ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Improving access and efficiency of acute ischemic stroke treatment across four Canadian provinces: a stepped-wedge trial.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The translation of standard-of-care in acute ischemic stroke reperfusion interventions into practice is well established, but multifactorial obstacles exist in complete adoption, which has led to inequities in access and delivery of services. The objective of this study was to improve access and efficiency of ischemic stroke treatment across four Atlantic Canadian Provinces. Methods: A stepped-wedge cluster trial was conducted over 30 months with 3 clusters covering 34 sites. The trial was conducted across all 4 Atlantic Canadian provinces: Nova Scotia (NS), New Brunswick (NB), Prince Edward Island (PE), and Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). The design was quasi-randomized, with each cluster associated with one or more provinces: cluster 1-NS; cluster 2-NB and PE; and cluster 3-NL. The patient population was all ischemic stroke patients across all 4 provinces. The intervention was a 6-month modified Quality Improvement Collaborative (mQIC), which was modified from the Breakthrough Series Collaborative to be half of the 1-year period and conducted virtually. The intervention consisted of assembling an interdisciplinary improvement team, 2 full-day workshops, webinars, and virtual site visits. Suggested changes included 6 process improvement strategies. Results: Over the trial period, 8,594 ischemic stroke patients were included, out of which 1,599 patients received acute reperfusion treatment. The proportion of patients that received treatment did not increase significantly with the intervention [0.4% increase for patients that received thrombolysis and/or EVT ( Conclusion: A mQIC intervention resulted in improvement of process measures like door-to-needle time. Quality improvement initiatives may need to be longer to allow full implementation and tailored for each health system to ensure that each system sees improvement. In-person activities might be critical to ensure fidelity of the intervention. Clinical trial registration: ISRCTN11109800, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11109800.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.