BE MoRe: Exploring the Benefits and Expectations of the 6MR
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Exploring the Benefits and Expectations of the 6 Month Review for Stroke Survivors: A multiple case study approach
IRAS ID
333555
Contact name
Richard Holmes
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Lancaster University
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 6 months, 30 days
Research summary
In the UK, stroke affects 100,000 people a year and by 2035 it is expected that there will be 2.1 million stroke survivors in our society. A large number of stroke survivors have long-term problems that aren’t helped by current services (for example: difficulty walking, depression, eyesight problems, and difficulty gaining employment). Living with these effects is known to significantly impact their quality of life and can lead to other problems in later life. Unfortunately, some of these effects can’t be fixed, but some could be removed or improved with the right help. The six-month review for stroke survivors was put in place to address this by identifying these problems and then directing patients to the appropriate support. However, there are large variations in how the review is conducted across the country and in some areas it doesn’t happen at all.
The aim of this research is to understand if and how the six-month review is supporting stroke survivors and their carers, and if not, then what should be done differently to improve this aspect of care.
To explore this we will look at 3 services in greater depth. These services will include different providers of the service (an acute NHS Trust, a community NHS Trust, and a charitable organisation). We will spend time at each service, observing how the service is run and interviewing the staff who work there. We will also interview patients and their carers to understand what they feel the purpose of the six-month review is, and whether they found it helpful or not. This information will be used to look at the differences and similarities between different providers of this service. In turn, this will help us to develop what works well in different situations so that suggestions can be made to improve future services.
Lay summary of study results:
We spoke with stroke survivors, carers, staff, managers, and commissioners. These groups had different views about the purpose of the 6-month review. Clinicians wanted to offer care that focused on the person but were often limited by time and resources. Managers tended to see the review as a way to collect data and plan services. Many stroke survivors saw it as a routine check-up; for some it marked the end of formal support, while others found it reassuring.We also found that the wider setting has a big effect on how the review is delivered and how well it works. This means that some stroke survivors may not get the same access to the 6-month review as others. It also means that different people will have different experiences of it.
From all these findings, we developed an explanation of how and why the 6-month review works differently in different places. It shows that services need to adapt to their local context to stay effective. This explanation gives practical guidance to help make the review more personalised, fair and valuable. We hope this will help new and existing services improve so that more stroke survivors can get effective access to a 6-month review.
REC name
Wales REC 7
REC reference
24/WA/0059
Date of REC Opinion
4 Mar 2024
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion