Translation of nurse-initiated protocols to manage fever, hyperglycaemia and swallowing following stroke across Europe (QASC Europe): A pre-test/post-test implementation study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Poor adoption of stroke guidelines is a problem internationally. The Quality in Acute Stroke Care (QASC) trial demonstrated significant reduction in death and disability with facilitated implementation of nurse-initiated protocols to manage fever, hyperglycaemia and swallowing (FeSS Protocols) following stroke. We aimed to determine real-world effectiveness of supported implementation of the FeSS Protocols across Europe. Methods: This was a multi-country, multi-centre, pre-test/post-test study (2017–2021) comparing post implementation data with historically collected pre-implementation data. Hospital clinical champions, supported by the Angels Initiative conducted multidisciplinary workshops discussing pre-implementation medical record audit results, barriers and facilitators to FeSS Protocol implementation, developed action plans and provided education, with ongoing support co-ordinated remotely from Australia. Prospective audits were conducted 3-month after FeSS Protocol introduction. Pre-to-post analysis and country income classification comparisons were adjusted for clustering by hospital and country controlling for age/sex/stroke severity. Results: Data from 64 hospitals in 17 countries (3464 patients pre-implementation and 3257 patients post-implementation) showed improvement pre-to-post implementation in measurement recording of all three FeSS components, all p < 0.0001: fever elements (pre: 17%, post: 51%; absolute difference 33%, 95% CI 30%, 37%); hyperglycaemia elements (pre: 18%, post: 52%; absolute difference 34%; 95% CI 31%, 36%); swallowing elements (pre: 39%, post: 67%; absolute difference 29%, 95% CI 26%, 31%) and thus in overall FeSS Protocol adherence (pre: 3.4%, post: 35%; absolute difference 33%, 95% CI 24%, 42%). In exploratory analysis of FeSS adherence by countries’ economic status, high-income versus middle-income countries improved to a comparable extent. Discussion and conclusion: Our collaboration resulted in successful rapid implementation and scale-up of FeSS Protocols into countries with vastly different healthcare systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.039 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".