Process evaluation of a cross-sectoral, coordinated follow-up care of stroke patients: a qualitative study.

Q2 Medicine
Theresa Schrage, Claudia Glissmann, Götz Thomalla, David Leander Rimmele, Holger Schmidt, Michael Rosenkranz, Stefan Boskamp, Martin Härter, Levente Kriston
{"title":"Process evaluation of a cross-sectoral, coordinated follow-up care of stroke patients: a qualitative study.","authors":"Theresa Schrage, Claudia Glissmann, Götz Thomalla, David Leander Rimmele, Holger Schmidt, Michael Rosenkranz, Stefan Boskamp, Martin Härter, Levente Kriston","doi":"10.1186/s42466-024-00360-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementation of interventions to improve follow-up stroke care is complex due to the involvement of various stakeholders and challenges of health care coordination. The aim of this study was to evaluate the process of implementing a cross-sectoral, coordinated follow-up care for stroke patients (the StroCare intervention).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As part of a multicenter interventional trial, this qualitative study was performed in a pre-post design with semi-structured interviews conducted with patients and health care employees. The multicomponent intervention was implemented in eight participating acute care and rehabilitation clinics. The interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Contents were coded using eight a priori defined categories (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, sustainability, patient-centeredness, satisfaction with treatment, and pandemic-related effects) with the possibility of inductively developed categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Interviews with 21 patients and 34 interviews with 23 employees were conducted. In addition to the deductive categories, three inductive categories (psychosocial implications, interconnectedness, and potential for improvement) emerged. Acceptability, adoption, and appropriateness were assessed positively before the intervention. However, poor feasibility had a negative impact on adoption and appropriateness. In contrast, outcomes related to patient care (patient-centeredness and psychosocial implications) were independent from this effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Similar to other implementation studies of stroke care interventions, implementation of eHealth Services in the StroCare project met barriers in usability and adaptability of new software. However, high adoption and appropriateness in regard to patient-centeredness, psychosocial implications, and an overall benefit for the patients supported continuation of the remaining intervention components. Trial registration The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04159324), registration date 12/11/19.</p>","PeriodicalId":94156,"journal":{"name":"Neurological research and practice","volume":"7 1","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11755855/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurological research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-024-00360-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Implementation of interventions to improve follow-up stroke care is complex due to the involvement of various stakeholders and challenges of health care coordination. The aim of this study was to evaluate the process of implementing a cross-sectoral, coordinated follow-up care for stroke patients (the StroCare intervention).

Methods: As part of a multicenter interventional trial, this qualitative study was performed in a pre-post design with semi-structured interviews conducted with patients and health care employees. The multicomponent intervention was implemented in eight participating acute care and rehabilitation clinics. The interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Contents were coded using eight a priori defined categories (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, sustainability, patient-centeredness, satisfaction with treatment, and pandemic-related effects) with the possibility of inductively developed categories.

Results: Interviews with 21 patients and 34 interviews with 23 employees were conducted. In addition to the deductive categories, three inductive categories (psychosocial implications, interconnectedness, and potential for improvement) emerged. Acceptability, adoption, and appropriateness were assessed positively before the intervention. However, poor feasibility had a negative impact on adoption and appropriateness. In contrast, outcomes related to patient care (patient-centeredness and psychosocial implications) were independent from this effect.

Conclusions: Similar to other implementation studies of stroke care interventions, implementation of eHealth Services in the StroCare project met barriers in usability and adaptability of new software. However, high adoption and appropriateness in regard to patient-centeredness, psychosocial implications, and an overall benefit for the patients supported continuation of the remaining intervention components. Trial registration The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04159324), registration date 12/11/19.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信