Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835Open textbooks209Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›Open textbooks›Using co-production to increase activity in acute stroke units: the CREATE mixed-methods study›References

Continue where you left off ()

Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Using co-production to increase activity in acute stroke units: the CREATE mixed-methods study · References

References

CC BY 4.0 · NIHR Journals Library · approximately 10 min read

  1. Cloud G, Hoffman A, Rudd A, Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party. National sentinel stroke audit 1998–2011. Clin Med 2013;13:444–8. 10.7861/clinmedicine.13-5-444
  2. Department of Health and Social Care. National Stroke Strategy. London: Department of Health and Social Care; 2007.
  3. Rudd AG, Hoffman A, Paley L, Bray B. 20 years of researching stroke through audit. Clin Rehabil 2018;32:997–1006. 10.1177/026921551878464529932011
  4. Rosbergen IC, Grimley RS, Hayward KS, Walker KC, Rowley D, Campbell AM, et al. Embedding an enriched environment in an acute stroke unit increases activity in people with stroke: a controlled before-after pilot study. Clin Rehabil 2017;31:1516–28. 10.1177/026921551770518128459184
  5. Åstrand A, Saxin C, Sjöholm A, Skarin M, Linden T, Stoker A, et al. Poststroke physical activity levels no higher in rehabilitation than in the acute hospital. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2016;25:938–45. 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2015.12.04626851969
  6. Kunkel D, Fitton C, Burnett M, Ashburn A. Physical inactivity post-stroke: a 3-year longitudinal study. Disabil Rehabil 2015;37:304–10. 10.3109/09638288.2014.91819024828312
  7. Bernhardt J, Dewey H, Thrift A, Donnan G. Inactive and alone. Stroke 2004;35:1005–9. 10.1161/01.STR.0000120727.40792.4014988574
  8. Esmonde T, McGinley J, Wittwer J, Goldie P, Martin C. Stroke rehabilitation: patient activity during non-therapy time. Aust J Physiother 1997;43:43–51. 10.1016/S0004-9514(14)60401-311676671
  9. Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party. National Clinical Guideline for Stroke. 5th edn. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2016.
  10. Taylor E, McKevitt C, Jones F. Factors shaping the delivery of acute inpatient stroke therapy: a narrative synthesis. J Rehabil Med 2015;47:107–19. 10.2340/16501977-191825437308
  11. Clarke DJ, Burton L-J, Tyson SF, Rodgers H, Drummond A, Palmer R, et al. Why do stroke survivors not receive recommended amounts of active therapy? Findings from the ReAcT study, a mixed-methods case-study evaluation in eight stroke units. Clin Rehabil 2018;32:1119–32. 10.1177/026921551876532929582712
  12. Taylor E, Jones F, McKevitt C. How is the audit of therapy intensity influencing rehabilitation in inpatient stroke units in the UK? An ethnographic study. BMJ Open 2018;8:e023676. 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023676
  13. Batalden P. Getting more health from healthcare: quality improvement must acknowledge patient coproduction – an essay by Paul Batalden. BMJ 2018;362:k3617. 10.1136/bmj.k3617
  14. Batalden M, Batalden P, Margolis P, Seid M, Armstrong G, Opipari-Arrigan L, Hartung H. Coproduction of healthcare service. BMJ Qual Saf 2016;25:509–17. 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004315
  15. Osborne SP, Radnor Z, Strokosch K. Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: a suitable case for treatment? Public Management Rev 2016;18:639–53. 10.1080/14719037.2015.1111927
  16. Clarke D, Jones F, Harris R, Robert G, Collaborative Rehabilitation Environments in Acute Stroke (CREATE) team. What outcomes are associated with developing and implementing co-produced interventions in acute healthcare settings? A rapid evidence synthesis. BMJ Open 2017;7:e014650. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014650
  17. Stroke Association. State of the Nation Stroke Statistics. London: Stroke Association; 2018. URL: www.stroke.org.uk/system/files/sotn_2018.pdf (accessed 14 April 2019).
  18. Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet 2011;377:1693–702. 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60325-521571152
