Search

Additional file 2. Search terms.

Background Stroke can affect people’s ability to swallow, resulting in passage of some food and drink into the airway. This can cause choking, chest infection, malnutrition and dehydration, reduced rehabilitation, increased risk of anxiety and depression, longer hospital stay, increased likelihood of discharge to a care home, and increased risk of death. Early identification and management of disordered swallowing reduces risk of these difficulties. Objectives Primary objective • To determine the diagnostic accuracy and the sensitivity and specificity of bedside screening tests for detecting risk of aspiration associated with dysphagia in people with acute stroke Secondary objectives • To assess the influence of the following sources of heterogeneity on the diagnostic accuracy of bedside screening tools for dysphagia ‐ Patient demographics (e.g. age, gender) ‐ Time post stroke that the study was conducted (from admission to 48 hours) to ensure only hyperacute and acute stroke swallow screening tools are identified ‐ Definition of dysphagia used by the study ‐ Level of training of nursing staff (both grade and training in the screening tool) ‐ Low‐quality studies identified from the methodological quality checklist ‐ Type and threshold of index test ‐ Type of reference test Search methods In June 2017 and December 2019, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database via the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; the reference lists of included studies; and grey literature sources. We contacted experts in the field to identify any ongoing studies and those potentially missed by the search strategy. Selection criteria We included studies that were single‐gate or two‐gate studies comparing a bedside screening tool administered by nurses or other healthcare professionals (HCPs) with expert or instrumental assessment for detection of aspiration associated with dysphagia in adults with acute stroke admitted to hospital. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently screened each study using the eligibility criteria and then extracted data, including the sensitivity and specificity of each index test against the reference test. A third review author was available at each stage to settle disagreements. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS‐2) tool. We identified insufficient studies for each index test, so we performed no meta‐analysis. Diagnostic accuracy data were presented as sensitivities and specificities for the index tests. Main results Overall, we included 25 studies in the review, four of which we included as narratives (with no accuracy statistics reported). The included studies involved 3953 participants and 37 screening tests. Of these, 24 screening tests used water only, six used water and other consistencies, and seven used other methods. For index tests using water only, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 46% to 100% and from 43% to 100%, respectively; for those using water and other consistencies, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 75% to 100% and from 69% to 90%, respectively; and for those using other methods, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 29% to 100% and from 39% to 86%, respectively. Twenty screening tests used expert assessment or the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) as the reference, six used fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), and 11 used videofluoroscopy (VF). Fifteen screening tools had an outcome of aspiration risk, 20 screening tools had an outcome of dysphagia, and two narrative papers did not report the outcome. Twenty‐one screening tests were carried out by nurses, and 16 were carried out by other HCPs (not including speech and language therapists (SLTs)). We assessed a total of six studies as low risk across all four QUADAS‐2 risk of bias domains, and we rated 15 studies as low concern across all three applicability domains. No single study demonstrated 100% sensitivity and specificity with low risk of bias for all domains. The best performing combined water swallow and instrumental tool was the Bedside Aspiration test (n = 50), the best performing water plus other consistencies tool was the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS; n = 30), and the best water only swallow screening tool was the Toronto Bedside Swallowing Screening Test (TOR‐BSST; n = 24). All tools demonstrated combined highest sensitivity and specificity and low risk of bias for all domains. However, clinicians should be cautious in their interpretation of these findings, as these tests are based on single studies with small sample sizes, which limits the estimates of reliability of screening tests. Authors' conclusions We were unable to identify a single swallow screening tool with high and precisely estimated sensitivity and specificity based on at least one trial with low risk of bias. However, we were able to offer recommendations for further high‐quality studies that are needed to improve the accuracy and clinical utility of bedside screening tools.

Supplemental material, WSO908140 Supplemental material for Prognostic significance of early urinary catheterization after acute stroke: Secondary analyses of the international HeadPoST trial by Menglu Ouyang, Laurent Billot, Lili Song, Xia Wang, Christine Roffe, Hisatomi Arima, Pablo M Lavados, Maree L Hackett, Verónica V Olavarría, Paula Muñoz-Venturelli, Sandy Middleton, Octavio M Pontes-Neto, Tsong-Hai Lee, Caroline L Watkins, Thompson G Robinson and Craig S Anderson in International Journal of Stroke

Supplemental material, Research Data1 for Establishment of an internationally agreed minimum data set for acute telestroke by Dominique A Cadilhac, Kathleen L Bagot, Bart M Demaerschalk, Gordian Hubert, Lee Schwamm, Caroline L Watkins, Catherine Elizabeth Lightbody, Joosup Kim, Michelle Vu, Nancy Pompeani, Jeffrey Switzer, Juanita Caudill, Juan Estrada, Anand Viswanathan, Nikolai Hubert, Robin Ohannessian, David Hargroves, Nicholas Roberts, Timothy Ingall, David C Hess, Annemarei Ranta, Vasantha Padma and Christopher F Bladin in Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

Supplemental material, JTT899262 Supplemental Material2 for Establishment of an internationally agreed minimum data set for acute telestroke by Dominique A Cadilhac, Kathleen L Bagot, Bart M Demaerschalk, Gordian Hubert, Lee Schwamm, Caroline L Watkins, Catherine Elizabeth Lightbody, Joosup Kim, Michelle Vu, Nancy Pompeani, Jeffrey Switzer, Juanita Caudill, Juan Estrada, Anand Viswanathan, Nikolai Hubert, Robin Ohannessian, David Hargroves, Nicholas Roberts, Timothy Ingall, David C Hess, Annemarei Ranta, Vasantha Padma and Christopher F Bladin in Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare

© 2020 European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved., Atrial fibrillation (AF) poses significant burden to patients, physicians, and healthcare systems globally. Substantial research efforts and resources are being directed towards gaining detailed information about the mechanisms underlying AF, its natural course and effective treatments (see also the ESC Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine: CardioMed) and new evidence is continuously generated and published. The complexity of AF requires a multifaceted, holistic, and multidisciplinary approach to the management of AF patients, with their active involvement in partnership with clinicians. Streamlining the care of patients with AF in daily clinical practice is a challenging but essential requirement for effective management of AF. In recent years, substantial progress has been made in the detection of AF and its management, and new evidence is timely integrated in this third edition of the ESC guidelines on AF. The 2016 ESC AF Guidelines introduced the concept of the five domains to facilitate an integrated structured approach to AF care and promote consistent, guideline-adherent management for all patients. The Atrial Fibrillation Better Care (ABC) approach in the 2020 ESC AF Guidelines is a continuum of this approach, with the goal to further improve the structured management of AF patients, promote patient values, and finally improve patient outcomes.

Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'eGFR category', '95 mL/min' (page 15). The cell should be coloured green instead of yellow. It should also read "60 mg"instead of "60 mg (use with caution in 'supranormal' renal function)."In the above-indicated cell, a footnote has also been added to state: "Edoxaban should be used in patients with high creatinine clearance only after a careful evaluation of the individual thromboembolic and bleeding risk."Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'Dose reduction in selected patients' (page 16). The cell should read "Edoxaban 60 mg reduced to 30 mg once daily if any of the following: creatinine clearance 15-50 mL/min, body weight

Supplemental material, WSO873597 Supplemental Material for Moving stroke rehabilitation research evidence into clinical practice: Consensus-based core recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable by Janice J Eng, Marie-Louise Bird, Erin Godecke, Tammy C Hoffmann, Carole Laurin, Olumide A Olaoye, John Solomon, Robert Teasell, Caroline L Watkins and Marion F Walker: on behalf of the Bowell Group in International Journal of Stroke

