Effect of acute stroke unit care integrated with care continuum versus conventional treatment: A randomized 1-year study of elderly patients: the Göteborg 70+ Stroke Study. Evaluation of rehabilitation methods in the hemiplegic patient. Study comparing the stroke unit outcome and conventional ward treatment: a randomized study in Joinville, Brazil. A randomized controlled trial of a stroke rehabilitation ward. Benefit of a stroke unit: a randomized controlled trial. [Intensive rehabilitation after apoplexy--a controlled pilot study]. A randomized trial of team care following stroke. II. Early activation in stroke: does it make a difference? A study of stroke patients treated in a non-intensive stroke unit or in general medical wards. Role of monitoring in management of acute ischemic stroke patients. The significance of intensity of rehabilitation of stroke--a controlled trial. Stroke units: an Australian perspective. A non-intensive stroke unit reduces functional disability and the need for long-term hospitalization. Improving stroke rehabilitation. A controlled study. Admitting acute ischemic stroke patients to a stroke care monitoring unit versus a conventional stroke unit: a randomized pilot study. Stroke unit versus general medical wards, II: neurological deficits and activities of daily living: a quasi-randomized controlled trial. Patients with severe stroke benefit most by interdisciplinary rehabilitation team approach. Where and how should elderly stroke patients be treated? A randomized trial. A comparison of functionally orientated medical care and formal rehabilitation in the management of patients with hemiplegia due to cerebrovascular disease. Assessment of the early effectiveness of a stroke unit in comparison to the general ward. Early assessment by a mobile stroke team: a randomised controlled trial. Role of stroke rehabilitation units in managing severe disability after stroke. Alternative strategies for stroke care: a prospective randomised controlled trial.
The aim of the study was to compare the effect of conventional treatment with the effect of acute stroke unit care integrated with geriatric stroke unit care continuum.
                A 1-year study was undertaken with 2:1 randomization to stroke unit care or conventional care, with assessment by an independent team. The study was composed of 249 elderly patients (aged >/=70 years) hospitalized for acute stroke, without previous cerebral lesion and without recognized need of care. Main outcome measures were patients at home after 1 year, ability in daily living activities, health-related quality of life score according to questionnaire, death or institutional care, and death or dependence.
                One hundred two patients (61%) in the stroke unit and 49 patients (59%) in the general ward group were alive and at home after 1 year (95% CI -10% to 16%). There were no significant differences in daily life activities or quality of life. In patients with concomitant cardiac disease, there was a reduction in death or institutional care after 3 months in the stroke unit group compared with the group receiving conventional care (28% versus 49%, respectively; 95% CI -40% to -3%). This effect did not remain after 1 year. Patients seeking care after 24 hours often had mild stroke and lived alone.
                There was no effect on the number of patients living at home after 1 year, but after 3 months of stroke unit care, a beneficial effect was found on mortality and the need for institutional care among those with concomitant heart disease. This study involved patients who were considerably older than those investigated in previous randomized studies of acute stroke unit care; thus, these findings will contribute to the specialized register of controlled trials in stroke. nan To assess the impact of a stroke unit (SU) on acute phase treatment when compared to a conventional general ward treatment (GW).
                Seventy-four patients with acute stroke were randomized between a SU and conventional general ward (GW). We compared both groups regarding the length of hospital stay, lethality and functional and clinical status within 6 months, using the Scandinavian scale and Barthel index.
                Thirty-five and thirty-nine patients were allocated at SU and GW, respectively. Lethality on the 10th day at SU and GW achieved 8.5% and 12.8% respectively (p= 0.41), whereas 30-days mortality rates achieved 14.2% and 28.2% (p= 0.24), 17.4% and 28.7% on the 3rd month (p= 0.39), and 25.7% and 30.7% on the 6th month (p= 0.41). Thirty-day survival curve achieved 1.8 log rank (p= 0.17), with a trend for lower lethality in the SU. In order to save one death in 6 months in SU, NNT (the number need to treat) was 20; to get one more home independent patient NNT was 15. No significant difference was found between the length of hospital stay and morbidity.
