Cited by 38Healthcare Quality and ManagementAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementHealth Policy Implementation Science

A cluster-randomized trial to improve stroke care in hospitals

Open access
Lakshminarayan, K., Borbas, C., McLaughlin, B., Morris, N.E., Vazquez, G., Luepker, R.V., Anderson, D.C.·2010·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effect of performance feedback on acute ischemic stroke care quality in Minnesota hospitals. METHODS: A cluster-randomized controlled trial design with hospital as the unit of randomization was used. Care quality was defined as adherence to 10 performance measures grouped into acute, in-hospital, and discharge care. Following preintervention data collection, all hospitals received a report on baseline care quality. Additionally, in experimental hospitals, clinical opinion leaders delivered customized feedback to care providers and study personnel worked with hospital administrators to implement changes targeting identified barriers to stroke care. Multilevel models examined experimental vs control, preintervention and postintervention performance changes and secular trends in performance. RESULTS: Nineteen hospitals were randomized with a total of 1,211 acute ischemic stroke cases preintervention and 1,094 cases postintervention. Secular trends were significant with improvement in both experimental and control hospitals for acute (odds ratio = 2.7, p = 0.007) and in-hospital (odds ratio = 1.5, p < 0.0001) care but not discharge care. There was no significant intervention effect for acute, in-hospital, or discharge care. CONCLUSION: There was no definite intervention effect: both experimental and control hospitals showed significant secular trends with performance improvement. Our results illustrate the potential fallacy of using historical controls for evaluating quality improvement interventions. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that informing hospital leaders of compliance with ischemic stroke quality indicators followed by a structured quality improvement intervention did not significantly improve compliance more than informing hospital leaders of compliance with stroke quality indicators without a quality improvement intervention.

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 · 10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181df096b

Cites

31 of 31 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

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Zimmerman JE, Shortell SM, Rousseau DM, et al. Im- proving intensive care: observations based on organiza- tional case studies in nine intensive care units: a prospective, multicenter study. Crit Care Med 1993;21: 1443-1451.
  2. Borbas C, McLaughlin DB, Schultz A. The Minnesota Clinical Comparison and Assessment Program: bridging the gap between clinical practice guidelines and patient care. In: Zablocki E, ed. Changing Physician Practice Pat- terns: Strategies for Success in a Capitated World. Gaith- ersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers Inc.; 1995:29.
  3. Hiss RG, MacDonald R, David WR. Identification of physician educational influentials in small community hospitals. Res Med Educ 1978;17:283-288.
  4. Ukoumunne OC, Thompson SG. Analysis of cluster ran- domized trials with repeated cross-sectional binary mea- surements. Stat Med 2001;20:417-433.
  5. Murray DM. Design and Analysis of Group-Randomized Trials. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.
  6. Alberts MJ, Hademenos G, Latchaw RE, et al. Recom- mendations for the establishment of primary stroke cen- ters: Brain Attack Coalition. JAMA 2000;283:3102-3109.
  7. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage Publications Ltd.; 1997.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lakshminarayan, K., Borbas, C., McLaughlin, B., Morris, N. E., Vazquez, G., Luepker, R. V., & Anderson, D. C.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Venue
Neurology
Published
2010-05-18
Volume
74
Issue
20
Pages
1634-1642
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2002421485
Cited by
38
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Heart Association
  • American Academy of Neurology
  • Northwestern University
  • Harvard University
  • University of Minnesota
  • Hennepin County Medical Center
  • Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation
  • Lunds Universitet
  • Hyderabad Eye Research Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (NHLBI R01)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (U18HS11073)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K23NS051377)
  • National Center for Research Resources
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
acute ischemic stroke, stroke care quality, performance feedback, quality improvement intervention, hospital quality indicators, historical controls, secular trends, discharge care, inpatient care
MeSH terms
Hospitals, Humans, Quality of Health Care, United States, Chi-Square Distribution, Odds Ratio, Total Quality Management, Health Care Surveys, Guideline Adherence, Stroke, Intention to Treat Analysis

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