重视参与 EBCD/AEBCD,认为他们是共同设计的平等伙伴。工作人员参与 EBCD/AEBCD,认为这是一种有价值的改进方法,导致活动机会增加。结构化的 EBCD/AEBCD 方法在实现一致性和认知参与以及使工作人员参与变革过程合法化方面具有影响力。EBCD/AEBCD 的研究人员促进支持了认知参与、集体行动和反思性监测;这些对于实施和维持共同设计活动非常重要。EBCD/AEBCD 循环后的观察和访谈证实,所有单位都创建和使用了新的社会空间,并增加了活动机会。EBCD/AEBCD 促进了与更广泛的医院资源和当地社区的合作,进一步增加了活动机会。然而,在结构化的小组活动之外,许多员工与患者的互动仍然以任务为中心。

结论

EBCD/AEBCD 促进了环境变化的发展和实施,以及工作常规的修订,这支持了急性后和康复护理脑卒中病房活动机会的增加。前脑卒中患者和照顾者为改进做出了贡献。NPT 的生成机制在个人、小组和组织层面上对促进因素和障碍的分析和解释具有重要作用,并可以为未来类似方法的实施提供信息。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cec7/7839845/e4a843943f11/bmjopen-2020-042723f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cec7/7839845/e4a843943f11/bmjopen-2020-042723f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cec7/7839845/e4a843943f11/bmjopen-2020-042723f01.jpg

相似文献

1
Co-designing organisational improvements and interventions to increase inpatient activity in four stroke units in England: a mixed-methods process evaluation using normalisation process theory.共同设计组织改进和干预措施,以提高英格兰四家卒中病房的住院患者活动量:使用常规过程理论的混合方法过程评估。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 26;11(1):e042723. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042723.
2
3
4
Addressing inactivity after stroke: The Collaborative Rehabilitation in Acute Stroke (CREATE) study.针对卒中后不活动问题:协作性急性卒中康复研究(CREATE 研究)。
Int J Stroke. 2021 Aug;16(6):669-682. doi: 10.1177/1747493020969367. Epub 2020 Nov 2.
5
Enablers and Barriers to an Experience-Based Co-Design Process to Develop Service Improvements in Enhanced Community Care in Ireland: A Qualitative Study.爱尔兰强化社区护理服务改进的基于体验的协同设计过程的促进因素和障碍:一项定性研究
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70206. doi: 10.1111/hex.70206.
6
A qualitative study exploring the barriers and facilitators of implementing a cardiovascular disease risk reducing intervention for people with severe mental illness into primary care contexts across England: the 'PRIMROSE' trial.一项探索在英格兰的基层医疗环境中实施针对严重精神疾病患者的心血管疾病风险降低干预措施的障碍和促进因素的定性研究:“PRIMROSE”试验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Aug 15;20(1):753. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05643-2.
7
Challenges implementing a carer support intervention within a national stroke organisation: findings from the process evaluation of the OSCARSS trial.在一个全国性中风组织内实施护理者支持干预措施面临的挑战:OSCARSS试验过程评估的结果
BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 12;11(1):e038129. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038129.
8
Co-designing and testing the learn together guidance to support patient and family involvement in patient safety investigations: a mixed-methods study.共同设计并测试“共同学习指南”以支持患者及家属参与患者安全调查:一项混合方法研究。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 May;13(18):1-125. doi: 10.3310/KJHT3375.
9
Using a national archive of patient experience narratives to promote local patient-centered quality improvement: an ethnographic process evaluation of 'accelerated' experience-based co-design.利用患者体验叙述的国家档案促进以患者为中心的地方质量改进:“加速”基于体验的共同设计的人种学过程评估
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2014 Oct;19(4):200-7. doi: 10.1177/1355819614531565. Epub 2014 May 19.
10
Introducing structured caregiver training in stroke care: findings from the TRACS process evaluation study.在中风护理中引入结构化护理者培训:TRACS过程评估研究的结果
BMJ Open. 2014 Apr 15;4(4):e004473. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004473.

