Cargando…

A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors

BACKGROUND: Recovery following a stroke is a long and ongoing process. Post-stroke follow-up after leaving the hospital is recommended. Methods for follow-up patients include face-to-face, via the telephone, post or online (internet). However, there is a debate which method is preferred by patients....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hewitt, Jonathan, Pennington, Anna, Smith, Alexander, Gething, Stephanie, Price, Michelle, White, James, Dewar, Richard, Carter, Ben
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31262317
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1350-5
_version_ 1783431695125446656
author Hewitt, Jonathan
Pennington, Anna
Smith, Alexander
Gething, Stephanie
Price, Michelle
White, James
Dewar, Richard
Carter, Ben
author_facet Hewitt, Jonathan
Pennington, Anna
Smith, Alexander
Gething, Stephanie
Price, Michelle
White, James
Dewar, Richard
Carter, Ben
author_sort Hewitt, Jonathan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recovery following a stroke is a long and ongoing process. Post-stroke follow-up after leaving the hospital is recommended. Methods for follow-up patients include face-to-face, via the telephone, post or online (internet). However, there is a debate which method is preferred by patients. This study aimed to determine whether telephone interview, online questionnaire and postal questionnaire were as acceptable as face-to-face follow-up. METHODS: In a blinded, UK-wide, multi-centre, Zelen’s designed, 4-arm (postal, online, telephone, compared to face-to-face), pragmatic non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of the mode of administration, stroke survivors were randomised to postal, online, telephone and face-to-face assessment, in an equal ratio (1:1:1:1). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants that responded to the three allocation groups, compared to the face-to-face group. Subgroup analyses for age, aphasia and type and severity of stroke were carried out. A non-inferiority margin of 0.025 was used, and Holm-Bonferroni multiplicity adjustment was made. RESULTS: Of the 2074 eligible patients randomised, 55% were male (1142/2074), with an average age of 73.0 years old (SD = 13.2). Of those randomised, 22% (116/525), 9% (47/515) and 20% (101/513) responded in postal, online and telephone, respectively, compared to 17% (89/521) in the face-to-face group. The reduction in the online response rate compared to face-to-face was found to be both inferior and not non-inferior and estimated as an 8% reduction (95% CI 3.9 to 12.0%; p < 0.001). The association with lower online completion was present regardless of age, stroke type (haemorrhage or infarct) and stroke severity. In haemorrhagic stroke, the reduction in response online, compared to face-to-face, was 21% (95% CI 10 to 32%; p value = 0.002). A secondary analysis found non-aphasic stroke survivors preferred postal completion adjusted odds ratio of 1.43 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.95; p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: The study found that fewer stroke survivors completed follow-up assessment using an online method, compared to face-to-face. This finding was present in all age groups. Caution should be employed when considering online follow-up methods in stroke survivors, particularly in those who have experienced a cerebrovascular haemorrhage. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03177161. Registered on 6 June 2017. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-019-1350-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6604353
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66043532019-07-12 A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors Hewitt, Jonathan Pennington, Anna Smith, Alexander Gething, Stephanie Price, Michelle White, James Dewar, Richard Carter, Ben BMC Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Recovery following a stroke is a long and ongoing process. Post-stroke follow-up after leaving the hospital is recommended. Methods for follow-up patients include face-to-face, via the telephone, post or online (internet). However, there is a debate which method is preferred by patients. This study aimed to determine whether telephone interview, online questionnaire and postal questionnaire were as acceptable as face-to-face follow-up. METHODS: In a blinded, UK-wide, multi-centre, Zelen’s designed, 4-arm (postal, online, telephone, compared to face-to-face), pragmatic non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of the mode of administration, stroke survivors were randomised to postal, online, telephone and face-to-face assessment, in an equal ratio (1:1:1:1). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants that responded to the three allocation groups, compared to the face-to-face group. Subgroup analyses for age, aphasia and type and severity of stroke were carried out. A non-inferiority margin of 0.025 was used, and Holm-Bonferroni multiplicity adjustment was made. RESULTS: Of the 2074 eligible patients randomised, 55% were male (1142/2074), with an average age of 73.0 years old (SD = 13.2). Of those randomised, 22% (116/525), 9% (47/515) and 20% (101/513) responded in postal, online and telephone, respectively, compared to 17% (89/521) in the face-to-face group. The reduction in the online response rate compared to face-to-face was found to be both inferior and not non-inferior and estimated as an 8% reduction (95% CI 3.9 to 12.0%; p < 0.001). The association with lower online completion was present regardless of age, stroke type (haemorrhage or infarct) and stroke severity. In haemorrhagic stroke, the reduction in response online, compared to face-to-face, was 21% (95% CI 10 to 32%; p value = 0.002). A secondary analysis found non-aphasic stroke survivors preferred postal completion adjusted odds ratio of 1.43 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.95; p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: The study found that fewer stroke survivors completed follow-up assessment using an online method, compared to face-to-face. This finding was present in all age groups. Caution should be employed when considering online follow-up methods in stroke survivors, particularly in those who have experienced a cerebrovascular haemorrhage. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03177161. Registered on 6 June 2017. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-019-1350-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-07-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6604353/ /pubmed/31262317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1350-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hewitt, Jonathan
Pennington, Anna
Smith, Alexander
Gething, Stephanie
Price, Michelle
White, James
Dewar, Richard
Carter, Ben
A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors
title A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors
title_full A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors
title_fullStr A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors
title_full_unstemmed A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors
title_short A multi-centre, UK-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors
title_sort multi-centre, uk-based, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial of 4 follow-up assessment methods in stroke survivors
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6604353/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31262317
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1350-5
work_keys_str_mv AT hewittjonathan amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT penningtonanna amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT smithalexander amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT gethingstephanie amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT pricemichelle amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT whitejames amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT dewarrichard amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT carterben amulticentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT hewittjonathan multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT penningtonanna multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT smithalexander multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT gethingstephanie multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT pricemichelle multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT whitejames multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT dewarrichard multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors
AT carterben multicentreukbasednoninferiorityrandomisedcontrolledtrialof4followupassessmentmethodsinstrokesurvivors