Prioritizing gaps in stroke care: A two-round Delphi process

Elke GE Mathijssen*, Jaap CA Trappenburg, Mark J Alberts, Angelique Balguid, Robert J Dempsey, Mayank Goyal, Bianca TA de Greef, Marjan J Hummel, Koji Iihara, Enrique C Leira, Winston Lim, Gregory YH Lip, Paolo Madeddu, Randolph S Marshall, Dominick JH McCabe, Ahmad S Muda, Dimitrios N Nikas, George Ntaios, Terence J Quinn, Marta RubieraTatjana Rundek, Shashank Shekhar, Wen-Jun Tu, Pearl Vyas, Wim van Zwam, Johannes B Reitsma, Ewoud Schuit

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background:
Despite international recognition of stroke as a significant health priority, discrepancies persist between the target values for stroke quality measures and the actual values that are achieved in clinical practice, referred to as gaps. This study aimed to reach consensus among international experts on prioritizing gaps in stroke care.

Methods:
A two-round Delphi process was conducted, surveying an international expert panel in the field of stroke care and cerebrovascular medicine, including patient representatives, healthcare professionals, researchers, policymakers, and medical directors. Experts scored the importance and required effort to close 13 gaps throughout the stroke care continuum and proposed potential solutions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis methods.

Results:
In the first and second Delphi rounds, 35 and 30 experts participated, respectively. Expert consensus was reached on the high importance of closing 11 out of 13 gaps. Two out of 13 gaps were considered moderately important to close, with expert consensus for one of these two gaps. Expert consensus indicated that only one gap, related to the prevention of complications after stroke, requires moderate effort to close, whereas the others were considered to require high effort to close. Key focus areas for potential solutions included: “Care infrastructure,” “Geographic disparities,” “Interdisciplinary collaboration,” and “Advocacy and funding.”

Conclusions:
While closing gaps in stroke care primarily requires high effort and substantial resources, targeted interventions in the identified key focus areas may provide feasible and clinically meaningful improvements.

[See paper for graphical abstract]
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1479-1488
Number of pages10
JournalEuropean Stroke Journal
Volume10
Issue number4
Early online date3 Apr 2025
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© European Stroke Organisation 2025

Keywords

  • Delphi technique
  • quality improvement
  • quality measures
  • Stroke
  • health services
  • quality indicators

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Prioritizing gaps in stroke care: A two-round Delphi process'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this