Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into prac...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into practice: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineReview articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into practice: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. / Bird, Marie Louise; Miller, Tiev; Connell, Louise A. et al.
In: Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 33, No. 10, 01.10.2019, p. 1586-1595.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineReview articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bird ML, Miller T, Connell LA, Eng JJ. Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into practice: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2019 Oct 1;33(10):1586-1595. Epub 2019 May 8. doi: 10.1177/0269215519847253

Author

Bird, Marie Louise ; Miller, Tiev ; Connell, Louise A. et al. / Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into practice : a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. In: Clinical Rehabilitation. 2019 ; Vol. 33, No. 10. pp. 1586-1595.

Bibtex

@article{e24460ebf7da4858a32b291d6f373030,
title = "Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into practice: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials",
abstract = "Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at moving research evidence into stroke rehabilitation practice through changing the practice of clinicians. Data sources: EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane and MEDLINE databases were searched from 1980 to April 2019. International trial registries and reference lists of included studies completed our search. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials that involved interventions aiming to change the practice of clinicians working in stroke rehabilitation were included. Bias was evaluated using RevMan to generate a risk of bias table. Evidence quality was evaluated using GRADE criteria. Results: A total of 16 trials were included (250 sites, 14,689 patients), evaluating a range of interventions including facilitation, audit and feedback, education and reminders. Of which, 11 studies included multicomponent interventions (using a combination of interventions). Four used educational interventions alone, and one used electronic reminders. Risk of bias was generally low. Overall, the GRADE criteria indicated that this body of literature was of low quality. This review found higher efficacy of trials which targeted fewer outcomes. Subgroup analysis indicated moderate-level GRADE evidence (103 sites, 10,877 patients) that trials which included both site facilitation and tailoring for local factors were effective in changing clinical practice. The effect size of these varied (odds ratio: 1.63–4.9). Education interventions alone were not effective. Conclusion: A large range of interventions are used to facilitate clinical practice change. Education is commonly used, but in isolation is not effective. Multicomponent interventions including facilitation and tailoring to local settings can change clinical practice and are more effective when targeting fewer changes.",
keywords = "clinical practice guidelines, clinician behaviour, knowledge translation, patient outcomes, rehabilitation, stroke, {\textquoteleft}Change in clinical practice{\textquoteright}",
author = "Bird, {Marie Louise} and Tiev Miller and Connell, {Louise A.} and Eng, {Janice J.}",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2019.",
year = "2019",
month = oct,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0269215519847253",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "1586--1595",
journal = "Clinical Rehabilitation",
issn = "0269-2155",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "10",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Moving stroke rehabilitation evidence into practice

T2 - a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

AU - Bird, Marie Louise

AU - Miller, Tiev

AU - Connell, Louise A.

AU - Eng, Janice J.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2019.

PY - 2019/10/1

Y1 - 2019/10/1

N2 - Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at moving research evidence into stroke rehabilitation practice through changing the practice of clinicians. Data sources: EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane and MEDLINE databases were searched from 1980 to April 2019. International trial registries and reference lists of included studies completed our search. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials that involved interventions aiming to change the practice of clinicians working in stroke rehabilitation were included. Bias was evaluated using RevMan to generate a risk of bias table. Evidence quality was evaluated using GRADE criteria. Results: A total of 16 trials were included (250 sites, 14,689 patients), evaluating a range of interventions including facilitation, audit and feedback, education and reminders. Of which, 11 studies included multicomponent interventions (using a combination of interventions). Four used educational interventions alone, and one used electronic reminders. Risk of bias was generally low. Overall, the GRADE criteria indicated that this body of literature was of low quality. This review found higher efficacy of trials which targeted fewer outcomes. Subgroup analysis indicated moderate-level GRADE evidence (103 sites, 10,877 patients) that trials which included both site facilitation and tailoring for local factors were effective in changing clinical practice. The effect size of these varied (odds ratio: 1.63–4.9). Education interventions alone were not effective. Conclusion: A large range of interventions are used to facilitate clinical practice change. Education is commonly used, but in isolation is not effective. Multicomponent interventions including facilitation and tailoring to local settings can change clinical practice and are more effective when targeting fewer changes.

AB - Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at moving research evidence into stroke rehabilitation practice through changing the practice of clinicians. Data sources: EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane and MEDLINE databases were searched from 1980 to April 2019. International trial registries and reference lists of included studies completed our search. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials that involved interventions aiming to change the practice of clinicians working in stroke rehabilitation were included. Bias was evaluated using RevMan to generate a risk of bias table. Evidence quality was evaluated using GRADE criteria. Results: A total of 16 trials were included (250 sites, 14,689 patients), evaluating a range of interventions including facilitation, audit and feedback, education and reminders. Of which, 11 studies included multicomponent interventions (using a combination of interventions). Four used educational interventions alone, and one used electronic reminders. Risk of bias was generally low. Overall, the GRADE criteria indicated that this body of literature was of low quality. This review found higher efficacy of trials which targeted fewer outcomes. Subgroup analysis indicated moderate-level GRADE evidence (103 sites, 10,877 patients) that trials which included both site facilitation and tailoring for local factors were effective in changing clinical practice. The effect size of these varied (odds ratio: 1.63–4.9). Education interventions alone were not effective. Conclusion: A large range of interventions are used to facilitate clinical practice change. Education is commonly used, but in isolation is not effective. Multicomponent interventions including facilitation and tailoring to local settings can change clinical practice and are more effective when targeting fewer changes.

KW - clinical practice guidelines

KW - clinician behaviour

KW - knowledge translation

KW - patient outcomes

KW - rehabilitation

KW - stroke

KW - ‘Change in clinical practice’

U2 - 10.1177/0269215519847253

DO - 10.1177/0269215519847253

M3 - Review article

C2 - 31066289

AN - SCOPUS:85065670709

VL - 33

SP - 1586

EP - 1595

JO - Clinical Rehabilitation

JF - Clinical Rehabilitation

SN - 0269-2155

IS - 10

ER -