  19. Wang Y, Rudd AG, Wolfe CD. Age and ethnic disparities in incidence of stroke over time: the South London Stroke Register. Stroke 2013;44:3298–304. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.00260424114452
  20. Marshall IJ, Wang Y, Crichton S, McKevitt C, Rudd AG, Wolfe CD. The effects of socioeconomic status on stroke risk and outcomes. Lancet Neurol 2015;14:1206–18. 10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00200-826581971
  21. Feigin VL, Forouzanfar MH, Krishnamurthi R, Mensah GA, Connor M, Bennett DA, et al. Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990-2010: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2014;383:245–54. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61953-424449944
  22. Patel A, Berdunov V, King D, Berdunov Z, Wittenberg R, Knapp M. Current, Future and Avoidable Costs of Stroke in the UK: Part 1. London: Centre for Primary Care & Public Health, Queen Mary University of London and the Personal Social Services Research Unit, London School of Economics and Political Science for the Stroke Association; n.d.
  23. Saka O, Serra V, Samyshkin Y, McGuire A, Wolfe CC. Cost-effectiveness of stroke unit care followed by early supported discharge. Stroke 2009;40:24–9. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.51804319008473
  24. Department of Health and Social Care. National Stroke Strategy. London: Department of Health and Social Care; 2007. https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130104224925/http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh_081059.pdf (accessed 14 April 2019).
  25. Stroke Unit Trialists’ Collaboration. Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;9:CD000197.
  26. Fulop N, Boaden R, Hunter R, McKevitt C, Morris S, Pursani N, et al. Innovations in major system reconfiguration in England: a study of the effectiveness, acceptability and processes of implementation of two models of stroke care. Implement Sci 2013;8:5. 10.1186/1748-5908-8-523289439
  27. Morris S, Ramsay AIG, Boaden RJ, Hunter RM, McKevitt C, Paley L, et al. Impact and sustainability of centralising acute stroke services in English metropolitan areas: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics and stroke national audit data. BMJ 2019;364:l1. 10.1136/bmj.l130674465
  28. Janssen H, Ada L, Bernhardt J, McElduff P, Pollack M, Nilsson M, Spratt NJ. An enriched environment increases activity in stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation in a mixed rehabilitation unit: a pilot non-randomized controlled trial. Disabil Rehabil 2014;36:255–62. 10.3109/09638288.2013.78821823627534
  29. Dewey HM, Sherry LJ, Collier JM. Stroke rehabilitation 2007: what should it be? Int J Stroke 2007;2:191–200. 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2007.00146.x18705943
  30. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Stroke Rehabilitation in Adults: Guidance. NICE; 2013. URL: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG162 (accessed 12 April 2020).
  31. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Stroke Overview – NICE Pathways. 2020. URL: https://pathways.nice.org.uk/pathways/stroke (accessed 13 April 2020).
  32. Schneider EJ, Lannin NA, Ada L, Schmidt J. Increasing the amount of usual rehabilitation improves activity after stroke: a systematic review. J Physiother 2016;62:182–7. 10.1016/j.jphys.2016.08.00627637769
  33. Lohse KR, Lang CE, Boyd LA. Is more better? Using meta-data to explore dose-response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 2014;45:2053–8. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.00469524867924
  34. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Koelman TW, Lankhorst GJ, Koetsier JC. Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke. Stroke 1997;28:1550–6. 10.1161/01.STR.28.8.15509259747
  35. Royal College of Physicians, Clinical Effectiveness and Evaluation Unit on behalf of the Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party. Changes Over Time: 4 Years of Data April 2013 – March 2017: National Results Based on Stroke Patients Admitted to and/or Discharged from Hospital Between April 2013 – March 2017. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2017.
