Objective: To investigate patients' and carers' experiences of Early Supported Discharge services and inform future Early Supported Discharge service development and provision. Design and subjects: Semi-structured interviews were completed with 27 stroke patients and 15 carers in the Nottinghamshire region who met evidence-based Early Supported Discharge service eligibility criteria. Participants were either receiving Early Supported Discharge or conventional services. Setting: Community stroke services in Nottinghamshire, UK. Results: A thematic analysis process was applied to identify similarities and differences across datasets. Themes specific to participants receiving Early Supported Discharge services were: the home-based form of rehabilitation; speed of response; intensity and duration of therapy; respite time for the carer; rehabilitation exercises and provision of technical equipment; disjointed transition between Early Supported Discharge and ongoing rehabilitation services. Participants receiving Early Supported Discharge or conventional community services experienced difficulties related to: limited support in dealing with carer strain; lack of education and training of carers; inadequate provision and delivery of stroke-related information; disjointed transition between Early Supported Discharge and ongoing rehabilitation services. Conclusions: Accelerated hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation was perceived positively by service users. The study findings highlight the need for Early Supported Discharge teams to address information and support needs of patients and carers and to monitor their impact on carers in addition to patients, using robust outcome measures.

Objectives: To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals and commissioners working with a stroke Early Supported Discharge service in relation to: (1) the factors that facilitate or impede the implementation of the service, and (2) the impact of the service. Design: Cross-sectional qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed by two researchers using a thematic analysis approach. Setting: Two Early Supported Discharge services in Nottinghamshire. Participants: Purposive sampling identified 35 key informants including practitioners, managers and commissioners. Results: The identified facilitators to the implementation of evidence-based services were: (1) the adaptability of the intervention to the healthcare context, (2) the role of rehabilitation assistants and (3) cross-service working arrangements. Perceived challenges included: (1) lack of clarity regarding the referral decision making process, (2) delays in securing social care input and (3) lack of appropriate followon services in the region. Most respondents perceived the impact of the services to be: (1) reducing inhospital stay, (2) aiding the seamless transfer of care from hospital to the community and (3) providing intensive stroke specific therapy. Commissioners called for greater evidence of service impact and clarity regarding where it fits into the stroke pathway. Conclusions: Early Supported Discharge services were perceived as successful in providing homebased, stroke specific rehabilitation. Teams would benefit from capitalising on identified facilitators and developing strategies to address the challenges. The remit and impact of the services should be clear and demonstrable, with teams strengthening links with other health and social care providers.