                No significant benefit was found in SU patients compared to GW group. However,an evident benefit in absolute numbers was observed in lethality, survival curve and NNT in thirty days period after stroke. Further collaborative studies or incresead number of patients are required to define the role of SU. In S.E. Kent, during 1978 and 1979, 225 patients, representing 228 occurrences of hemiplegia, were referred to a new 20-bed stroke rehabilitation ward. These patients were randomly allocated to treatment in the special ward (group A 112 strokes) or to remain in conventional treatment locations (group C 116 strokes); the two groups were closely similar, except for the initial level of consciousness. Survivors were observed at four-month intervals to one year. There are indications of benefit for patients in group A by comparison with Group C in terms of treatment received (number treated by remedial therapists, the extent of treatment, and the arrangements for after-care), and in outcome (survival and the proportion returned to the community). The direction of the trend of advantage is consistent with another recent controlled trial, although not all modes of improvement are identical in the two trials. It is suggested that every health district should develop a comprehensive policy of stroke management. In a randomized controlled trial we compared the clinical outcome of acute stroke patients, 110 of whom were allocated to treatment in a stroke unit and 110 to treatment in general medical wards. No significant difference existed between these groups with regard to sex, age, marital status, medical history, or functional impairment on admission. Outcome was measured at 6 and 52 weeks after the stroke by the proportion of patients at home, the proportion of patients in an institution, the mortality, and the functional state. After 6 weeks 56.4% of the patients randomized to the stroke unit and 32.7% of the patients randomized to the general medical wards were at home (p = 0.0004), and after 52 weeks 62.7% and 44.6%, respectively, were at home (p = 0.002). After 6 weeks 36.3% of the patients from the stroke unit and 50.0% from the general medical wards were in an institution (p = 0.02); after 52 weeks 12.7% and 22.7%, respectively, were institutionalized (p = 0.016). After 6 weeks mortality was 7.3% for the stroke unit group and 17.3% for the general medical wards group (p = 0.027). After 52 weeks mortality was 24.6% for the stroke unit group and 32.7% for the general medical wards group (difference not significant). Functional state was significantly better for patients treated in the stroke unit after both 6 and 52 weeks. We conclude that care of patients with acute stroke in a stroke unit improves clinical outcome compared with treatment in general medical wards. In a prospective, randomized, controlled trial we compared the clinical outcome for 65 acute stroke patients where 31 were treated in a stroke unit and 34 in general medical units. In the stroke unit the treatment principles of Bobath were used, and teamwork was essential in the treatment. The inclusion period was nine months. Patients were followed up at a control six months after hospital discharge. The two groups were comparable as concerned age, sex, number of patients > or = 75 years and functional impairment at hospital admission. The mortality was similar in the two groups of patients. Significantly fewer patients from the stroke unit group were referred to nursing homes, when the patients in function group five (those most severely ill) were excluded. The functional status at the six months post discharge control was similar in the two groups. The in-patient time was without significant difference between the two groups when patients referred to nursing homes were excluded. The need for primary nursing after discharge was similar in the two groups. We conclude from our pilot study that better organisation in a general medical ward would in some aspects improve the prognosis of a major proportion of stroke patients. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to examine the effects of interdisciplinary team care on acute hospitalized stroke patients. After obtaining baseline information on 42 stroke victims receiving conventional care in a general hospital, 130 stroke patients were stratified and randomly assigned either to Traditional or Team care. Assessments by independent evaluators permitted comparisons between Team and Traditional groups with reference to patient survival, motor performance and functional abilities. Data obtained prospectively from charts and treatment logs allowed the care process across groups to be compared. Results demonstrated that Team and Traditional patients fared similarly in survival. However there was an unexpected difference in survival depending upon sex. For motor performance, male survivors performed better with Team care and female survivors with the Traditional method. In terms of functional abilities, male patients receiving Team care again performed better than their Traditional counterparts, whereas in women there was no difference between the treatment groups. The effect of early systematic activation in daily nursing care was studied in an experimental group of patients with acute stroke. The staff had received an educational programme on stroke and