Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 358, Issue 9293, 10 November 2001, Pages 1586-1592
The Lancet

Articles
Can differences in management processes explain different outcomes between stroke unit and stroke-team care?

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06652-1Get rights and content

Summary

Background

Stroke units reduce mortality and dependence, but the reasons are unclear. We have compared differences in management and complications of patients with acute stroke who were admitted to a stroke unit or to a general ward as part of a previously reported randomised trial.

Methods

304 patients had been randomly assigned to stroke units (n=152) or to general wards supported by a specialist stroke team (152). We used a structured format to gather prospective data on the frequency of prespecified interventions in each of the major aspects of stroke care. Observations were undertaken daily for the first week and every week for the next 3 months by independent observers. The effect of differences in management on outcome at 3 months was assessed with the modified Rankin score, dichotomised to good (0–3) and poor (4–6) outcome.

Findings

Patients in the stroke unit were monitored more frequently (odds ratio 2·1 [1·3–3·4]) and more patients received oxygen (2·0 [1·3–3·2]), antipyretics (6·4 [1·5–27·5]), measures to reduce aspiration (6·0 [2·3–15·5]), and early nutrition (14·4 [5·1–40·9]) than those in general wards. Complications were less frequent in patients in the stroke unit than those in general wards (0·6 [0·2–0·7]), with fewer patients having progression of stroke, chest infection, or dehydration. Measures to prevent aspiration, early feeding, stroke unit management, and frequency of complications independently affected outcome.

Interpretation

Differences in management and complications between the stroke unit and general wards differ substantially, even when specialist support is provided. Such differences could be responsible for the more favourable outcome seen in patients on stroke units than those on general wards.

Introduction

Several randomised studies have shown that management of patients in a stroke unit, both in the acute phase and during rehabilitation, is associated with significant reductions in mortality and dependence.1, 2, 3, 4 However, the exact nature of stroke-unit care remains poorly defined because of wide variations in practice in different units. Previous research5 to identify common themes in stroke management has shown that multidisciplinary teamwork, education of staff, and involvement of patients and their relatives characterise effective stroke rehabilitation. Research into the components of acute management has been more modest, but practices such as thrombolysis in selected individuals,6 physiological homoeostasis,7 early prescription of aspirin,8 anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation,9 and early mobilisation10 might be important in reduction of mortality and dependence after a stroke. Additionally, indirect evidence suggests that a higher proportion of patients in stroke units receive such interventions than those in non-specialist settings.2, 10

The processes of stroke management have not been investigated in great detail and most information is either superficial or based on selective case studies.11 Whether processes suspected to be important for favourable outcomes can be replicated in generic settings, thereby reducing the need for geographically defined locations to manage stroke patients, is unknown.1 We do not know how stroke units reduce mortality. Practices such as adequate hydration, maintenance of physiological homoeostasis, and prevention of complications probably contribute substantially,12 but such contributions have not been investigated in randomised trials that include patients from stroke onset with regular and complete follow-up using objective criteria for processes or events.

The translation of trial efficacy of stroke units into clinical effectiveness in mainstream practice requires replication of not only the structure but also the processes associated with a favourable outcome. Objective assessment of processes in specialist management is complex because specialist management consists of several elements working together. It might be possible to overcome some of these problems by categorising processes into theoretically defined and clinically relevant domains, which could then be used to analyse differences between settings.11 Since some processes might be interdependent, this dependency and the relation of the processes to the frequency of complications can be explored by further analysis to identify processes most strongly associated with better outcome.

We have previously reported a randomised controlled trial of 457 patients with acute stroke, which showed that stroke units were more effective than a specialist stroke team (and specialist domiciliary care) in reducing mortality and dependence after stroke.4 The objective of this study was to investigate factors that could explain why mortality and dependence were lower in the stroke unit than in stroke-team care by using prespecified objective criteria to compare processes of management and frequency of complications associated with stroke between different settings.

Section snippets

Patients

The trial4 allocated 457 patients with acute, moderately severe stroke to treatment in a stroke unit (n=152), general medical wards with specialist stroke team support (n=152), or specialist domiciliary stroke care (n=153) at the time of presentation. Patients allocated to the domiciliary-care group of the original trial were excluded from this analysis because a third (51) could not be managed at home and because management processes at home would be difficult to compare with hospital care.

Results

Of 152 patients allocated to the stroke unit, 118 (78%) were admitted within 24 h and 27 (18%) between 24 and 48 h of stroke onset. 124 of 153 (82%) patients allocated to general wards with specialist team support were admitted within 24 h and 20 (13%) between 24 and 48 h of onset. Both groups were well matched for median age (75 vs 77 years), sex (women 47% vs 51%), comorbidity, risk factor profile, and amount of independence before stroke. A similar proportion of patients in the stroke unit

Discussion

Our results show significant differences in frequency of assessment procedures, acute management, early rehabilitation, and secondary complications between patients allocated to the stroke unit and those allocated to stroke-team care on general medical wards—possibly the reason for the higher mortality and dependence seen in non-specialist settings. They also show that specialist aspects of stroke management cannot be replicated in generic settings, even when ongoing specialist stroke-team care

References (32)

  • JM Wardlaw et al.

    Thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke

    Cochrane Database Syst Rev

    (2000)
  • P Langhorne et al.

    Association between physiological homeostasis and early recovery after stroke

    Stroke

    (1999)
  • G Gubitz et al.

    Antiplatelet therapy for acute ischaemic stroke

    Cochrane Database Syst Rev

    (2000)
  • B Indredavik et al.

    Treatment in a combined acute and rehabilitation stroke unit: which aspects are most important?

    Stroke

    (1999)
  • P Langhorne et al.

    Stroke units: an evidence based approach

    (1998)
  • P Langhorne

    Measures to improve recovery after stroke

    Cerebrovasc Dis

    (1999)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text