Dataset Information

Effect of aphasia on acute stroke outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine the independent effects of aphasia on outcomes during acute stroke admission, controlling for total NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores and loss of consciousness.

Methods

Data from the Tulane Stroke Registry were used from July 2008 to December 2014 for patient demographics, NIHSS scores, length of stay (LOS), complications (sepsis, deep vein thrombosis), and discharge modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score. Aphasia was defined as a score >1 on question 9 on the NIHSS on admission and hemiparesis as >1 on questions 5 or 6.

Results

Among 1,847 patients, 866 (46%) had aphasia on admission. Adjusting for NIHSS score and inpatient complications, those with aphasia had a 1.22 day longer LOS than those without aphasia, whereas those with hemiparesis (n = 1,225) did not have any increased LOS compared to those without hemiparesis. Those with aphasia had greater odds of having a complication (odds ratio [OR] 1.44, confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.93, p = 0.0174) than those without aphasia, which was equivalent to those having hemiparesis (OR 1.47, CI 1.09-1.99, p = 0.0137). Controlling for NIHSS scores, aphasia patients had higher odds of discharge mRS 3-6 (OR 1.42 vs 1.15).

Conclusion

Aphasia is independently associated with increased LOS and complications during the acute stroke admission, adding $2.16 billion annually to US acute stroke care. The presence of aphasia was more likely to produce a poor functional outcome than hemiparesis. These data suggest that further research is necessary to determine whether establishing adaptive communication skills can mitigate its consequences in the acute stroke setting.

SUBMITTER: Boehme AK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5135027 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEnhancing speech-language therapy remains the most effective strategy for improving post-stroke aphasia, However, conventional face-to-face interventions often lack the necessary therapeutic intensity. In recent years, mobile application-based speech-language therapy has emerged progressively, offering new opportunities for independent rehabilitation among aphasic patients. This review aims to evaluate the impact of mobile application-based interventions on post-stroke aphasic.MethodsBy conducting a systematic search across five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus), we identified and included studies that investigated the utilization of mobile application-based technologies (such as computers, iPads, etc.) for treating post-stroke aphasia.ResultsThis study included 15 research investigations, including 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), four self-controlled studies and one cross-over experimental design study. Among these, eight studies demonstrated the efficacy of mobile application-based therapy in enhancing overall language functionality for post-stroke aphasia patients, three studies highlighted its potential for improving communication skills, three studies observed its positive impact on spontaneous speech expression. Moreover, four studies indicated its effectiveness in enhancing naming abilities, two studies underscored the positive influence of mobile application-based interventions on the quality of life for individuals with aphasia. Six studies noted that speech improvement effects were maintained during the follow-up period.ConclusionThe results of this review demonstrate the potential of mobile application-based interventions for improving speech-language function in individuals with aphasia. However, further high-quality research is needed to establish their effects across different domains and to delve into the comparative advantages of various treatment approaches.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=405248.

Project description:BackgroundIntegrated care pathways (ICP) in stroke management are increasingly being implemented to improve outcomes of acute stroke patients. We evaluated the effect of implementing a 72 hour stroke care bundle on early outcomes among patients admitted within seven days post stroke to the national referral hospital in Uganda.MethodsIn a one year non-randomised controlled study, 127 stroke patients who had 'usual care' (control group) were compared to 127 stroke patients who received selected elements from an ICP (intervention group). Patients were consecutively enrolled (controls first, intervention group second) into each group over 5 month periods and followed to 30-days post stroke. Incidence outcomes (mortality and functional ability) were compared using chi square test and adjusted for potential confounders. Kaplan Meier survival estimates and log rank test for comparison were used for time to death analysis for all strokes and by stroke severity categories. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, median survival time and median length of hospital stay.ResultsMortality within 7 days was higher in the intervention group compared to controls (RR 13.1, 95% CI 3.3-52.9). There was no difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups (RR 1.2, 95% CI 0.5-2.6). There was better 30-day survival in patients with severe stroke in the intervention group compared to controls (P = 0.018). The median survival time was 30 days (IQR 29-30 days) in the control group and 30 days (IQR 7-30 days) in the intervention group. In the intervention group, 41patients (32.3%) died in hospital compared to 23 (18.1%) in controls (P < 0.001). The median length of hospital stay was 8 days (IQR 5-12 days) in the controls and 4 days (IQR 2-7 days) in the intervention group. There was no difference in functional outcomes between the groups (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.4-2.2).ConclusionsWhile implementing elements of a stroke-focused ICP in a Ugandan national referral hospital appeared to have little overall benefit in mortality and functioning, patients with severe stroke may benefit on selected outcomes. More research is needed to better understand how and when stroke protocols should be implemented in sub-Saharan African settings.Trial registrationPan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201510001272347.