its care. Sixty stroke patients were admitted to two general medical wards during a period of 9 months. Fifty-two stroke patients from two other such wards formed a control group. The functional capacity was measured by a specially constructed Activity Index (AI) at regular intervals in all patients. The functional capacity of the experimental group improved significantly with the special care in hospital up to 4 weeks after the stroke, while the change in the control group was non-significant according to the chosen level of significance. During the remainder of the 3-month study period with routine care in both groups, the two groups improved more equally. The activation programme may thus have had a stimulation effect while it was in progress. To study the representativity and outcome of patients admitted to a stroke unit (SU) (n = 269), a comparison was made with all stroke patients treated in general medical wards (GMW) (n = 225) in the same hospital during two years. There was no difference between the patient groups regarding sex, age, previous cardiovascular diseases or neurological deficit on admission. As expected, more diagnostic examinations were performed in the SU than in the GMW where a diagnosis of ill-defined stroke was very frequent. A higher frequency of lumbar puncture with CSF spectrophotometry would have increased considerably the number of specific diagnoses in the GMW. Acute and, particularly, secondary prophylactic treatment was more often given in the SU. There was no difference between the patient groups regarding mortality or length of hospital stay. Although several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of specialist Stroke Unit (SU) care of stroke patients, there is still disagreement over how these units are best organized. We sought to clarify the role of continuous monitoring of physiological parameters in acute ischemic stroke.
                We conducted a prospective study of 268 first-ever ischemic stroke patients admitted to our Cerebrovascular Department and allocated, according to the availability of beds, to the SU or Cerebrovascular Unit (CU). Statistical analysis compared mortality and outcome at discharge, medical and neurological complications, and length of hospitalization in the 2 care settings.
                Two hundred sixty-eight patients were enrolled. A good outcome at discharge, observed in 114 SU patients (85%) and 78 CU patients (58%) (odds ratio, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.8; P<0.02), was found, on multivariate analysis, to be significantly related to type of care (SU versus CU). A significantly greater proportion of SU patients showed adverse changes in monitored parameters, which required acute medical treatment (SU: 64%; CU: 19%; P<0.0001). The mean duration of these complications was significantly shorter in the SU patients (SU: 1.0 day; CU: 2.4 days; P<0.02), and the outcome in patients experiencing complications covered by the monitoring protocol was significantly better in the SU (66%) than in the CU (35%) group (P<0.0001).
                Admission of acute stroke patients to a monitoring SU may positively influence their outcome at discharge. Confirmation of our findings in larger trials will indicate the need for a revision of the minimum requirements of SUs, with the addition of monitoring as a new requirement. Of the 373 stroke patients 95 were admitted to the feasibility study of stroke rehabilitation. The patients were divided into two groups, an intensive and a normal treatment group. In this study, the functional recovery of stroke, measured by ADL and motor function was significantly better in the intensive treatment group. There was no difference in institutionalization or incidence of death between the groups. The gain of ADL and motor function was greatest during the first three months after stroke in the intensive treatment group. The conclusion is that intensified physiotherapy seems to improve the functional recovery of stroke patients. nan In a prospective controlled trial we compared the clinical outcome for unselected acute stroke patients in a non-intensive stroke unit (n = 110) and in general medical wards (n = 183). The patients were comparable in age, marital state and functional impairment on admission. Case fatality rates over the first year after the stroke were similar in the two groups. By three months after the stroke, 15% of the survivors initially admitted to the stroke unit and 39% of those admitted to general medical wards remained hospitalized (p less than 0.001). The corresponding figures by one year after the cerebrovascular accident were 12% and 28%, respectively (p less than 0.05). A greater proportion of surviving stroke unit patients was independent in walking (0.10 greater than p greater than 0.05), personal hygiene (p less than 0.05) and dressing (p less than 0.001). Essential features of the stroke unit are team work headed by a stroke nurse, staff, patient and family education and very early onset of rehabilitation. We conclude that this strategy improves functional outcome and reduces the need for long-term hospital care. Assessment of stroke rehabilitation is complicated by the heterogeneity of patients and settings and by difficulties in disentangling effects of organization from effects of types and amounts of treatment input.
