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. |