Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality of stroke care at an Irish Regional General Hospital and Stroke Rehabilitation Unit

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Robust international data support the effectiveness of stroke unit (SU) care. Despite this, most stroke care in Ireland are provided outside of this setting. Limited data currently exist on the quality of care provided.

Aim

The aim of this study is to examine the quality of care for patients with stroke in two care settings—Regional General Hospital (RGH) and Stroke Rehabilitation Unit (SRU).

Methods

A retrospective analysis of the stroke records of consecutive patients admitted to the SRU between May–November 2002 and April–November 2004 was performed applying the UK National Sentinel Audit of Stroke (NSAS) tool.

Results

The results of the study reveal that while SRU processes of care was 74% compliant with standards; compliance with stroke service organisational standards was only 15 and 43% in the RGH and SRU, respectively.

Conclusion

The quality of stroke care in our area is deficient. Comprehensive reorganisation of stroke services is imperative.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rudd AG, Hoffman A, Irwin BA, Lowe D, Pearson MG (2005) Stroke unit care and outcome results from the 2001 National Sentinel Audit of Stroke (England, Wales and Northern Ireland). Stroke 1:103–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. The Stroke Unit Trialists’ Collaboration (1997) Collaborative systematic review of the randomized trials of organized inpatient (stroke unit) care after stroke. BMJ 314:1151–1159

    Google Scholar 

  3. Stegmayr B, Asplund K, Hulter-Asberg K et al (1999) Stroke units in their natural habitat: can the results of randomized trials be reproduced in routine clinical practice? Stroke 30:709–714

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stroke Unit Trialists Collaboration (1997) How do stroke units improve patient outcomes? A collaborative systematic review of the randomised trials. Stroke 28:2139–2144

    Google Scholar 

  5. Juby LC, Lincoln NB, Berman P, Stroke Unit Evaluation Study Group (1996) The effect of a stroke unit rehabilitation unit on functional and psychological outcome: a randomised controlled trial. Cerebrovasc Dis 6:106–110. doi:10.1159/000108005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Indredavik B, Bakke F, Solberg R, Rokseth R, Haaheim L, Holme I (1991) Benefit of a stroke unit: a randomised controlled trial. Stroke 22:1026–1031

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kalra L, Dale P, Crome P (1993) Improving stroke rehabilitation: a controlled study. Stroke 24:1462–1467

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. British Association of Stroke Physicians Service Development and Quality Committee 2005. http://www.basp.ac.uk/strokespec2005.doc. Accessed 23 July 2007

  9. Walsh T, Cotter S, Boland M, Greally T, Clinch D, Lyons D (2004) The impact of stroke unit care—Mid-Western perspective. Ir J Med Sci 173(3):14

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rudd AG, Irwin Lowe D, Rutledge Z, Pearson M (2001) National stroke audit: a tool for change? Quality in Health Care 10:141–151

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gomperetz PH, Irwin P, Morris R et al (2001) Reliability and validity of the intercollegiate Stroke Audit Package. J Eval Clin Pract 7(1):1–11. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2753.2001.00274.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Evans A, Perez I, Harraf F, Melbourne A et al (2001) Can differences in stroke management processes explain different outcomes between stroke unit and stroke team care? Lancet 358:1586–1596. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06652-1

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Langhorne P, Duncan P (2001) Does the organisation of post acute stroke care really matter? Stroke 32:268–274

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. British Association of Stroke Physicians Service Development Committee http://www.basp.ac.uk2003staffingastroke.htm. Accessed 23 July 2007

Download references

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department Medicine for the Elderly, Clinical Age Assessment Unit, Mid-Western Regional Hospital, Dooradoyle, Limerick, Ireland

    T. Walsh, J. Browne, E. Ugwu & D. Lyons

  2. Stroke Unit, St Camillus Hospital, Shelbourne Road, Limerick, Ireland

    T. Walsh, J. Browne, E. Ugwu, R. O’ Riordan & D. Lyons

Authors
  1. T. Walsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Browne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Ugwu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. O’ Riordan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. Lyons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Walsh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walsh, T., Browne, J., Ugwu, E. et al. Quality of stroke care at an Irish Regional General Hospital and Stroke Rehabilitation Unit. Ir J Med Sci 178, 19–23 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-008-0193-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-008-0193-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation