5th Edition of Stroke Guidelines Rosemary Cunningham Sue Pownall

Context Intercollegiate Working Party (IWP) made up of many organisations across health, social care and voluntary sector. Professional representatives are not paid Covers SSNAP, Stroke Guidelines, Peer review, response to national agenda. Limited ‘air time’ in meetings Level of research accepted is based on top level rated methodologies If individual papers in a review the review is used. Pragmatic approach taken so that where no research or v limited research exists but clinical practice indicates best practice then Consensus decision taken. Reviewers – academics and clinicians

Context for Stroke Guidelines 18 months to 2 year process Review groups set up through RCSLT to support the guideline process Conflicts of interest disclosed RCTs, Cochrane reviews, Systematic Reviews, Consensus IWP has oversight of whole document Working Party has final consensus decision

Process for 5th edition Editorial board set up to overview the process RCP searched for papers Review groups read and liaised re outcomes Teleconferences held with one of the editors Recommendations agreed Cross referencing checked Consultation process Final Working party consensus 3 Editors Recommendations for aphasia had least debate owing to timings

Recommendations Subject to interpretation IWP not keen to identify specific professional groups Standard of research evidence plays strong part in emphasis taken Need to use whole document as some elements of SLT will be included in other areas Need to know what elements to use to support services