Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Dec 19;4(12):e0003711.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003711. eCollection 2024.

Implementation of a goal-directed Care Bundle for intracerebral hemorrhage: Results of embedded process evaluation in the INTERACT3 trial

Affiliations

Implementation of a goal-directed Care Bundle for intracerebral hemorrhage: Results of embedded process evaluation in the INTERACT3 trial

Menglu Ouyang et al. PLOS Glob Public Health. .

Abstract

The third, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized, Intensive Care Bundle with Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage Trial (INTERACT3), has shown that a goal-directed multi-faceted Care Bundle incorporating protocols for the management of physiological variables was safe and effective for improving functional recovery in a broad range of patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). The INTERACT3 Care Bundle included time- and target-based protocols for the management of early intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (SBP, target <140mmHg), glucose control (target 6.1-7.8 mmol/L in those without diabetes and 7.8-10.0 mmol/L in those with diabetes), anti-pyrexia treatment (target body temperature ≤37.5°C), and the rapid reversal of warfarin-related anticoagulation (target international normalized ratio <1.5). An embedded process evaluation was conducted to allow a better understanding of how the Care Bundle was implemented in different countries to enhance the transferability of this evidence in the international context. This study used a mixed-methods approach involving interviews, focus group discussions, and surveys to evaluate the implementation outcomes included fidelity, dose, reach, acceptability, appropriateness, adoption, and sustainability. Interviews (n = 27), focus group discussions (n = 3), and quantitative surveys (n = 48) were conducted in 7 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and 1 high-income country during 2019-2022. The Care Bundle was generally delivered as planned and well accepted by stakeholders, although some difficulties were reported in reaching the SBP and glycemic targets. Contextual factors including staff shortage, limited availability of antihypertensive drugs, and delayed systems of care processes, were common barriers to implementing the Care Bundle. Facilitating factors included good communication and collaboration with staff in emergency departments, the development of pathways within available resources, and regular training and monitoring. Our process evaluation provides useful insights into the contextual barriers which need to be addressed for effective scale up of the Care Bundle implementation in a global context. Trial registration: INTERACT3 is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03209258) and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IOC-17011787).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: LS reports funding from the Medical Research Council of the UK, Sichuan Credit Pharmaceutic, and Takeda China; and speaker fees from Takeda China. CSA has received grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council and Medical Research Futures Fund of Australia, the Medical Research Council of the UK, Penumbra, and Takeda China. CY has received funding from West China Hospital. The other authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Synthesis findings by implementation research logic model.
BGL blood glucose level, BP denotes blood pressure, CI confidence interval, ED Emergency Department, ICH intracerebral haemorrhage, OR odds ratio.

References

    1. Feigin VL, Stark BA, Johnson CO, Roth GA, Bisignano C, Abady GG, et al.. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. Lancet Neurol. 2021;20:795–820. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00252-0 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cordonnier C, Demchuk A, Ziai W, Anderson CS. Intracerebral hemorrhage: current approaches to acute management. Lancet. 2018;392:1257–1268. - PubMed
    1. Davis SM, Broderick J, Hennerici M, Brun NC, Diringer MN, Mayer SA, et al.. Hematoma growth is a determinant of mortality and poor outcome after intracerebral haemorrhage. Neurology. 2006;66(8):1175–1181. - PubMed
    1. Haupenthal D, Schwab S, Kuramatsu JB. Hematoma expansion in intracerebral haemorrhage—the right target? Neurol Res Pract. 2023. Jul 27;5(1):36. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Li Q, Yakhkind A, Alexandrov AW, Anderson CS, Dowlatshahi D, Frontera JA, et al.. Code ICH: A Call to Action. Stroke. 2024. Feb;55(2):494–505. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.123.043033 - DOI - PubMed

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources