Protocol for a feasibility registry-based randomised controlled trial investigating a tailored follow-up service for stroke (A-LISTS)
Dominique A Cadilhac,Andrew G Ross,Kathleen L Bagot,Jannette M Blennerhassett,Monique F Kilkenny,Joosup Kim,Tara Purvis,Karen M Barclay,Fiona Ellery,Julie Morrison,Jennifer Cranefield,Timothy J Kleinig,Rohan Grimley,Katherine Jaques,Dana Wong,Lisa Murphy,Grant Russell,Mark R Nelson,Vincent Thijs,Colin Scott,Sandy Middleton,A-LISTS investigator group
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-024-01527-y
2024-07-30
Abstract:Background: Stroke affects long-term physical and cognitive function; many survivors report unmet health needs, such as pain or depression. A hospital-led follow-up service designed to address ongoing health problems may avoid unplanned readmissions and improve quality of life. Methods: This paper outlines the protocol for a registry-based, randomised controlled trial with allocation concealment of participants and outcome assessors. Based on an intention-to-treat analysis, we will evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, potential effectiveness and cost implications of a new tailored, codesigned, hospital-led follow-up service for people within 6-12 months of stroke. Participants (n = 100) from the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry who report extreme health problems on the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L survey between 90 and 180 days after stroke will be randomly assigned (1:1) to intervention (follow-up service) or control (usual care) groups. All participants will be independently assessed at baseline and 12-14-week post-randomisation. Primary outcomes for feasibility are the proportion of participants completing the trial and for intervention participants the proportion that received follow-up services. Acceptability is satisfaction of clinicians and participants involved in the intervention. Secondary outcomes include effectiveness: change in extreme health problems (EQ-5D-3L), unmet needs (Longer-term Unmet Needs questionnaire), unplanned presentations and hospital readmission, functional independence (modified Rankin Scale) and cost implications estimated from self-reported health service utilisation and productivity (e.g. workforce participation). To inform future research or implementation, the design contains a process evaluation including clinical protocol fidelity and an economic evaluation. Discussion: The results of this study will provide improved knowledge of service design and implementation barriers and facilitators and associated costs and resource implications to inform a future fully powered effectiveness trial of the intervention. Trial registration: ACTRN12622001015730pr. Trial sponsor: Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, 245 Burgundy Street, Heidelberg, VIC, 3084, PH: +61 3 9035 7032.