Background In England, the provision of early supported discharge is recommended as part of an evidence-based stroke care pathway. Objectives To investigate the effectiveness of early supported discharge services when implemented at scale in practice and to understand how the context within which these services operate influences their implementation and effectiveness. Design A mixed-methods study using a realist evaluation approach and two interlinking work packages was undertaken. Three programme theories were tested to investigate the adoption of evidence-based core components, differences in urban and rural settings, and communication processes. Setting and interventions Early supported discharge services across a large geographical area of England, covering the West and East Midlands, the East of England and the North of England. Participants Work package 1: historical prospective patient data from the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme collected by early supported discharge and hospital teams. Work package 2: NHS staff (n = 117) and patients (n = 30) from six purposely selected early supported discharge services. Data and main outcome Work package 1: a 17-item early supported discharge consensus score measured the adherence to evidence-based core components defined in an international consensus document. The effectiveness of early supported discharge was measured with process and patient outcomes and costs. Work package 2: semistructured interviews and focus groups with NHS staff and patients were undertaken to investigate the contextual determinants of early supported discharge effectiveness. Results A variety of early supported discharge service models had been adopted, as reflected by the variability in the early supported discharge consensus score. A one-unit increase in early supported discharge consensus score was significantly associated with a more responsive early supported discharge service and increased treatment intensity. There was no association with stroke survivor outcome. Patients who received early supported discharge in their stroke care pathway spent, on average, 1 day longer in hospital than those who did not receive early supported discharge. The most rural services had the highest service costs per patient. NHS staff identified core evidence-based components (e.g. eligibility criteria, co-ordinated multidisciplinary team and regular weekly multidisciplinary team meetings) as central to the effectiveness of early supported discharge. Mechanisms thought to streamline discharge and help teams to meet their responsiveness targets included having access to a social worker and the quality of communications and transitions across services. The role of rehabilitation assistants and an interdisciplinary approach were facilitators of delivering an intensive service. The rurality of early supported discharge services, especially when coupled with capacity issues and increased travel times to visit patients, could influence the intensity of rehabilitation provision and teams’ flexibility to adjust to patients’ needs. This required organising multidisciplinary teams and meetings around the local geography. Findings also highlighted the importance of good leadership and communication. Early supported discharge staff highlighted the need for collaborative and trusting relationships with patients and carers and stroke unit staff, as well as across the wider stroke care pathway. Limitations Work package 1: possible influence of unobserved variables and we were unable to determine the effect of early supported discharge on patient outcomes. Work package 2: the pragmatic approach led to ‘theoretical nuggets’ rather than an overarching higher-level theory. Conclusions The realist evaluation methodology allowed us to address the complexity of early supported discharge delivery in real-world settings. The findings highlighted the importance of context and contextual features and mechanisms that need to be either addressed or capitalised on to improve effectiveness. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15568163. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background Stroke Early Supported Discharge (ESD) is a service innovation that facilitates discharge from hospital and delivery of specialist rehabilitation in patients’ homes. There is currently widespread implementation of ESD services in many countries, driven by robust clinical trial evidence. In England, the type of ESD service patients receive on the ground is variable, and in some regions, ESD is still not offered at all. This protocol presents a study designed to investigate the mechanisms and outcomes of implementing ESD at scale in real-world conditions. This will help to establish which models of ESD are most effective and in what context. Methods A realist evaluation approach composed of two interlinking work packages will be adopted to investigate how and why ESD works, for whom and in what circumstances. Work package 1 (WP1) will begin with a rapid evidence synthesis to formulate preliminary realist hypotheses. Quantitative analyses of historical prospective Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP) data will be performed to evaluate service outcomes based on the degree to which evidence-based ESD has been implemented. Work package 2 (WP2) will involve the qualitative investigation of purposively selected case study sites featuring in WP1 and covering different regions in England. The perspectives of clinicians, managers, commissioners, and service users will be explored qualitatively. Cost implications of ESD models will be examined using a cost-consequence analysis. Cross-case comparisons and triangulation of the data sources from both work packages will be performed to test, revise, and refine initial programme theories and address research aims. Discussion This study will investigate whether and how current large-scale implementation of ESD is achieving the outcomes suggested by the evidence base. The theory-driven evaluation approach will highlight key mechanisms and contextual conditions necessary to optimise outcomes and allow us to draw transferable lessons to inform the effective implementation and sustainability of ESD in clinical practice. In addition, the methodological framework will progress the theoretical understanding of implementation and evaluation of complex rehabilitation interventions in stroke care. Trial registration ISRCTN: 15568163, registration date: 26 October 2018.

ObjectiveThe first observational study to investigate the impact of early supported discharge (ESD) on length of hospital stay in real-world conditions.DesignUsing historical prospective Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP) data (1 January 2013–31 December 2016) and multilevel modelling, cross-sectional (2015–2016; 30 791 patients nested within 55 hospitals) and repeated cross-sectional (2013–2014 vs 2015–2016; 49 266 patients nested within 41 hospitals) analyses were undertaken.SettingHospitals were sampled across a large geographical area of England covering the West and East Midlands, the East of England and the North of England.ParticipantsStroke patients whose data were entered into the SSNAP database by hospital teams.InterventionsReceiving ESD along the patient care pathway.Primary and secondary outcome measuresLength of hospital stay.ResultsWhen adjusted for important case-mix variables, patients who received ESD on their stroke care pathway spent longer in hospital, compared with those who did not receive ESD. The percentage increase was 15.8% (95% CI 12.3% to 19.4%) for the 2015–2016 cross-sectional analysis and 18.8% (95% CI 13.9% to 24.0%) for the 2013–2014 versus 2015–2016 repeated cross-sectional analysis. On average, the increased length of hospital stay was approximately 1 day.ConclusionsThis study has shown that by comparing ESD and non-ESD patient groups matched for important patient characteristics, receiving ESD resulted in a 1-day increase in length of hospital stay. The large reduction in length of hospital stay overall, since original trials were conducted, may explain why a reduction was not observed. The longer term benefits of accessing ESD need to be investigated further.Trial registration numberhttp://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15568163.