引用本文的文献

1
Insights into the implementation of a whole genome sequencing report form (SRF) to reduce nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 in UK hospitals within an unfolding pandemic: A qualitative process evaluation using normalisation process theory.关于在不断演变的疫情中实施全基因组测序报告表(SRF)以减少英国医院内新冠病毒医院感染的见解:一项运用规范化过程理论的定性过程评估
PLoS One. 2025 Apr 17;20(4):e0321534. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0321534. eCollection 2025.
2
What Is So Great about Inpatient Rehabilitation from the Patient Experience Perspective: Qualitative Content Analysis of an Appreciative Inquiry during a Bedside Experience Rounding.从患者体验角度看住院康复的优势何在:床边体验查房中赞赏性探询的定性内容分析
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Aug 27;12(17):1711. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12171711.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Addressing inactivity after stroke: The Collaborative Rehabilitation in Acute Stroke (CREATE) study.针对卒中后不活动问题:协作性急性卒中康复研究(CREATE 研究)。
Int J Stroke. 2021 Aug;16(6):669-682. doi: 10.1177/1747493020969367. Epub 2020 Nov 2.
2
Push, pull or co-produce?推动、拉动还是共同生产?
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2020 Apr;25(2):67-69. doi: 10.1177/1355819620907352.
3
The impact of environmental enrichment in an acute stroke unit on how and when patients undertake activities.环境强化在急性脑卒中单元中对患者活动方式和时间的影响。
A scoping review of patient and public involvement in empirical stroke research.患者和公众参与实证性卒中研究的范围综述。
Int J Stroke. 2024 Oct;19(9):962-972. doi: 10.1177/17474930241262638. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
4
Co-design for stroke intervention development: Results of a scoping review.共同设计用于中风干预措施的发展:范围综述的结果。
PLoS One. 2024 Feb 14;19(2):e0297162. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297162. eCollection 2024.
5
Using experience-based co-design to develop mobile/tablet applications to support a person-centred and empowering stroke rehabilitation.利用基于经验的协同设计来开发移动/平板电脑应用程序,以支持以人为本且具有赋能作用的中风康复。
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Aug 24;9(1):69. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00472-z.
6
Tailoring and Evaluating an Intervention to Support Self-management After Stroke: Protocol for a Multi-case, Mixed Methods Comparison Study.定制和评估中风后支持自我管理的干预措施:多案例混合方法比较研究方案
JMIR Res Protoc. 2022 May 6;11(5):e37672. doi: 10.2196/37672.
7
[Not Available].[无可用内容]。
Physiother Can. 2021 Nov 1;73(4):301-303. doi: 10.3138/ptc-2021-0060-gef. Epub 2021 Oct 20.
8
Realizing the Potential of Co-Design to Build Innovation in Rehabilitation Services.认识到共同设计在康复服务中构建创新的潜力。
Physiother Can. 2021 Nov 1;73(4):299-300. doi: 10.3138/ptc-2021-0060-gee. Epub 2021 Oct 20.
Clin Rehabil. 2019 Apr;33(4):784-795. doi: 10.1177/0269215518820087. Epub 2018 Dec 23.
4
Is Environmental Enrichment Ready for Clinical Application in Human Post-stroke Rehabilitation?环境富集是否已准备好应用于人类中风后康复的临床实践?
Front Behav Neurosci. 2018 Jul 11;12:135. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00135. eCollection 2018.
5
Using Normalization Process Theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review.运用常态化进程理论对复杂医疗干预措施的可行性研究和进程评估:系统综述。
Implement Sci. 2018 Jun 7;13(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0758-1.
6
Why do stroke survivors not receive recommended amounts of active therapy? Findings from the ReAcT study, a mixed-methods case-study evaluation in eight stroke units.为什么中风幸存者没有接受推荐的积极治疗量?来自 ReAcT 研究的发现,这是一项在 8 个中风病房中进行的混合方法病例研究评估。
Clin Rehabil. 2018 Aug;32(8):1119-1132. doi: 10.1177/0269215518765329. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
7
Can the physical environment itself influence neurological patient activity?物理环境本身会影响神经科患者的活动吗?
Disabil Rehabil. 2019 May;41(10):1177-1189. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1423520. Epub 2018 Jan 17.
8
A comparative study of patients' activities and interactions in a stroke unit before and after reconstruction-The significance of the built environment.卒中单元重建前后患者活动与互动的对比研究——建筑环境的意义
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 20;12(7):e0177477. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177477. eCollection 2017.
9
What outcomes are associated with developing and implementing co-produced interventions in acute healthcare settings? A rapid evidence synthesis.在急性医疗环境中开发和实施共同生产的干预措施会带来哪些结果?一项快速证据综合分析。
BMJ Open. 2017 Jul 11;7(7):e014650. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014650.
10
Embedding an enriched environment in an acute stroke unit increases activity in people with stroke: a controlled before-after pilot study.在急性脑卒中单元中嵌入丰富环境可增加脑卒中患者的活动量:一项对照前后试点研究。
Clin Rehabil. 2017 Nov;31(11):1516-1528. doi: 10.1177/0269215517705181. Epub 2017 May 1.