Narrow Results

Background: A clinical quality improvement programme named Accelerated Stroke Ambulation Programme (ASAP) was piloted in Physiotherapy Department of Tai Po Hospital from 1st October 2019 to 30th September 2020 and executed as a standard practice afterwards. The goal of ASAP was to facilitate early maximal walking ability of stroke patients in early rehabilitation phase. ASAP featured (1) proactive outcome monitoring and standardised process compliance monitoring by a patient database — Stroke Registry; (2) standardised mobility prediction by Reference Modified Rivermead Mobility Index (MRMI) Gain and (3) standardised intervention database — Stroke Treatment Library. Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of ASAP in an inpatient rehabilitation setting for stroke patients in terms of functional outcomes. Methods: The design was a retrospective comparative study to analyse the difference in functional outcomes of Pre-ASAP Group (1st October 2018 - 30th September 2019) and Post-ASAP Group (1st October 2020–30th September 2021). The primary outcome measures were MRMI, Berg’s Balance Scale (BBS), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), MRMI Gain, BBS Gain, MBI Gain, MRMI Efficiency, BBS Efficiency and MBI Efficiency. Results: There 348 subjects in Pre-ASAP Group and 281 subjects in Post-ASAP Group. Both groups had highly significant within-group improvement in MRMI, BBS and MBI ($p<0.001$). The MRMI Gain of Pre-ASAP Group and Post-ASAP Group was 6.32 and 7.42, respectively; and the difference was significant ($p<0.05$). The BBS Gain of Pre-ASAP Group and Post-ASAP Group was 8.17 and 9.70, respectively; and the difference was in margin of significance ($p=0.069$). The MBI Gain of Pre-ASAP Group and Post-ASAP Group was 10.69 and 11.96, respectively; but the difference was non-significant ($p=0.280$). The MRMI Efficiency, BBS Efficiency and MBI Efficiency of Post-ASAP Group were higher than Pre-ASAP Group but the difference was non-significant. The results of this study reflected that stroke rehabilitation programme with proactive outcome monitoring, standardised process compliance monitoring, standardised mobility prediction and standardised intervention database was practical in real clinical practice with better functional outcomes than traditional physiotherapy practice which were dominated by personal preference and experience of therapists. Conclusion: Proactive outcome monitoring, standardised process compliance monitoring, standardised mobility prediction and standardised intervention database may enhance the effectiveness in terms of functional outcomes of stroke rehabilitation programme.

In many hi-tech sectors one of the most important competitive weapons is standardisation. It is particularly true in network markets where users would like to buy products compatible with those bought by others. Different processes may lead to standard setting. Sometimes there are fierce standardisation wars, whereas in other cases competitors are able to agree on a common standard before the introduction of a new technology on the market. Quite often a single firm is not able to adequately sponsor the adoption of its technology as a standard. Therefore, partners supporting the standard-setting process have to be found and collaborations have to be formed. In this paper, the reasons that may lead firms to co-operate or not co-operate are first analysed and then the different typologies of collaborations are described together with their motivations and critical success factors. Finally, the dynamic of the standard-setting process will be investigated and discussed. The paper is based on the study of ten cases in the multimedia sector.

Young companies need support concerning decisions related to intellectual properties. Entrepreneurs can resort to a menu of strategies, not only patenting. First, we explore the literature on standardisation and patenting and relate it to entrepreneurship to identify the internal and external influencing factors as well as the motives and risks related to decision making. Then, we conduct five case studies to explore these influencing factors, while trying to reconstruct the decision making process. We find five main factors: technology, resources, knowledge protection vs. knowledge diffusion, need for partnerships, and pace of innovation. Companies should use patents when their technology is patentable and knowledge protection is perceived essential. Standardisation is suitable when knowledge diffusion is more important than protection, and companies look for establishing new partnerships. These insights are integrated into a decision tree that provides guidance to young entrepreneurs to make an informed decision regarding intellectual properties.

The emergence of digital innovation in academia and practice has been established, and it is time to consider when and how it affects innovation performance. Before this background, we examine how innovation practices such as open innovation and dominant design impact innovation performance, particularly in the case of digital innovation. We develop a theoretical framework that is tested on a long panel of patent data for 788 technologies over 32 years. Open innovation has no impact on the innovative performance of technologies in general, but for digital innovation, we find a positive effect. In addition, dominant design has a stronger impact on the innovative performance for digital innovations than for other innovations. We conclude that the management of digital innovation is different from that of other innovations since both open innovation and dominant design are more important for innovative performance. Indeed, some of the benefits of openness may only apply to digital innovation.

The ability to utilise corporate environmental reports to benchmark environmental performance requires the development and inclusion of standardised environmental performance indicators. Most systems for benchmarking corporate environmental reports are measures of environmental activities rather than performance. The UK Water Industry has considerable experience in measuring and reporting standardised environmental performance indicators to the regulator and publishing corporate environmental reports. An analysis of corporate environmental reports shows that the inclusion of industry standardised environmental performance indicators is patchy and inconsistent. Moreover, slight differences in units of measurement make comparisons very difficult. A new set of standardised environmental performance indicators developed by the water industry itself, shows similar findings when compared against corporate environmental reports. At the current time corporate environmental reports cannot be used to benchmark performance. There is no reason why corporate environmental reports could not be adjusted to include the two sets of standardised environmental performance indicators examined. In their absence there seems to be little purpose in benchmarking corporate environmental reports.

In many hi-tech sectors one of the most important competitive weapons is standardisation. It is particularly true in network markets where users would like to buy products compatible with those bought by others. Different processes may lead to standard setting. Sometimes there are fierce standardisation wars, whereas in other cases competitors are able to agree on a common standard before the introduction of a new technology on the market. Quite often a single firm is not able to adequately sponsor the adoption of its technology as a standard. Therefore, partners supporting the standard-setting process have to be found and collaborations have to be formed. In this paper, the reasons that may lead firms to co-operate or not cooperate are first analysed and then the different typologies of collaborations are described together with their motivations and critical success factors. Finally, the dynamic of the standard-setting process will be investigated and discussed. The paper is based on the study of ten cases in the multimedia sector.

The provision of central resources of human stem cell lines will be an important element in enabling progress in stem cell research and the development of safe and effective cell therapies. These resource centres, commonly referred to as "stem cell banks", could promote advances in the field of stem cell research, by providing access to well-characterised and quality controlled seed stocks of human stem cell lines that have been checked for appropriate ethical provenance. Such banks can also deliver benefits for the field through establishing international collaboration and standardisation between the developing national stem cell banking centres. This chapter will review the key issues that centres banking and distributing stem cells must address to support the research community in the development of exciting cell therapies for the future.