Search

Background: Evidence should guide decisions in aphasia practice across the continuum of stroke care; however, evidence–practice gaps persist. This is particularly pertinent in the acute setting where 30% of people with stroke will have aphasia, and speech pathologists experience many challenges implementing evidence‐based practice. This has important consequences for people with aphasia and their close others, as well as speech pathologists working in acute settings. Aims: This study protocol details how we will target practice change using a behavioural approach, with the aim of promoting the uptake of synthesized evidence in aphasia management post‐stroke in the acute hospital setting. Methods & Procedures: We will conduct a mixed‐methods before‐and‐after study following the Knowledge‐to‐Action (KTA) framework. Researchers, speech pathologists and people with lived experience of aphasia will collaborate to identify and prioritize practice gaps, and develop and implement changes to clinical practice based on the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel. Discussion: This study may provide a template for acute stroke services in how to use an implementation science approach to promote the application of synthesized evidence into routine clinical practice to ensure people with aphasia receive high‐quality services. Collaboration among researchers, healthcare providers, people with aphasia and their close others ensures that the identification and targeting of practice gaps are driven by theory, lived experience and the local context. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Synthesized evidence, such as clinical guidelines and consensus statements, provides the highest level of evidence to inform clinical practice, yet discrepancies between delivered care and evidence remain. This discrepancy is of note in the acute setting where clinicians report many challenges implementing the best available evidence, combined with a high proportion of people with stroke who will have aphasia (30%). There are many reasons why evidence is not put into practice, and efforts to change clinical practice need to consider these barriers when developing interventions. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study protocol details an implementation science approach to affect clinical practice change, informed by a collaboration of key stakeholders (researchers, speech pathologists, and people with aphasia and their close others). Protocol papers that focus on bridging the gap between evidence and practice are uncommon in communication disorders; moreover, explicit prioritization of practice gaps is a critical but often overlooked aspect of promoting evidence‐based practice. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This protocol provides insights into how one study site identified and prioritized evidence–practice gaps using a participatory approach. We provide insights into how clinical practice change may occur by describing how we plan to identify priority evidence–practice gaps and develop an intervention to improve the use of aphasia evidence in routine practice. This protocol aims to share an implementation science approach to service improvement that may be replicated across other services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Speech and language therapists and nurses need to work together to keep patients with swallowing difficulties safe throughout their acute stroke admission. Speech and language therapists make recommendations for safe swallowing following assessment and nurses put recommendations into practice and monitor how patients cope. There has been little research into the everyday realities of ongoing swallow safety management by these two disciplines. Patient safety research in other fields of healthcare indicates that safety can be enhanced through understanding the cultural context in which risk decisions are made. Aims: To generate new understanding for how speech and language therapists (SLTs) and nurses share information for ongoing management of swallows safety on stroke units. Methods & Procedures: An ethnographic methodology involving 40 weeks of fieldwork on three stroke wards in England between 2015 and 2017. Fieldwork observation (357 h) and interviews with 43 members of SLT and nursing staff. Observational and interview data were analysed iteratively using techniques from the constant comparative method to create a thematically organized explanation. Outcomes & Results: An explanation for how disciplinary differences in time and space influenced how SLT and nursing staff shared information for ongoing management of swallow safety, based around three themes: (1) SLTs and nurses were aligned in concern for swallow safety across all information‐sharing routes; however, (2) ambiguity was introduced by the need for the information contained in swallowing recommendations to travel across time, creating dilemmas for nurses. Patients could improve or deteriorate after recommendations were made and nurses had competing demands on their time. Ambiguity had consequences for (3) critical incident reporting and relationships. SLTs experienced dilemmas over how to act when recommendations were not followed. Conclusions & Implications: This study provides new understanding for patient safety dilemmas associated with the enactment and oversight of swallowing recommendations in context, on stroke wards. Findings can support SLTs and nurses to explore together how information for ongoing dysphagia management can be safely implemented within ward realities and kept up to date. This could include considering nursing capacity to act when SLTs are not there, mealtime staffing and SLT 7‐day working. Together they can review their understanding of risk and preferred local and formal routes for learning from it. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: It is known that information to keep swallowing safe is shared through swallowing recommendations, which are understood to involve a balance of risks between optimizing the safety of the swallow mechanism and maintaining physiological and emotional health. There is increasing appreciation from patient safety research, of the importance of understanding the context in which hospital staff make decisions about risk and patient safety. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: The paper provides new empirical understanding for the complexities of risk management associated with SLT and nursing interactions and roles with respect to ongoing swallow safety. