Co-design of a Mobile Stroke Unit pathway highlights uncertainties and trade-offs for viable system-wide implementation in the English and Welsh NHS.

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
L Moseley, P McMeekin, M Allen, G A Ford, M James, A Laws, S McCarthy, G McClelland, L J Park, K Pearn, D Phillips, C Price, L Shaw, P White, D Wilson, J Scott
{"title":"Co-design of a Mobile Stroke Unit pathway highlights uncertainties and trade-offs for viable system-wide implementation in the English and Welsh NHS.","authors":"L Moseley, P McMeekin, M Allen, G A Ford, M James, A Laws, S McCarthy, G McClelland, L J Park, K Pearn, D Phillips, C Price, L Shaw, P White, D Wilson, J Scott","doi":"10.1186/s12873-025-01243-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mobile stroke units (MSUs) are specialist ambulances equipped with scanning and point of care testing that can identify patients eligible for intravenous thrombolysis - medication to dissolve a clot used in ischaemic strokes - and provide this on location. While benefits of MSUs have been demonstrated, this is context dependent. Routine use of MSUs across the English and Welsh National Health Service (NHS) has not yet been considered, and as such no pathway for their operation exists. This study aimed to co-design a viable pathway, detailing dispatch, staffing and treatment decisions, for MSUs within the NHS context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study used interdisciplinary co-design alongside Nominal Group Technique (NGT) to generate consensus. Participants were recruited using a combination of purposive, opportunistic and snowball sampling. Data collection took place in online workshops, across three rounds, with supplemental interviews conducted where required. Data were analysed as an ongoing process, with participants checking interpretations after each round, and then further analysed deductively to identify key uncertainties following all the rounds. Consensus threshold for the NGT was set a priori at ≥ 80%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An MSU pathway that reached consensus for being viable within the NHS was developed with consideration for current systems and pressures. Key uncertainties were identified such as where to base the MSU. We also identified where participants had to make trade-offs in the co-designed pathway, such as staffing considerations. Together, the uncertainties and trade-offs represent challenges to MSU implementation and are presented alongside the process to reach the finalised pathway. Future developments which may have implications for the implementation of MSUs were also explored.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The co-designed MSU pathway provides a foundation for MSU implementation in the English and Welsh NHS and can be subjected to local and regional modifications required for implementation. However, optimal implementation is likely hindered by several uncertainties and trade-offs, including the geographical base of the MSU and staffing, that represent challenges to implementation of MSUs at scale. Future developments in acute stroke care may help to mitigate these challenges, such as developments in artificial intelligence to read scans and improved access to telemedicine.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9002,"journal":{"name":"BMC Emergency Medicine","volume":"25 1","pages":"97"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12147245/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-025-01243-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Mobile stroke units (MSUs) are specialist ambulances equipped with scanning and point of care testing that can identify patients eligible for intravenous thrombolysis - medication to dissolve a clot used in ischaemic strokes - and provide this on location. While benefits of MSUs have been demonstrated, this is context dependent. Routine use of MSUs across the English and Welsh National Health Service (NHS) has not yet been considered, and as such no pathway for their operation exists. This study aimed to co-design a viable pathway, detailing dispatch, staffing and treatment decisions, for MSUs within the NHS context.

Methods: The study used interdisciplinary co-design alongside Nominal Group Technique (NGT) to generate consensus. Participants were recruited using a combination of purposive, opportunistic and snowball sampling. Data collection took place in online workshops, across three rounds, with supplemental interviews conducted where required. Data were analysed as an ongoing process, with participants checking interpretations after each round, and then further analysed deductively to identify key uncertainties following all the rounds. Consensus threshold for the NGT was set a priori at ≥ 80%.

Results: An MSU pathway that reached consensus for being viable within the NHS was developed with consideration for current systems and pressures. Key uncertainties were identified such as where to base the MSU. We also identified where participants had to make trade-offs in the co-designed pathway, such as staffing considerations. Together, the uncertainties and trade-offs represent challenges to MSU implementation and are presented alongside the process to reach the finalised pathway. Future developments which may have implications for the implementation of MSUs were also explored.

Conclusions: The co-designed MSU pathway provides a foundation for MSU implementation in the English and Welsh NHS and can be subjected to local and regional modifications required for implementation. However, optimal implementation is likely hindered by several uncertainties and trade-offs, including the geographical base of the MSU and staffing, that represent challenges to implementation of MSUs at scale. Future developments in acute stroke care may help to mitigate these challenges, such as developments in artificial intelligence to read scans and improved access to telemedicine.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

共同设计的移动中风单位途径突出的不确定性和权衡可行的全系统实施在英国和威尔士NHS。
背景:移动卒中单元(msu)是配备扫描和护理点检测的专业救护车,可以识别适合静脉溶栓治疗的患者,并在现场提供静脉溶栓治疗。静脉溶栓是用于缺血性卒中的溶栓药物。虽然msu的好处已经被证明,但这取决于具体情况。在整个英格兰和威尔士国家卫生服务体系(NHS)中常规使用msu尚未得到考虑,因此不存在其运作途径。本研究旨在共同设计一个可行的途径,详细的调度,人员配置和治疗决策,为msu在NHS背景下。方法:本研究采用跨学科共同设计和名义群体技术(NGT)来产生共识。参与者是通过有目的、机会主义和滚雪球抽样的结合来招募的。数据收集通过在线研讨会进行,共三轮,必要时进行补充访谈。数据分析是一个持续的过程,参与者在每一轮后检查解释,然后进一步进行演绎分析,以确定所有回合后的关键不确定性。NGT的共识阈值先验设定为≥80%。结果:考虑到当前的系统和压力,在NHS内达成可行共识的MSU途径被开发出来。确定了关键的不确定性,例如在哪里建立MSU。我们还确定了参与者在共同设计的路径中必须做出权衡的地方,例如人员配置方面的考虑。总之,不确定性和权衡对MSU的实施构成了挑战,并与实现最终路径的过程一起呈现。我们亦探讨了可能对管理单位的实施产生影响的未来发展。结论:共同设计的MSU途径为MSU在英格兰和威尔士NHS的实施提供了基础,并且可以根据实施所需的地方和区域修改。然而,最佳实施可能会受到一些不确定性和权衡的阻碍,包括MSU的地理基础和人员配置,这些都是大规模实施MSU的挑战。急性中风护理的未来发展可能有助于减轻这些挑战,例如人工智能读取扫描的发展和远程医疗的改善。临床试验号:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Emergency Medicine
BMC Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Emergency Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all urgent and emergency aspects of medicine, in both practice and basic research. In addition, the journal covers aspects of disaster medicine and medicine in special locations, such as conflict areas and military medicine, together with articles concerning healthcare services in the emergency departments.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信