  36. Huijben-Schoenmakers M, Rademaker A, van Rooden P, Scherder E. The effects of increased therapy time on cognition and mood in frail patients with a stroke who rehabilitate on rehabilitation units of nursing homes in the Netherlands: a protocol of a comparative study. BMC Geriatr 2014;14:68. 10.1186/1471-2318-14-6824884651
  37. English C, Bernhardt J, Hillier S. Circuit class therapy and 7-day-week therapy increase physiotherapy time, but not patient activity: early results from the CIRCIT trial. Stroke 2014;45:3002–7. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.00603825123219
  38. Trammell M, Kapoor P, Swank C, Driver S. Improving practice with integration of patient directed activity during inpatient rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 2017;31:3–10. 10.1177/026921551562510026837432
  39. Skarin M, Sjöholm A, Nilsson Å, Nilsson M, Bernhardt J, Lindén T. A mapping study on physical activity in stroke rehabilitation: establishing the baseline. J Rehabil Med 2013;45:997–1003. 10.2340/16501977-121424150662
  40. Peiris CL, Taylor NF, Shields N. Extra physical therapy reduces patient length of stay and improves functional outcomes and quality of life in people with acute or subacute conditions: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011;92:1490–500. 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.04.00521878220
  41. Galvin R, Cusack T, O’Grady E, Murphy TB, Stokes E. Family-mediated exercise intervention (FAME): evaluation of a novel form of exercise delivery after stroke. Stroke 2011;42:681–6. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.59468921233462
  42. Lockhart J, James I, Linstead G. Mind the Gap. London: NHS Improvement; 2006. URL: www.stroke-in-stoke.info/otherfiles/mind%20thegap2011.pdf (accessed 14 April 2019).
  43. NHS England. Putting Patients First: The NHS England Business Plan for 2013/14–2015/16. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ppf-1314-1516.pdf (accessed 13 April 2020).
  44. NHS England. Five Year Forward View 2014. London: NHS England; 2014. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/5yfv-web.pdf (accessed 14 April 2019).
  45. NHS Improvement. Patient Experience Improvement Framework. London: NHS Improvement; 2018. URL: https://improvement.nhs.uk/documents/2885/Patient_experience_improvement_framework_full_publication.pdf (accessed 14 April 2019).
  46. Needham C, Carr S. Co-production: An Emerging Evidence Base for Adult Social Care Transformation. London: Queen Mary, University of London, and Social Care Institute for Excellence; 2009.
  47. Robert G, Cornwell J. Rethinking policy approaches to measuring and improving patient experience. J Health Serv Res Policy 2013;18:67–9. 10.1177/1355819612473583
  48. Madden M, Speed E. Beware zombies and unicorns: toward critical patient and public involvement in health research in a neoliberal context. Front Sociol 2017;2. 10.3389/fsoc.2017.00007
  49. Berwick DM. Improvement, trust, and the healthcare workforce. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12(Suppl. 1):i2–6. 10.1136/qhc.12.suppl_1.i214645740
  50. Goodrich J, Cornwell J. Seeing the Person in the Patient: The Point of Care Review Paper. London: The King’s Fund; 2008. URL: www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/default/files/Seeing-the-person-in-the-patient-The-Point-of-Care-review-paper-Goodrich-Cornwell-Kings-Fund-December-2008.pdf
  51. Bate P, Robert G. Bringing User Experience to Healthcare Improvement: The Concepts, Methods and Practices of Experience-based Design. Abingdon: Radcliffe Publishing; 2007.
  52. Tsianakas V, Maben J, Wiseman T, Robert G, Richardson A, Madden P, et al. Using patients’ experiences to identify priorities for quality improvement in breast cancer care: patient narratives, surveys or both? BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12:271. 10.1186/1472-6963-12-27122913525
  53. Cottam H, Leadbeater C. Red Paper 01 Health: Co-creating Services. London: Design Council; 2004.
  54. Baim-Lance A, Tietz D, Lever H, Swart M, Agins B. Everyday and unavoidable coproduction: exploring patient participation in the delivery of healthcare services. Sociol Health Illn 2019;41:128–42. 10.1111/1467-9566.1280130084113
