Improving quality and outcomes of stroke care in hospital

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Stroke123 implementation study

Dominique A. Cadilhac, Nadine E. Andrew, Monique F. Kilkenny, Kelvin Hill, Brenda Grabsch, Natasha A. Lannin, Amanda G. Thrift, Craig S. Anderson, Geoffrey A. Donnan, Sandy Middleton, Rohan Grimley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleOtherpeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Rationale: The effectiveness of clinician-focused interventions to improve stroke care is uncertain. Aims: To determine whether an organizational intervention can improve the quality of stroke care over usual care. Sample size estimates: To detect an absolute 10% difference in overall performance (composite outcome), a minimum of 21 hospitals and 843 patients per group was determined. Methods and design: Before and after controlled design in hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Intervention: Externally facilitated program (StrokeLink) using outreach workshops incorporating clinical performance feedback, patient outcomes (survival, quality of life at 90–180 days), local barrier assessments to best practice care, action planning, and ongoing support. Descriptive and multivariable analyses adjusted for patient correlations by hospital (intention-to-treat method). Context: Concurrent implementation of financial incentives to increase stroke unit access and use of the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry for performance monitoring. Study outcome(s): Primary outcome: net change in composite score (i.e. total number of process indicators achieved divided by the sum of eligible indicators for each cohort). Secondary outcomes: change in individual indicators, change in composite score comparing hospitals that did or did not develop action plans (per-protocol analysis), impact on 90–180-day health outcomes. Sensitivity analyses: hospital self-rated status, alternate cross-sectional audit data (Stroke Foundation). To account for temporal effects, comparison of Queensland hospital performance relative to other Australian hospitals will also be undertaken. Discussion: Twenty-one hospitals were recruited; however, one was unable to participate within the study time frame. Workshops were held between 11 March 2014 and 7 November 2014. Data are ready for analysis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)96-106
Number of pages11
JournalInternational Journal of Stroke
Volume13
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2018

Keywords

  • long-term outcome
  • observational study
  • quality of care
  • quality of life
  • Stroke

Cite this

@article{7562129d64f942e2b5a14c772bfa6365,
title = "Improving quality and outcomes of stroke care in hospital: Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Stroke123 implementation study",
abstract = "Rationale: The effectiveness of clinician-focused interventions to improve stroke care is uncertain. Aims: To determine whether an organizational intervention can improve the quality of stroke care over usual care. Sample size estimates: To detect an absolute 10{\%} difference in overall performance (composite outcome), a minimum of 21 hospitals and 843 patients per group was determined. Methods and design: Before and after controlled design in hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Intervention: Externally facilitated program (StrokeLink) using outreach workshops incorporating clinical performance feedback, patient outcomes (survival, quality of life at 90–180 days), local barrier assessments to best practice care, action planning, and ongoing support. Descriptive and multivariable analyses adjusted for patient correlations by hospital (intention-to-treat method). Context: Concurrent implementation of financial incentives to increase stroke unit access and use of the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry for performance monitoring. Study outcome(s): Primary outcome: net change in composite score (i.e. total number of process indicators achieved divided by the sum of eligible indicators for each cohort). Secondary outcomes: change in individual indicators, change in composite score comparing hospitals that did or did not develop action plans (per-protocol analysis), impact on 90–180-day health outcomes. Sensitivity analyses: hospital self-rated status, alternate cross-sectional audit data (Stroke Foundation). To account for temporal effects, comparison of Queensland hospital performance relative to other Australian hospitals will also be undertaken. Discussion: Twenty-one hospitals were recruited; however, one was unable to participate within the study time frame. Workshops were held between 11 March 2014 and 7 November 2014. Data are ready for analysis.",
keywords = "long-term outcome, observational study, quality of care, quality of life, Stroke",
author = "Cadilhac, {Dominique A.} and Andrew, {Nadine E.} and Kilkenny, {Monique F.} and Kelvin Hill and Brenda Grabsch and Lannin, {Natasha A.} and Thrift, {Amanda G.} and Anderson, {Craig S.} and Donnan, {Geoffrey A.} and Sandy Middleton and Rohan Grimley",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1747493017730741",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "96--106",
journal = "International Journal of Stroke",
issn = "1747-4930",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

Improving quality and outcomes of stroke care in hospital : Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Stroke123 implementation study. / Cadilhac, Dominique A.; Andrew, Nadine E.; Kilkenny, Monique F.; Hill, Kelvin; Grabsch, Brenda; Lannin, Natasha A.; Thrift, Amanda G.; Anderson, Craig S.; Donnan, Geoffrey A.; Middleton, Sandy; Grimley, Rohan.