BackgroundUp to 160,000 people incur traumatic brain injury (TBI) each year in the UK. TBI can have profound effects on many areas of human functioning, including participation in work. There is limited evidence of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation (VR) after injury to promote early return to work (RTW) following TBI.ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of a definitive, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early, specialist VR plus usual care (UC) compared with UC alone on work retention 12 months post TBI.DesignA multicentre, feasibility, parallel-group RCT with a feasibility economic evaluation and an embedded mixed-methods process evaluation. Randomisation was by remote computer-generated allocation.SettingThree NHS major trauma centres (MTCs) in England.ParticipantsAdults with TBI admitted for > 48 hours and working or studying prior to injury.InterventionsEarly specialist TBI VR delivered by occupational therapists (OTs) in the community using a case co-ordination model.Main outcome measuresSelf-reported RTW 12 months post randomisation, mood, functional ability, participation, work self-efficacy, quality of life and work ability. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment and retention rates. Follow-up was by postal questionnaires in two centres and face to face in one centre. Those collecting data were blind to treatment allocation.ResultsOut of 102 target participants, 78 were recruited (39 randomised to each arm), representing 39% of those eligible and 5% of those screened. Approximately 2.2 patients were recruited per site per month. Of those, 56% had mild injuries, 18% had moderate injuries and 26% had severe injuries. A total of 32 out of 45 nominated carers were recruited. A total of 52 out of 78 (67%) TBI participants responded at 12 months (UC, n = 23; intervention, n = 29), completing 90% of the work questions; 21 out of 23 (91%) UC respondents and 20 out of 29 (69%) intervention participants returned to work at 12 months. Two participants disengaged from the intervention. Face-to-face follow-up was no more effective than postal follow-up. RTW was most strongly related to social participation and work self-efficacy. It is feasible to assess the cost-effectiveness of VR. Intervention was delivered as intended and valued by participants. Factors likely to affect a definitive trial include deploying experienced OTs, no clear TBI definition or TBI registers, and repatriation of more severe TBI from MTCs, affecting recruitment of those most likely to benefit/least likely to drop out.LimitationsTarget recruitment was not reached, but mechanisms to achieve this in future studies were identified. Retention was lower than expected, particularly in UC, potentially biasing estimates of the 12-month RTW rate.ConclusionsThis study met most feasibility objectives. The intervention was delivered with high fidelity. When objectives were not met, strategies to ensure feasibility of a full trial were identified. Future work should test two-stage recruitment and include resources to recruit from ‘spokes’. A broader measure covering work ability, self-efficacy and participation may be a more sensitive outcome.

BACKGROUND: Care home residents with stroke-related disabilities have significant activity limitations. Phase II trial results suggested a potential benefit of occupational therapy (OT) in maintaining residents' capacity to engage in functional activity. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a targeted course of OT in maintaining functional activity and reducing further health risks from inactivity for UK care home residents living with stroke-related disabilities. DESIGN: Pragmatic, parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. Cluster randomisation occurred at the care-home level. Homes were stratified according to trial administrative centre and type of care provided (nursing or residential), and they were randomised 1 : 1 to either the intervention or the control arm. SETTING: The setting was 228 care homes which were local to 11 trial administrative centres across England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Care home residents with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, including residents with communication and cognitive impairments, not receiving end-of-life care. INTERVENTION: Personalised 3-month course of OT delivered by qualified therapists. Care workers participated in training workshops to support personal activities of daily living. The control condition consisted of usual care for residents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome data were collected by a blinded assessor. The primary outcome at the participant level was the Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (BI) score at 3 months. The secondary outcomes included BI scores at 6 and 12 months post randomisation, and the Rivermead Mobility Index, Geriatric Depression Scale-15 and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, three levels, questionnaire scores at all time points. Economic evaluation examined the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain. Costs were estimated from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services. RESULTS: Overall, 568 residents from 114 care homes were allocated to the intervention arm and 474 residents from another 114 care homes were allocated to the control arm, giving a total of 1042 participants. Randomisation occurred between May 2010 and March 2012. The mean age of participants was 82.9 years, and 665 (64%) were female. No adverse events attributable to the intervention were recorded. Of the 1042 participants, 870 (83%) were included in the analysis of the primary outcome (intervention, n = 479; control, n = 391). The primary outcome showed no significant differences between groups. The adjusted mean difference in the BI score between groups was 0.19 points higher in the intervention arm [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.33 to 0.70, p = 0.48; adjusted intracluster correlation coefficient 0.09]. Secondary outcome measures showed no significant differences at all time points. Mean incremental cost of the Occupational Therapy intervention for residents with stroke living in UK Care Homes intervention was £438.78 (95% CI -£3360.89 to £1238.46) and the incremental QALY gain was 0.009 (95% CI -0.030 to 0.048). LIMITATIONS: A large proportion of participants with very severe activity-based limitations and cognitive impairment may have limited capacity to engage in therapy. CONCLUSION: A 3-month individualised course of OT showed no benefit in maintaining functional activity in an older care home population with stroke-related disabilities. FUTURE WORK: There is an urgent need to reduce health-related complications caused by inactivity and to provide an enabling built environment within care homes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN00757750. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 15. See the Health Technology Assessment programme website for further project information.