Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Stroke
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Published Online
on April 26, 2007

Stroke. 2007
Published online before print April 26, 2007, doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.106.480871
A more recent version of this article appeared on June 1, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
38/6/1886    most recent
STROKEAHA.106.480871v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Seenan, P.
Right arrow Articles by Langhorne, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Seenan, P.
Right arrow Articles by Langhorne, P.
Related Collections
Right arrow Other Stroke Treatment - Medical

Submitted on December 20, 2006
Accepted on January 9, 2007

Stroke Units in Their Natural Habitat. Systematic Review of Observational Studies

Pamela Seenan MRCP; Marita Long RN; and Peter Langhorne PhD, FRCP*

From the Academic Section of Geriatric Medicine, Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: p.langhorne{at}clinmed.gla.ac.uk.

Background and Purpose--Within clinical trials, stroke patients allocated to receive organized inpatient (stroke unit) care are more likely to survive, return home, and regain independence than those allocated to conventional care. However, there are concerns that the benefits seen in clinical trials may not be replicated in routine practice. We carried out a systematic review of observational studies of stroke unit implementation.

Methods--We searched (up to January 2006) MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, British Nursing Index, Cochrane Stroke Group register, and recent conference abstracts for observational studies that compared the outcomes of stroke patients managed in a stroke unit versus non-stroke unit care. We excluded studies that did not describe either matching for baseline prognostic factors or adjustment for case-mix characteristics. The primary outcome was death within 1 year. We also recorded poor outcome (death, institutional care, or dependency). Data analysis used the generic inverse variance method in Revman 4.2. Where raw data were provided, effect sizes and variances were calculated accordingly. We used a random-effects model and explored for sources of heterogeneity.

Results--We identified 72 articles describing stroke unit outcomes; 25 were eligible for review; and 18 provided data on case fatality or poor outcome. Stroke unit care was associated with significantly reduced odds of death (odds ratio=0.79, 95% CI=0.73 to 0.86; P<0.00001) and of death or poor outcome (odds ratio=0.87, 95% CI=0.80 to 0.95; P=0.002) within 1 year of stroke. Results were complicated by significant heterogeneity (P<0.05), mainly in single-center studies.

Conclusions--Although these results are complicated by potential bias and heterogeneity, the observed benefit associated with stroke unit care in routine practice is comparable to that in clinical trials.


Key words: stroke unit • stroke outcome • systematic review • meta-analysis




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
StrokeHome page
R. F. Lyons, A. G. Rudd, and C. Alvaro
Advances in Health Policy 2007
Stroke, February 1, 2008; 39(2): 264 - 267.
[Full Text] [PDF]