Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24736035›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2014

Introducing structured caregiver training in stroke care: findings from the TRACS process evaluation study.

David J Clarke, R Hawkins, E Sadler, G Harding, C McKevitt, M Godfrey, J Dickerson, A J Farrin, L Kalra, D Smithard and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 26 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Association of Caregiver Availability and Training With Patient Community Discharge After Stroke.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Addressing inactivity after stroke: The Collaborative Rehabilitation in Acute Stroke (CREATE) study.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

David J ClarkeBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust and University of Leeds, Bradford, UK.
R Hawkins
E Sadler
G Harding
C McKevitt
M Godfrey
J Dickerson
A J Farrin
L Kalra
D Smithard
A Forster

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0407-13308Medical Research Council G0501807
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the process of implementation of the modified London Stroke Carers Training Course (LSCTC) in the Training Caregivers After Stroke (TRACS) cluster randomised trial and contribute to the interpretation of the TRACS trial results. The LSCTC was a structured competency-based training programme designed to help develop the knowledge and skills (eg, patient handling or transfer skills) essential for the day-to-day management of disabled survivors of stroke. The LSCTC comprised 14 components, 6 were mandatory (and delivered to all) and 8 non-mandatory, to be delivered based on individual assessment of caregiver need.

designProcess evaluation using non-participant observation, documentary analysis and semistructured interviews.

participantsPatients with stroke (n=38), caregivers (n=38), stroke unit staff (n=53). SETTINGS: 10 of the 36 stroke units participating in the TRACS trial in four English regions (Yorkshire, North West, South East and South West, Peninsula).

resultsPreparatory cascade training on delivery of the LSCTC did not reach all staff and did not lead to multidisciplinary team (MDT) wide understanding of, engagement with or commitment to the LSCTC. Although senior therapists in most intervention units observed developed ownership of the LSCTC, MDT working led to separation rather than integration of delivery of LSCTC elements. Organisational features of stroke units and professionals' patient-focused practices limited the involvement of caregivers. Caregivers were often invited to observe therapy or care being provided by professionals but had few opportunities to make sense of, or to develop knowledge and stroke-specific skills provided by the LSCTC. Where provided, caregiver training came very late in the inpatient stay. Assessment and development of caregiver competence was not commonly observed.

conclusionsContextual factors including service improvement pressures and staff perceptions of the necessity for and work required in caregiver training impacted negatively on implementation of the caregiver training intervention. Structured caregiver training programmes such as the LSCTC are unlikely to be practical in settings with short inpatient stays. Stroke units where early supported discharge is in place potentially offer a more effective vehicle for introducing competency based caregiver training. LINKED TRACS CLUSTER RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL NUMBER: ISRCTN49208824.

Indexed as

Process Assessment, Health CareStroke RehabilitationActivities of Daily LivingAgedCaregiversEnglandFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchQuality of LifeQualitative ResearchRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID24736035
PMCPMC4010820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.