Search

Background: Audit and feedback (A&F) is a widely used implementation strategy. Understanding mechanisms of action of A&F increases the likelihood that the strategy will lead to implementation of an evidence-based practice. We therefore sought to understand one hospital's experience selecting and implementing an A&F intervention, to determine the implementation strategies that were used by staff and to specify the mechanism of action of those implementation strategies using causal pathway models, with the ultimate goal of improving acute stroke treatment practices., Methods: We selected an A&F strategy in a hospital, initially based on implementation determinants and staff consideration of their performance on acute stroke treatment measures. After 7 months of A&F, we conducted semi-structured interviews of hospital providers and administrative staff to understand how it contributed to implementing guideline-concordant acute stroke treatment (medication named tissue plasminogen activator). We coded the interviews to identify the implementation strategies that staff used following A&F and to assess their mechanisms of action., Results: We identified five implementation strategies that staff used following the feedback intervention. These included (1) creating folders containing the acute stroke treatment protocol for the emergency department, (2) educating providers about the protocol for acute stroke, (3) obtaining computed tomography imaging of stroke patients immediately upon emergency department arrival, (4) increasing access to acute stroke medical treatment in the emergency department, and (5) providing additional staff support for implementation of the protocol in the emergency department. We identified enablement, training, and environmental restructuring as mechanisms of action through which the implementation strategies acted to improve guideline-concordant and timely acute stroke treatment., Conclusions: A&F of a hospital's acute stroke treatment practices generated additional implementation strategies that acted through various mechanisms of action. Future studies should focus on how initial implementation strategies can be amplified through internal mechanisms.

Background: The Tailored Implementation in Chronic Disease (TICD) framework is a comprehensive framework describing the determinants of implementation success that has been used extensively in primary care settings. We explored the utility of the TICD to identify determinants of practice in an acute setting, namely guideline concordant acute stroke thrombolysis in a low-resourced, predominately minority serving, large, Emergency Department (ED)., Methods: Through workshops and expert review, we developed an interview guide informed by the TICD framework. We then conducted semi-structured interviews with data collected through written transcripts, audio transcripts or interviewer notes based on participant availability. Three independent coders then performed a content analysis using template analysis, but open to new determinants that arose from the data, into the TICD framework., Results: We performed a total of 15 semi-structured interviews with ED acute stroke providers including medical technicians, nurses, and physicians. We found that guideline factors, individual health professional factors, and patient factors domains were barriers to guideline concordant acute stroke thrombolysis. The domain professional interactions was a facilitator to treatment. We identified three determinants, healthcare professional burnout, health care professional turnover and surrogate decision making, that are not part of the TICD framework., Conclusions: Most determinants of acute stroke thrombolysis are included within the TICD framework. Inclusion of healthcare professional burnout, healthcare professional turnover and surrogate decision making may assist in expanding the TICD to time-sensitive ED conditions. Further work is needed to confirm this finding and to establish whether the TICD is applicable for use in non-time sensitive ED conditions. Interventions that address guideline, individual health professional and patient factors may improve guideline concordant acute stroke thrombolysis.

Background: Post-stroke disability is common, costly, and projected to increase. Acute stroke treatments can substantially reduce post-stroke disability, but few patients take advantage of these cost-effective treatments. Practical, cost-efficient, and sustainable interventions to address underutilized acute stroke treatments are currently lacking. In this context, we present the Stroke Ready project, a stepped wedge design, multi-level intervention that combines implementation science and community-based participatory research approaches to increase acute stroke treatments in the predominately African American community of Flint, Michigan, USA., Methods: Guided by the Tailored Implementation of Chronic Disease (TICD) framework, we begin with optimization of acute stroke care in emergency departments, with particular attention given to our safety-net hospital partners. Then, we move to a community-wide, multi-faceted, stroke preparedness intervention, with workshops led by peer educators, over 2 years. Measures of engagement of the safety-net hospital and the feasibility and sustainability of the implementation strategy as well as community intervention reach, dose delivered, and satisfaction will be collected. The primary outcome is acute stroke treatment rates, which includes both intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, and endovascular treatment. The co-secondary outcomes are intravenous tissue plasminogen activator treatment rates and the proportion of stroke patients who arrive by ambulance., Discussion: If successful, Stroke Ready will increase acute stroke treatment rates through emergency department and community level interventions. The stepped wedge design and process evaluation will provide insight into how Stroke Ready works and where it might work best. By exploring the relative effectiveness of the emergency department optimization and the community intervention, we will inform hospitals and communities as they determine how best to use their resources to optimize acute stroke care., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Trial Identifier NCT03645590 .