Cited by 87Health Policy Implementation ScienceAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementClinical practice guidelines implementation

Identifying the barriers and enablers for a triage, treatment, and transfer clinical intervention to manage acute stroke patients in the emergency department: a systematic review using the theoretical domains framework (TDF)

Open access
Craig, Louise E., McInnes, Elizabeth, Taylor, Natalie, Grimley, Rohan, Cadilhac, Dominique A., Considine, Julie, Middleton, Sandy·2016·Implementation Science

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend that assessment and management of patients with stroke commences early including in emergency departments (ED). To inform the development of an implementation intervention targeted in ED, we conducted a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies to identify relevant barriers and enablers to six key clinical behaviours in acute stroke care: appropriate triage, thrombolysis administration, monitoring and management of temperature, blood glucose levels, and of swallowing difficulties and transfer of stroke patients in ED. METHODS: Studies of any design, conducted in ED, where barriers or enablers based on primary data were identified for one or more of these six clinical behaviours. Major biomedical databases (CINAHL, OVID SP EMBASE, OVID SP MEDLINE) were searched using comprehensive search strategies. The barriers and enablers were categorised using the theoretical domains framework (TDF). The behaviour change technique (BCT) that best aligned to the strategy each enabler represented was selected for each of the reported enablers using a standard taxonomy. RESULTS: Five qualitative studies and four surveys out of the 44 studies identified met the selection criteria. The majority of barriers reported corresponded with the TDF domains of "environmental, context and resources" (such as stressful working conditions or lack of resources) and "knowledge" (such as lack of guideline awareness or familiarity). The majority of enablers corresponded with the domains of "knowledge" (such as education for physicians on the calculated risk of haemorrhage following intravenous thrombolysis [tPA]) and "skills" (such as providing opportunity to treat stroke cases of varying complexity). The total number of BCTs assigned was 18. The BCTs most frequently assigned to the reported enablers were "focus on past success" and "information about health consequences." CONCLUSIONS: Barriers and enablers for the delivery of key evidence-based protocols in an emergency setting have been identified and interpreted within a relevant theoretical framework. This new knowledge has since been used to select specific BCTs to implement evidence-based care in an ED setting. It is recommended that findings from similar future reviews adopt a similar theoretical approach. In particular, the use of existing matrices to assist the selection of relevant BCTs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13012-016-0524-1

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Craig, L. E., McInnes, E., Taylor, N., Grimley, R., Cadilhac, D. A., Considine, J., & Middleton, S.
Affiliations
  • Nursing Research Institute (AU)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Deakin University (AU)
Corresponding author
Craig, Louise E.
Venue
Implementation Science
Published
2016-11-28
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
157-157
ISSN
1748-5908 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2558253728
Cited by
87
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Implementation Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Australian Catholic University (1063761)
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1024812, 1063761)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
acute stroke, emergency department, stroke triage, intravenous thrombolysis, tissue plasminogen activator, patient transfer, temperature control, glycemic control, dysphagia, barriers and facilitators, Theoretical Domains Framework, behaviour change techniques, guideline implementation, clinician knowledge and skills
MeSH terms
Adult, Clinical Competence, Deglutition Disorders, Emergency Service, Hospital, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Medical Staff, Hospital, Patient Transfer, Tissue Plasminogen Activator, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Self Concept, Triage, Stroke, Professional Role, Intention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review