ObjectiveTo identify patient-perceived benefits of memory rehabilitation and draw transferrable lessons for the delivery and evaluation of similar interventions for people with neurological disabilities.MethodsA qualitative study was conducted as part of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing 2 memory rehabilitation approaches with a self-help control group. Postintervention interviews were conducted with 20 participants with a diagnosis of traumatic brain injury, multiple sclerosis or stroke. Data were analysed using a qualitative content analysis approach.ResultsParticipants receiving memory rehabilitation reported that the sessions responded to previously unmet needs for information on brain injury and memory function and developed their insight along with a sense of self-efficacy and control over the management of their memory problems. Although they did not experience major improvements in their memory function per se, they reported that rehabilitation gave them the skills to effectively cope with the residual deficits. Respondents in the control groups did not report similar benefits. The opportunities for interaction offered by the group setting were greatly valued by all respondents. Mixed aetiology groups were received positively; however, marked differences in cognitive performance were frustrating for some participants.ConclusionsThe study highlighted important patient-perceived outcomes that should be considered by researchers and rehabilitation professionals when evaluating the effects of memory rehabilitation. The use of domain-specific outcome measures which reflect these areas is recommended. Qualitative changes in the use of memory aids may be achieved which cannot be captured by frequency indices alone. The benefits of the group-based rehabilitation approach were stressed by participants, suggesting that a combination of group and individual sessions might be a good practice.Trial registration numberISRCTN92582254; Results.

Background Implementation of stroke early supported discharge (ESD) services has been recommended in many countries’ clinical guidelines, based on clinical trial evidence. This is the first observational study to investigate the effectiveness of ESD service models operating in real-world conditions, at scale. Methods AND RESULTS Using historical prospective data from the United Kingdom Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (January 1, 2016–December 31, 2016), measures of ESD effectiveness were “days to ESD” (number of days from hospital discharge to first ESD contact; n=6222), “rehabilitation intensity” (total number of treatment days/total days with ESD; n=5891), and stroke survivor outcome (modified Rankin scale at ESD discharge; n=6222). ESD service models (derived from Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme postacute organizational audit data) were categorized with a 17-item score, reflecting adoption of ESD consensus core components (evidence-based criteria). Multilevel modeling analysis was undertaken as patients were clustered within ESD teams across the Midlands, East, and North of England (n=31). A variety of ESD service models had been adopted, as reflected by variability in the ESD consensus score. Controlling for patient characteristics and Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme hospital score, a 1-unit increase in ESD consensus score was significantly associated with a more responsive ESD service (reduced odds of patient being seen after ≥1 day of 29% [95% CI, 1%–49%] and increased treatment intensity by 2% [95% CI, 0.3%–4%]). There was no association with stroke survivor outcome measured by the modified Rankin Scale. Conclusions This study has shown that adopting defined core components of ESD is associated with providing a more responsive and intensive ESD service. This shows that adherence to evidence-based criteria is likely to result in a more effective ESD service as defined by process measures. REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.isrctn.com/ ; Unique identifier: ISRCTN15568163.

Background Stroke Early Supported Discharge (ESD) involves provision of responsive and intensive rehabilitation to stroke survivors at home and it is recommended as part of the stroke care pathway. Core components have been identified to guide the delivery of evidence-based ESD, however, service provision in England is of variable quality. The study sought to understand how and in what conditions the adoption of these components drives the delivery of responsive and intensive ESD services in real world settings. Methods This qualitative study was part of a wider multimethod realist evaluation project (WISE) conducted to inform large-scale ESD implementation. Overarching programme theories and related context–mechanism–outcome configurations were used as a framework to guide data collection and analysis. Six case study sites were purposively selected; interviews and focus groups with ESD staff members were conducted and analysed iteratively. Results We interviewed 117 ESD staff members including clinicians and service managers. Staff highlighted the role of certain core components including eligibility criteria, capacity, team composition and multidisciplinary team (MDT) coordination in achieving responsive and intensive ESD. Regardless of the geographical setting, adhering to evidence-based selection criteria, promoting an interdisciplinary skillset and supporting the role of rehabilitation assistants, allowed teams to manage capacity issues and maximise therapy time. Gaps in the stroke care pathway, however, meant that teams had to problem solve beyond their remit to cater for the complex needs of patients with severe disabilities. Adjusting MDT structures and processes was seen as key in addressing challenges posed by travel times and rural geography. Conclusions Despite variations in the wider service model of operation and geographical location, the adoption of core components of ESD helped teams manage the pressures and deliver services that met evidence-based standards. Findings point to a well-recognised gap in service provision in England for stroke survivors who do not meet the ESD criteria and emphasise the need for a more integrated and comprehensive stroke service provision. Transferable lessons could be drawn to inform improvement interventions aimed at promoting evidence-based service delivery in different settings. Trial registration ISRCTN: 15,568,163, registration date: 26 October 2018.