                A prospective controlled study was undertaken in 245 stroke patients stratified into three groups according to prognosis and managed on a stroke rehabilitation unit (n = 124) or general medical wards (n = 121). Patients were randomly allocated to either setting 2 weeks after stroke and were comparable for baseline characteristics.
                Patients on general medical wards received more physiotherapy on average (16.2 +/- 7.2 versus 14.3 +/- 3.2 hours; P < .05) but similar amounts of occupational therapy (9.3 +/- 2.8 versus 9.5 +/- 3.2 hours) compared with stroke unit patients. More time was spent on individual rehabilitation on the stroke unit compared with general wards (P < .001). Functional abilities at discharge, destination of discharge, and length of hospital stay in patients with good prognosis were comparable in both settings. Patients with poor prognosis managed on general wards showed higher mortality (P < .05) and longer hospital stay (123.2 +/- 48.2 versus 52.3 +/- 19.8 days; P < .001), but functional abilities at discharge in survivors were comparable with those of stroke unit patients. Patients with intermediate prognosis had significantly better outcome on the stroke unit, with more patients being discharged home (75% versus 52%; P < .001), shorter average length of hospital stay (48.7 +/- 17.2 versus 104.6 +/- 28.6 days; P < .001), and better functional abilities at discharge (P < .05).
                Stroke units improve outcome and reduce hospital stay without increasing therapy time. Their effectiveness may be enhanced by patient selection. Pathophysiological considerations and observational studies indicate that elevated body temperature, hypoxia, hypotension, and cardiac arrhythmias in the acute phase of ischemic stroke may aggravate brain damage and worsen outcome.
                Both units were organized with the same standard care and multidisciplinary approach to nursing and rehabilitation. A blinded observer assessed functional outcome at 3 months with the modified Rankin scale (mRS) and Barthel Index (BI). End points were (1) poor outcome, defined as either mRS > or =4 or BI <60 or the need for institutional care and (2) mortality.
                Fifty-four patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomized. The groups were well matched for baseline characteristics, stroke subtype, stroke severity, vascular risk factors, and prognostic factors. Poor outcome was seen in 7 (25.9%) patients in the SCMU group and in 13 (48.1%) in the SU group (P=0.16). Mortality was lower in the SCMU group than in the SU group (1 [3.7%] vs 7 [25.9%]; odds ratio, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.96], P=0.05).
                This pilot study suggests that admission of acute stroke patients to an SCMU may reduce mortality and poor outcome. A larger trial is required to confirm these findings. The efficacy of stroke units has been extensively examined. It is unknown, however, whether the superiority of the stroke unit will remain after the increased focus on stroke treatment in general medicine. This study of patients admitted to the hospital early and with a short length of stay determines the effect and identifies certain important components of a stroke unit.
                Five hundred fifty patients aged 60 years or older with acute stroke were allocated by a quasi-randomized design to a stroke unit or a general medical ward based on date of birth in the month. Patients admitted within 24 hours of onset were enrolled. Outcomes after 7 months were death, proportion needing long-term care, and change in neurological and functional state assessed by the Scandinavian Stroke Scale and Barthel Index.
                Seven months after admission there was a trend in favor of the stroke unit in all outcome measures, but no significant differences in clinical outcomes were found except for change in the Scandinavian Stroke Scale score. Recurrent stroke during hospitalization occurred more often in the general medical ward (P = .03). The stroke unit was significantly more aggressive in mobilization out of bed (P<.01) and use of parenteral fluid (P<.0001), aspirin (P<.0001), antipyretics (P<.0001), and antibiotics (P<.0001).
