Skip to main content

Table 2 What evidence supported outcomes for the 6MR?

From: How unmet are unmet needs post-stroke? A policy analysis of the six-month review

Locally defined patient outcomes based on national guidelines Any evidence from the data
 Greater patient involvement in identifying and planning to address their ongoing needs.  Minimal evidence, and only for those who were already pro-active in addressing their ongoing needs.
 Access to a wide range of information about NHS, voluntary, community and social services that will contribute to achieving stroke related goals.  The SA co-ordinator provided comprehensive information about local services; the SNSs provided limited information and/or advised the patient to contact the SA.
 Feeling supported and more confident.  Limited evidence, mainly those who were confident and had good social support.
 Will be less likely to be readmitted to hospital.  No evidence but SNSs did identify medical concerns requiring follow-up (and urgently, in a few instances).
 Will be less likely to have another stroke.  As above.
 Improved health and general well-being.  No evidence but indirectly the review may have contributed to some improvement for those who were more able and articulate.
 Reduced GP appointments.  No evidence.
 Reduced dependency on social services.  No evidence.
Stroke Association overall service outcomes
 Improved quality of life Potentially an indirect outcome through signposting respondents to community services.
 Improved medication compliance No evidence for SA reviews but those reviewed by SNSs valued their tailored medical advice and expertise which could have led to improved adherence.
 Reduced hospital admissions No evidence.
 Reduced social isolation As for improved quality of life – potentially an indirect outcome.