  55. Farr M. Power dynamics and collaborative mechanisms in co-production and co-design processes. Crit Soc Policy 2018;38:623–44. 10.1177/0261018317747444
  56. Filipe A, Renedo A, Marston C. The co-production of what? Knowledge, values, and social relations in health care. PLOS Biol 2017;15:e2001403. 10.1371/journal.pbio.200140328467412
  57. Bate P, Robert G. Toward more user-centric OD: lessons from the field of experience-based design and a case study. J Appl Behav Sci 2007;43:41–66. 10.1177/0021886306297014
  58. Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G. Using Experience-based Co-design to Improve the Quality of Healthcare: Mapping Where We Are Now and Establishing Future Directions. London: King’s College London; 2014.
  59. The Point of Care Foundation. What is Experience-based Co-design? URL: www.pointofcarefoundation.org.uk/resource/experience-based-co-design-ebcd-toolkit/step-by-step-guide/1-experience-based-co-design/ (accessed 9 April 2019).
  60. Locock L, Robert G, Boaz A, Vougioukalou S, Shuldham C, Fielden J, et al. Testing accelerated experience-based co-design: a qualitative study of using a national archive of patient experience narrative interviews to promote rapid patient-centred service improvement. Health Serv Deliv Res 2014;2(4). 10.3310/hsdr02040
  61. Robert G, Cornwell J, Locock L, Purushotham A, Sturmey G, Gager M. Patients and staff as codesigners of healthcare services. BMJ 2015;350:g7714. 10.1136/bmj.g771425670179
  62. Intercollegiate Working Party for Stroke. National Guidelines for Stroke. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2012. URL: www.strokeaudit.org/Guideline/Historical-Guideline/National-Clinical-Guidelines-for-Stroke-fourth-edi.aspx (accessed 14 April 2019).
  63. King’s College London, Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP). SSNAP Clinical Interactive Maps. URL: www.strokeaudit.org/results/Clinical-audit/Maps.aspx (accessed July 2020).
  64. Royal College of Physicians, Care Quality Improvement Department on behalf of the Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party. Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (SSNAP): Acute Organisational Report. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2016. URL: www.strokeaudit.org/Documents/National/AcuteOrg/2016/2016-AOANationalReport.aspx (accessed 13 April 2020).
  65. The Point of Care Foundation. EBCD: Experience-based Co-design Toolkit. URL: www.pointofcarefoundation.org.uk/resource/experience-based-co-design-ebcd-toolkit/ (accessed 14 February 2019).
  66. Greenhalgh T, Papoutsi C. Studying complexity in health services research: desperately seeking an overdue paradigm shift. BMC Med 2018;16:95. 10.1186/s12916-018-1089-429921272
  67. May CR, Finch T, Ballini L, MacFarlane A, Mair F, Murray E, et al. Evaluating complex interventions and health technologies using normalization process theory: development of a simplified approach and web-enabled toolkit. BMC Health Serv Res 2011;11:245. 10.1186/1472-6963-11-24521961827
  68. Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, MacFarlane A, Ballini L, Dowrick C, et al. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med 2010;8:63. 10.1186/1741-7015-8-6320961442
  69. Kneebone II, Hull SL, McGurk R, Cropley M. Reliability and validity of the neurorehabilitation experience questionnaire for inpatients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2012;26:834–41. 10.1177/154596831143196222328684
  70. Clarke DJ, Hawkins R, Sadler E, Harding G, McKevitt C, Godfrey M, et al. Introducing structured caregiver training in stroke care: findings from the TRACS process evaluation study. BMJ Open 2014;4:e004473. 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004473
  71. Askim T, Bernhardt J, Salvesen O, Indredavik B. Physical activity early after stroke and its association to functional outcome 3 months later. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2014;23:e305–12. 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.12.01124529353
  72. Normalization Process Theory. What is NPT? URL: www.normalizationprocess.org/what-is-npt/ (accessed 11 April 2019).