                Our study confirms the benefit of the stroke unit, but the effects on the most reliable clinical outcomes were modest and insignificant. Treatment in this stroke unit hastened recovery. More aggressive rehabilitation and use of parenteral fluid, aspirin, antipyretics, and antibiotics appeared in the stroke unit. We evaluated the efficacy of a regular interdisciplinary stroke team approach on rehabilitation outcome.
                We compared a stroke rehabilitation unit (SRU) with regular interdisciplinary stroke team conferences with general rehabilitation ward (GRW) without such conferences in the same rehabilitation hospital. One hundred and seventy-eight patients within 3 months after stroke were allocated to SRU or GRW, based on bed availability. Main outcome measures were the Functional Independence Measure, Stroke Impairment Assessment Set, length of hospital stay, discharge disposition and cost of hospitalization.
                The interval between stroke onset and admission to our hospital was significantly longer in the SRU (n = 91) group compared with the GRW group (n = 87, p < 0.05). Although comparable numbers of patients were discharged home (74.7% in the SRU vs. 71.3% in the GRW), significantly more patients (p < 0.0001) with severe disability were discharged home in the SRU group (47.4%) compared with the GRW group (0%). There were no significant differences in the increase in Functional Independence Measure score, Stroke Impairment Assessment Set score,length of hospital stay, or cost.
                Patients with severe stroke appeared to benefit most from regular interdisciplinary stroke team conferences in the SRU and had an improved discharge disposition.
                Copyright (c) 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel. Elderly stroke patients in particular are at risk of receiving less than optimal care. We studied the effects of the department care (medicine versus neurology) on the outcome of elderly stroke patients in a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up.
                A total of 243 consecutive patients aged 65 years or older with acute stroke were randomized to receive care in the Departments of Medicine or the Department of Neurology of a university teaching hospital with a referral area of 1.1 million. The outcome was assessed by mortality, length of hospital stay, ability to live at home on discharge, Barthel Index, and Rankin grades at 1 year.
                There were no differences in sex and age, severity or type of stroke, other diseases, or social factors between the two groups. One-year mortality was 21% in both patients treated by the Departments of Medicine and those treated by the Department of Neurology. Patients treated by the Department of Neurology were discharged an average of 16 days earlier (24 versus 40 days). The length of hospital stay of patients aged younger than 75 years differed significantly (P = .02). Patients randomized to neurological wards more often went directly home (75% versus 62%; P = .03), and their functional status was better as assessed with Barthel Index and Rankin grades at 1 year (P = .02 and P = .03, respectively). Independent predictors of a better functional outcome and shorter hospital stay by stepwise multivariate analysis included management by the Department of Neurology.
                Well-organized management of elderly stroke patients was associated with a better outcome. It was also the more economical alternative. nan Stroke unit is the most effective treatment method to benefit stroke patients. Our study is to evaluate the early effectiveness of a hospital stroke unit (SU).
                Three hundred and ninety-two patients who had suffered from acute strokes and who were admitted to our hospital between December 2001 and January 2003 were recruited for this controlled study. All patients were sent at random to either the SU or the general ward (GW) for treatment. The following indices were measured by: Barthel Index (BI), National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), Oxford Handicap Scale (OHS).
                The mean change in BI score between the day of admission and the day of discharge was 20.00 +/- 24.36 for the SU group and 10.63 +/- 23.59 for the GW group. A difference that is statistically significant (P = 0.000). The mean change in NIHSS score was -2.01 +/- 6.61 for the SU group and 0.55 +/- 7.44 for the GW group. A difference that is also statistically significant (P = 0.000). Finally, the mean change in OHS score was -0.74 +/- 1.04 for the SU group and -0.28 +/- 0.98 for the GW group, also a statistically significant difference (P = 0.000). Among SU patients, patient satisfaction was higher (P = 0.000), the rehabilitation success rate was higher (P = 0.000), and there were fewer complications (P = 0.000).
                Compared to GW patients, stroke patients treated in a special SU were able to return to normal daily activities earlier, with better social abilities, and have reduced neurological defects, without increasing the overall economic burden. There is overwhelming evidence of the effectiveness of specialist stroke rehabilitation, but more limited evidence of the effectiveness of organised stroke care during the acute phase of stroke.
