Assessing feasibility and acceptability of study procedures: Getting ready for implementation of national stroke guidelines in out-patient health care

BMC Health Services Research

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Palmcrantz, Susanne ^a,b   Tistad, Malin ^a,c   Eldh, Ann Catrine ^a,c   Holmqvist, Lotta Widén ^a,d   Ehrenberg, Anna ^c   Tomson, Göran ^a   Olsson, Christina B ^a,e   Wallin, Lars ^a,c  

^a KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^b DANDERYD HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c DALARNA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^d KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^e STOCKHOLM COUNTY COUNCIL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Acceptability; Feasibility; Guidelines; Implementation; Stroke

Indexed keywords

AGED; AMBULATORY CARE; EVALUATION STUDY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANIZATION; OUTPATIENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; STROKE REHABILITATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AMBULATORY CARE; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE; OUTPATIENTS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; STROKE REHABILITATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84947726365     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12913-015-1177-5     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Norrving B, Wester P, Sunnerhagen KS, Terent A, Sohlberg A, Berggren F, et al. Beyond conventional stroke guidelines: setting priorities. Stroke. 2007;38:2185-90.
2. The Swedish National Audit Office. The Swedish Parliament. http://www.riksrevisionen.se/PageFiles/560/RiR-2004-9.pdf. Accessed Aug 2015.
3. The National Board of Health and Welfare. Nationella riktlinjerna för strokesjukvård http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/nationellariktlinjerforstrokesjukvard. Accessed Aug 2015.
4. The National Board of Health and Welfare. Nationell utvärdering 2011-Strokevård http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/publikationer2011/2011-11-2. Accessed Aug 2015.
5. Riksstroke The Swedish Stroke Register. Annual report 2011. http://www.riks-stroke.org/content/analyser/Rapport07.pdf. Accessed Aug 2015.
6. Riksstroke The Swedish Stroke Register. One year follow up 2012. http://www.riksstroke.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Strokerapport-2012-1års-web.pdf. Accessed Aug 2015.
7. Grimshaw JM, Eccles MP, Lavis JN, Hill SJ, Squires JE. Knowledge translation of research findings. Implement Sci. 2012;7:50.
8. Walker MF, Fisher RJ, Korner-Bitensky N, McCluskey A, Carey LM. From what we know to what we do: translating stroke rehabilitation research into practice. Int J Stroke. 2013;8:11-7.
9. Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, Seers K, Kitson A, McCormack B, Titchen A. An exploration of the factors that influence the implementation of evidence into practice. J Clin Nurs. 2004;13:913-24.
10. Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50.
11. Rycroft-Malone J, Kitson A, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A, et al. Ingredients for change: revisiting a conceptual framework. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002;11:174-80.
12. Kitson AL, Rycroft-Malone J, Harvey G, McCormack B, Seers K, Titchen A. Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges. Implement Sci. 2008;3:1.
13. Ovretveit J. Improvement leaders: what do they and should they do? A summary of a review of research. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19:490-2.
14. Stig K, Paulsson Lutz I, The National Board och Health and Welfare. Hälso- och sjukvårdens finansiering i Norden. Nordisk Medicinalstatistisk kommitté 2013. http://www.nowbase.dk/~/media/Projekt%20sites/Nowbase/Publikationer/Andre/Finansiering.ashx. Accessed Aug 2015.
15. The National Board of Health and Welfare: SOSFS 1997: 8 (M) Allmänna råd. Verksamhetschef inom hälso- och sjukvård. 1997. http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Lists/Artikelkatalog/Attachments/12721/1997-10-8.pdf. Accessed Aug 2015.
16. Whitehead AL, Sully BG, Campbell MJ. Pilot and feasibility studies: is there a difference from each other and from a randomised controlled trial? Contemp Clin Trials. 2014;38:130-3.
17. Richards DA. Complex interventions in health. An overview of research methods. London & New York: Routledge; 2015.
18. Feeley N, Cossette S, Cote J, Heon M, Stremler R, Martorella G, et al. The importance of piloting an RCT intervention. Can J Nurs Res. 2009;4:85-99.
19. Seers K, Cox K, Crichton NJ, Edwards RT, Eldh AC, Estabrooks CA, et al. FIRE (Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence): a study protocol. Implement Sci. 2012;7:25.
20. Riksstroke The Swedish Stroke Register. http://www.riksstroke.org/eng/. Accessed Aug 2015.
21. Spradley JP. Participant observation. USA: Wandsworth Thompson Learning; 1980.
22. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189-98.
23. Elo S, Kyngas H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62:107-15.
24. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24:105-12.
25. Ross S, Grant A, Counsell C, Gillespie W, Russell I, Prescott R. Barriers to participation in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:1143-56.
26. Donnellan C, Sweetman S, Shelley E. Health professionals' adherence to stroke clinical guidelines: a review of the literature. Health Policy. 2013;11:245-63.
27. Donnellan C, Sweetman S, Shelley E. Implementing clinical guidelines in stroke: a qualitative study of perceived facilitators and barriers. Health Policy. 2013;111:234-44.
28. Arias M, Smith LN. Early mobilization of acute stroke patients. J Clin Nurs. 2007;16:282-8.
29. Blackburn DJ, Walters S, Harkness K. Letter by Blackburn et al regarding article, "Is the Montreal cognitive assessment superior to the mini-mental state examination to detect poststroke cognitive impairment? A study with neuropsychological evaluation". Stroke. 2011;42:e582. author reply e583.
30. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61-5.
31. Duncan PW, Bode RK, Min Lai S, Perera S. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:950-63.
32. Duncan PW, Lai SM, Bode RK, Perera S, DeRosa J. Stroke impact scale-16: a brief assessment of physical function. Neurology. 2003;60:291-6.
33. Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI. The balance scale: reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with an acute stroke. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1995;27:27-36.
34. Hsieh CL, Hsueh IP, Mao HF. Validity and responsiveness of the rivermead mobility index in stroke patients. Scand J Rehabil Med. 2000;32:140-2.
35. Kosak M, Smith T. Comparison of the 2-, 6-, and 12-min walk tests in patients with stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42:103-7.
36. Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1982;14:377-81.
37. Sonn U, Asberg KH. Assessment of activities of daily living in the elderly. A study of a population of 76-year-olds in Gothenburg, Sweden. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1991;23:193-202.
38. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30:2131-40.