  73. Tsianakas V, Robert G, Maben J, Richardson A, Dale C, Griffin M, Wiseman T. Implementing patient-centred cancer care: using experience-based co-design to improve patient experience in breast and lung cancer services. Support Care Cancer 2012;20:2639–47. 10.1007/s00520-012-1470-322544223
  74. Locock L, Robert G, Boaz A, Vougioukalou S, Shuldham C, Fielden J, et al. Using a national archive of patient experience narratives to promote local patient-centered quality improvement: an ethnographic process evaluation of ‘accelerated’ experience-based co-design. J Health Serv Res Policy 2014;19:200–7. 10.1177/135581961453156524840387
  75. Bowen S, McSeveny K, Lockley E, Wolstenholme D, Cobb M, Dearden A. How was it for you? Experiences of participatory design in the UK health service. CoDesign 2013;9:230–46. 10.1080/15710882.2013.846384
  76. Piper D, Iedema R, Gray J, Verma R, Holmes L, Manning N. Utilizing experience-based co-design to improve the experience of patients accessing emergency departments in New South Wales public hospitals: an evaluation study. Health Serv Manage Res 2012;25:162–72. 10.1177/095148481247424723554443
  77. Larkin M, Boden ZV, Newton E. On the brink of genuinely collaborative care: experience-based co-design in mental health. Qual Health Res 2015;25:1463–76. 10.1177/104973231557649425829467
  78. Vennik FD, van de Bovenkamp HM, Putters K, Grit KJ. Co-production in healthcare: rhetoric and practice. Int Rev Admin Sci 2016;82:150–68. 10.1177/0020852315570553
  79. Thomson A, Rivas C, Giovannoni G. Multiple sclerosis outpatient future groups: improving the quality of participant interaction and ideation tools within service improvement activities. BMC Health Serv Res 2015;15:105. 10.1186/s12913-015-0773-825903748
  80. Greenhalgh T, Jackson C, Shaw S, Janamian T. Achieving research impact through co-creation in community-based health services: literature review and case study. Milbank Q 2016;94:392–429. 10.1111/1468-0009.1219727265562
  81. Bovaird T. Beyond engagement and participation: user and community coproduction of public services. Public Admin Rev 2007;67:846–60. 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00773.x
  82. Scottish Co-Production Network. Co-production — How We Make a Difference Together. Glasgow: Scottish Community Development Centre; 2016. URL: www.scdc.org.uk/what/co-production-how-we-make-difference-together (accessed 20 September 2019).
  83. Boyd H, McKernon S, Mullin B, Old A. Improving healthcare through the use of co-design. N Z Med J 2012;125:76–87.
  84. Tollyfield R. Facilitating an accelerated experience-based co-design project. Br J Nurs 2014;23:136–41. 10.12968/bjon.2014.23.3.13624526020
  85. Walshe K. Pseudoinnovation: the development and spread of healthcare quality improvement methodologies. Int J Qual Health Care 2009;21:153–9. 10.1093/intqhc/mzp01219383716
  86. Keith RA, Cowell KS. Time use of stroke patients in three rehabilitation hospitals. Soc Sci Med 1987;24:529–33. 10.1016/0277-9536(87)90342-x3589748
  87. Rosbergen IC, Grimley RS, Hayward KS, Brauer SG. The impact of environmental enrichment in an acute stroke unit on how and when patients undertake activities. Clin Rehabil 2019;33:784–95. 10.1177/026921551882008730582368
  88. Wenger E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
  89. Palmer J. Stroke unit transformed at St Helier Hospital. Sutton & Croydon Guardian, 5 February 2018. URL: www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/15921208.stroke-unit-transformed-at-st-helier-hospital/ (accessed 12 December 2019).
← DisseminationAcknowledgements →

Attribution. Fiona Jones; Karolina Gombert-Waldron; Stephanie Honey; Geoffrey Cloud; Ruth Harris; Alastair Macdonald et al. (2020). Using co-production to increase activity in acute stroke units: the CREATE mixed-methods study. NIHR Journals Library. Copyright © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2020. This work was produced by Jones et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. NCBI Bookshelf NBK561473. CC BY 4.0. Original source ↗. Text reproduced from the Bookshelf XML without changing wording; figures, images and supplements are not reproduced.

In this chapter Contents

  • References

Source

OpenStax source file ↗

Source record ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support