In: International Journal of Stroke, Vol. 13, No. 1, 01.01.2018, p. 96-106.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleOtherpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Improving quality and outcomes of stroke care in hospital

T2 - Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Stroke123 implementation study

AU - Cadilhac, Dominique A.

AU - Andrew, Nadine E.

AU - Kilkenny, Monique F.

AU - Hill, Kelvin

AU - Grabsch, Brenda

AU - Lannin, Natasha A.

AU - Thrift, Amanda G.

AU - Anderson, Craig S.

AU - Donnan, Geoffrey A.

AU - Middleton, Sandy

AU - Grimley, Rohan

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Rationale: The effectiveness of clinician-focused interventions to improve stroke care is uncertain. Aims: To determine whether an organizational intervention can improve the quality of stroke care over usual care. Sample size estimates: To detect an absolute 10% difference in overall performance (composite outcome), a minimum of 21 hospitals and 843 patients per group was determined. Methods and design: Before and after controlled design in hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Intervention: Externally facilitated program (StrokeLink) using outreach workshops incorporating clinical performance feedback, patient outcomes (survival, quality of life at 90–180 days), local barrier assessments to best practice care, action planning, and ongoing support. Descriptive and multivariable analyses adjusted for patient correlations by hospital (intention-to-treat method). Context: Concurrent implementation of financial incentives to increase stroke unit access and use of the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry for performance monitoring. Study outcome(s): Primary outcome: net change in composite score (i.e. total number of process indicators achieved divided by the sum of eligible indicators for each cohort). Secondary outcomes: change in individual indicators, change in composite score comparing hospitals that did or did not develop action plans (per-protocol analysis), impact on 90–180-day health outcomes. Sensitivity analyses: hospital self-rated status, alternate cross-sectional audit data (Stroke Foundation). To account for temporal effects, comparison of Queensland hospital performance relative to other Australian hospitals will also be undertaken. Discussion: Twenty-one hospitals were recruited; however, one was unable to participate within the study time frame. Workshops were held between 11 March 2014 and 7 November 2014. Data are ready for analysis.

AB - Rationale: The effectiveness of clinician-focused interventions to improve stroke care is uncertain. Aims: To determine whether an organizational intervention can improve the quality of stroke care over usual care. Sample size estimates: To detect an absolute 10% difference in overall performance (composite outcome), a minimum of 21 hospitals and 843 patients per group was determined. Methods and design: Before and after controlled design in hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Intervention: Externally facilitated program (StrokeLink) using outreach workshops incorporating clinical performance feedback, patient outcomes (survival, quality of life at 90–180 days), local barrier assessments to best practice care, action planning, and ongoing support. Descriptive and multivariable analyses adjusted for patient correlations by hospital (intention-to-treat method). Context: Concurrent implementation of financial incentives to increase stroke unit access and use of the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry for performance monitoring. Study outcome(s): Primary outcome: net change in composite score (i.e. total number of process indicators achieved divided by the sum of eligible indicators for each cohort). Secondary outcomes: change in individual indicators, change in composite score comparing hospitals that did or did not develop action plans (per-protocol analysis), impact on 90–180-day health outcomes. Sensitivity analyses: hospital self-rated status, alternate cross-sectional audit data (Stroke Foundation). To account for temporal effects, comparison of Queensland hospital performance relative to other Australian hospitals will also be undertaken. Discussion: Twenty-one hospitals were recruited; however, one was unable to participate within the study time frame. Workshops were held between 11 March 2014 and 7 November 2014. Data are ready for analysis.

KW - long-term outcome

KW - observational study

KW - quality of care

KW - quality of life

KW - Stroke

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038252819&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1747493017730741

DO - 10.1177/1747493017730741

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 96

EP - 106

JO - International Journal of Stroke

JF - International Journal of Stroke

SN - 1747-4930

IS - 1

ER -