                To determine the impact on outcome of access to a mobile team during the acute phase of stroke among patients admitted to general wards.
                308 patients admitted to one of two hospitals within 5 days of the onset of a clinically diagnosed stroke.
                Randomised controlled trial. STUDY GROUPS: Following admission, patients in the intervention arm were visited by members of a mobile stroke team who advised clinical staff on appropriate and timely investigation and management. They co-ordinated early input from therapy groups and identified those ready for transfer to the stroke rehabilitation unit. Patients in the control arm were not visited by the mobile stroke team.
                All-cause mortality measured at 6 weeks and 12 months.
                There was no statistically significant difference observed between study groups in mortality at 6 weeks (95% CI(adj) -7.4 to 7.4%) nor at 12 months ( 95% CI(adj) -4.1 to 15.9%). There were also no differences observed between study groups in morbidity outcomes or health-related quality of life measured at 12 months.
                The trial was terminated before the necessary sample size was collected but findings suggest that the mobile stroke team failed to confer significant long-term mortality benefit compared with general ward-based care alone. Stroke unit rehabilitation tends to be directed toward stroke patients with moderately severe disabilities ("the middle group"). Data collected on a stroke rehabilitation unit, however, showed improving outcome over 3 years in patients with a poor prognosis (discharge home: 48% versus 16%, P < .02; discharge Barthel Index score: 9 versus 6, P < .05). The hypothesis that stroke rehabilitation units may improve outcome in severely disabled stroke patients was tested in this study.
                A randomized controlled study was undertaken in 71 patients with a poor prognosis who were treated either on a stroke rehabilitation unit (n = 34) or on general wards (n = 37) to compare outcome between the two groups. Data collected were also compared with those from a methodologically similar study undertaken 3 years ago.
                Severe stroke patients treated on the stroke rehabilitation unit had a significantly better outcome compared with general wards (mortality: 21% versus 46%, P < .05; discharge home 47% versus 19%, P < .01; median length of hospital stay: 43 versus 59 days, P < .02). The number of stroke unit patients being discharged home had increased significantly from the previous study, with a trend toward improvement in median discharge Barthel Index score.
                Stroke rehabilitation units may improve outcome in severe stroke patients. This improvement appears to be due to the development of innovative management strategies that reduce mortality and institutionalization and enable caregivers to support more disabled stroke patients at home. Organised specialist care for stroke improves outcome, but the merits of different methods of organisation are in doubt. This study compares the efficacy of stroke unit with stroke team or domiciliary care.
                A single-blind, randomised, controlled trial was undertaken in 457 acute-stroke patients (average age 76 years, 48% women) randomly assigned to stroke unit, general wards with stroke team support, or domiciliary stroke care, within 72 h of stroke onset. Outcome was assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome measure was death or institutionalisation at 12 months. Analyses were by intention to treat.
                152 patients were allocated to the stroke unit, 152 to stroke team, and 153 to domiciliary stroke care. 51 (34%) patients in the domiciliary group were admitted to hospital after randomisation. Mortality or institutionalisation at 1 year were lower in patients on a stroke unit than for those receiving care from a stroke team (21/152 [14%] vs 45/149 [30%]; p<0.001) or domiciliary care (21/152 [14%] vs 34/144 [24%]; p=0.03), mainly as a result of reduction in mortality. The proportion of patients alive without severe disability at 1 year was also significantly higher on the stroke unit compared with stroke team (129/152 [85%] vs 99/149 [66%]; p<0.001) or domiciliary care (129/152 [85%] vs 102/144 [71%]; p=0.002). These differences were present at 3 and 6 months after stroke.
                Stroke units are more effective than a specialist stroke team or specialist domiciliary care in reducing mortality, institutionalisation, and dependence after stroke.
Stroke patients who receive organised inpatient care in a stroke unit are more likely to be alive, independent, and living at home one year after the stroke. The benefits were most apparent in units based in a discrete ward. No systematic increase was observed in the length of inpatient stay.