ArticleBMC health services research2026
Barriers and facilitators to implementation of the Free Water Protocol - findings from a national survey of acute stroke unit staff.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Free Water Protocol (FWP) offers patients who are at risk of aspiration with thin fluids the option to drink water under controlled conditions to enhance quality of life and hydration while minimising respiratory complications. Research supports its use in selected patients in rehabilitation settings, however evidence in acute stroke is limited. This study aimed to investigate the barriers and facilitators to the FWP implementation from the perspectives of professionals working in acute stroke units in the United Kingdom to inform a future feasibility study. A national web-based survey was undertaken of acute stroke unit staff, including speech and language pathologists, nurses, doctors, dietitians, and support staff. The survey, informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, explored perceived barriers and facilitators towards the FWP implementation. Responses (N = 171) highlighted key barriers such as concerns around risks of aspiration and chest infections, complexity of patient selection, training challenges, oral hygiene practices, high workload, staffing levels and high turnover of staff disrupting implementation, and lack of clinical guidelines and clear governance. Facilitators included supporting evidence, perceived patient benefits, strong multidisciplinary team (MDT) collaboration, leadership by senior clinicians, effective communication, and adaptability of the FWP specifically patient selection and delivery methods among the FWP users. Successful FWP implementation in acute stroke units depends on overcoming risk aversion, strengthening MDT working, enhancing education and training, and embedding robust mouthcare protocols. These findings will guide stakeholder workshops to codesign an implementation strategy for a feasibility study in an acute stroke unit setting.
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.