Intervention Analysis Template

INTERVENTION ANALYSIS TEMPLATE
Intervention name to bring improvement within discharge plan:
Organisational intervention to improve discharge after
hospitalisation for acute stroke, a controlled before-after pilot study
SCOPING Scope of this intervention is to bring improvement within discharge
of patients suffered from acute stroke after hospitalization
Target population Target population of this organizational intervention are hospital
clinicians or practitioners who are involved in discharge care of
patients who had been hospitalized after suffering an acute stroke.
Problem Analysis It has been analysed that due to poor interaction and poor healthcare
management system discharge care of a patient is not planned in a
proper manner. Discharge care pan of such patients is extremely poor
because of various causes such as: due to poor discharge care plan
hospitalization stay of patients within hospital is much longer, unmet
needs of patients are not fulfilled in a proper manner. Patients are not
educated about their condition are not provided with an education
booklet for self-care planning. Less than 50 percent of patients
receive behavioural prevention education or prescription of
prevention medicines form healthcare practitioners.
Strategy mix It is an important part of analysing intervention because it directly
help evaluators and other stakeholders to identify what is being
evaluated. Most of the hospitals do not focus upon development of
individualized prevention management strategies for acute stroke
patients. It is important to develop a high- quality discharge plan for
such patients so that their hospital stay can be minimized. This
intervention will further help in enhancing overall quality of
discharge plan.
Timeframes this intervention has been completed and pilot study of this
intervention carried out for approximately 5 months. But completion
of this intervention took 12 months and was completed in 7 phases
that were:
Phase 1: baseline performance in which selection of hospitals were

done.
Phase 2: Intervention design was developed and finalized
Phase 3: pre- intervention performance was analysed with the help of
data completeness report
Phase 4: delivery of intervention was done in order to review the
process and data result quality
Phase 5: 2nd workshop of intervention was carried out in which
education to leaders were given considering local opinion and action
plan for behavioural change strategy was developed
Phase 6: Post implementation performance was analysed after 3
months in which self- monitoring was done using Australian stroke
clinical registry and through telephone support from project officer.
Phase 7: Lastly sustainability assessment was done after 12 months.
LOGIC MODEL Input: In this what will be invested are identified. Some of the main
things that were invested are: money, student and staff time, planning
time. Expertise, knowledge base and material for decision making
that can further help in decision making. Assistance of team
members and technology with all the planning activities.
Output activities: In this what is required to be developed,
delivered, and conduct (Biggs and et. al., 2017).
 Develop an organizational intervention for improving discharge
care by improving discharge after hospitalization
 To deliver an intervention that can help in enhancing overall
quality of discharge plan
 Conduct 2 workshops in which review of progress gap analysis is
to be done and education by local opinion leader is required to be
taken and on the basis of it review of performance data is
required to be done. On the bass of education taken by local
opinion leaders, education other stakeholders would be given
 Conduction of extensive research was done in order to identify
effectiveness of this intervention.
Output participants: Here all the participants whom researcher
reached were identified and specified. Some of the main participants

who were reached for development of intervention have been
identified below:
 Existing contributors or researchers who have carried out
research in this field. The did not participated within this
intervention development directly. In fact, their research and
knowledge were used for development of intervention program.
 Leader and new contributors were another important participant
who participated in provision of their opinion or for educating
other stakeholders in development of intervention program.
 Educators and decision makers patrocinated in taking important
decisions and developing an educational workshop for providing
education to other important stakeholders involved in this
intervention program development.
 Researcher and other team members directly participated in this
intervention program development and in interacting with others
for development of effective intervention program.
Outcome of evaluation plan:
 Short outcome: In this results in terms of learning are shown and
explained:
 Improved understanding of clinicians of ways in
which they can work upon bringing improvement within
discharge care plan
 Awareness of importance of high- quality discharge
care plan will be enhanced within all the stakeholders of this
intervention
 Opinion of local leaders will be taken in order to
ensure that intervention is being developed and implemented
in a proper and appropriate manner.
 Feedback from all the stakeholders involved in
development of intervention will be asked in order to identify
scope of improvement.
 Medium outcome:
 Adoption of self-monitoring system using Australian