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Findings can underpin SLT and nurse discussion about how swallow safety could be improved in their own settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dysphagia affects over half of adults after stroke. Dysphagia rehabilitation aims to improve swallowing and reduce negative outcomes for these adults. However, significant variability exists in dysphagia rehabilitation. Research is needed to explore the underlying clinician‐specific and workplace factors that contribute to variability in dysphagia rehabilitation after stroke. Aim: To explore factors influencing speech pathology practice in dysphagia rehabilitation after stroke. Methods & Procedures: We used a phenomenological approach with an interpretivist perspective. Twenty speech pathologists working in dysphagia rehabilitation participated from different workplace settings around Australia. Five semi‐structured focus groups were conducted online. Data were inductively analysed using thematic analysis with a coding reliability method. Outcomes & Results: Four themes were discussed within focus groups: (1) relationship between experienced and less experienced clinicians: 'Following what other people have done', (2) need for collaborative learning: 'A safe space to share and train', (3) variation between settings impacts on continuity of care: 'There's a difference between community and acute', and (4) working effectively with multidisciplinary teams (MDT): 'An MDT which can listen to the voice of speech pathology'. Conclusions & Implications: Relationships between senior and junior speech pathologists, within speech pathology and MDT, and across inpatient and community settings influenced speech pathology practice. Flattened hierarchies in speech pathology, collaborative learning in workplaces, mutual respect within teams and connection across inpatient and community settings could improve the quality and consistency of dysphagia rehabilitation after stroke. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject: Dysphagia rehabilitation can improve swallowing after a stroke. However, dysphagia rehabilitation is characterised by variability in clinical practice. Clinician‐specific and workplace factors influence clinical practice and may contribute to variability in dysphagia rehabilitation. What this study adds: Professional relationships influence speech pathologists' clinical practice, including relationships between senior and junior clinicians, between inpatient and community settings and with peers and multidisciplinary teams. Workplace norms and hierarchies, poor continuity of care between settings and competing priorities from other disciplines can hinder dysphagia rehabilitation. However, collaborative learning, positive workplace cultures and respectful transdisciplinary care can improve the quality and consistency of clinical practice. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Flattening hierarchies in the workplace can foster a safe learning space. Further, questioning workplace norms and seeking out peer learning within and across settings can build clinical skills and confidence. Developing positive workplace cultures that support continuous development may be key for empowering speech pathologists to provide high‐quality and consistent dysphagia rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While implementation studies in aphasia management have shown promising improvements to clinical practice, it is currently unknown if aphasia implementation outcomes are sustained and what factors may influence clinical sustainability. Aims: To evaluate the sustainment (i.e., sustained improvement of aphasia management practices and domains influencing clinicians' practice) and sustainability (i.e., factors influencing sustainability) outcomes of the Acute Aphasia IMplementation Study (AAIMS). Methods & Procedures: A convergent interactive mixed‐methods sustainability evaluation was conducted on two previously delivered implementation interventions (AAIMS). The AAIMS interventions were targeted at improving either written aphasia‐friendly information provision (Intervention A) or collaborative goal‐setting (Intervention B). Outcomes were collected 2 and 3 years post‐implementation, addressing the research questions of sustainment (e.g., medical record audits and behavioural constructs questionnaires) and sustainability (e.g., post‐study focus groups and organizational readiness surveys). Quantitative sustainability data were compared with post‐implementation data, allowing for sustainment to be determined. Clinicians' perspectives on sustainability outcomes and challenges were analysed using framework analysis and integrated with the quantitative findings. Outcomes & Results: A total of 35 speech–language therapists (SLTs) from four hospitals participated. The medical records of 79 patients were audited in the sustainability period compared with the 107 medical records audited during AAIMS. Overall, there was variable sustainment of the target behaviours; implementation for Intervention A was not sustained at either sustainability time point (2018 = 47.8% decrease; 2019 = 22.78% decrease), but implementation for Intervention B was sustained at both time points (2018 = 7.78% increase; 2019 = 18.1% increase). There was a pattern of sustained change in the behaviour change domains targeted by the implementation interventions, where scores of the targeted domains increased over time (0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.05 to 0.30) and scores of the non‐targeted domains declined (−0.03, 95% CI = −0.11 to 0.04). Factors influencing sustainability were mainly related to 'processes', 'the inner context' and 'SLT characteristics', and these interacted dynamically to account for variation between teams. Conclusions & Implications: Implementation outcomes (i.e., practice changes) were not sustained to the same level for three of the four participating SLT teams, with variable or partial sustainment most common. While the factors influencing sustainability differed depending on the context and individuals involved, the most important factor influencing outcomes seemed to be the level to which behaviour‐change processes and strategies were embedded within the SLT department. Future implementation studies should incorporate sustainability measures from the onset and include follow‐ups and monitoring systems to help support sustained change in the long term. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: In post‐stroke aphasia management, there are few examples of long‐term sustainability of implementation outcomes. It is therefore unknown what factors are potentially important to sustain implementation of best‐practice recommendations in aphasia services. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: There is potential for implementation outcomes to be sustained long term, but sustainment is impacted by a range of factors. Ongoing facilitation or follow‐up after initial implementation may to useful to promote sustainment, but is not essential if processes are sufficiently embedded. Gradual implementation into practice may lead to better sustainment than rapid change that is quickly forgotten. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Future implementation efforts should incorporate sustainability measures from the onset. Applying a sustainability framework was useful to guide evaluations and explore factors influencing the sustainment outcomes and is recommended for those interested in sustainability. Results from our evaluation can be used to guide refinement and support future development of sustainable implementation interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]