Dataset Information

Structured follow-up pathway to support people after transient ischaemic attack and minor stroke (SUPPORT TIA): protocol for a feasibility study and process evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

People who experience transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and minor stroke have limited follow-up despite rapid specialist review in hospital. This means they often have unmet needs and feel abandoned following discharge. Care needs after TIA/minor stroke include information provision (diagnosis and stroke risk), stroke prevention (medication and lifestyle change) and holistic care (residual problems and return to work or usual activities). This protocol describes a feasibility study and process evaluation of an intervention to support people after TIA/minor stroke. The study aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of (1) the intervention and (2) the trial procedures for a future randomised controlled trial of this intervention.

Methods and analysis

This is a multicentre, randomised (1:1) feasibility study with a mixed-methods process evaluation. Sixty participants will be recruited from TIA clinics or stroke wards at three hospital sites (England). Intervention arm participants will be offered a nurse or allied health professional-led follow-up appointment 4 weeks after TIA/minor stroke. The multifaceted intervention includes: a needs checklist, action plan, resources to support management of needs, a general practitioner letter and training to deliver the intervention. Control arm participants will receive usual care. Follow-up will be self-completed questionnaires (12 weeks and 24 weeks) and a clinic appointment (24 weeks). Follow-up questionnaires will measure anxiety, depression, fatigue, health related quality of life, self-efficacy and medication adherence. The clinic appointment will collect body mass index, blood pressure, cholesterol and medication. Assessment of feasibility and acceptability will include quantitative process variables (such as recruitment and questionnaire response rates), structured observations of study processes, and interviews with a subsample of participants and clinical staff.

Ethics and dissemination

Favourable ethical opinion was gained from the Wales Research Ethics Committee (REC) 1 (23 February 2021, REC reference: 21/WA/0036). Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. A lay summary and dissemination strategy will be codesigned with consumers. The lay summary and journal publication will be distributed on social media.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN39864003.

SUBMITTER: Turner GM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9207897 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the effectiveness and safety of dual agent antiplatelet therapy combining clopidogrel and aspirin to prevent recurrent thrombotic and bleeding events compared with aspirin alone in patients with acute minor ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, placebo controlled trials. DATA SOURCES:Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO website, PsycINFO, and grey literature up to 4 July 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS:Two reviewers independently screened potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria and assessed the risk of bias using a modified version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A third team member reviewed all final decisions, and the team resolved disagreements through discussion. When reports omitted data that were considered important, clarification and additional information was sought from the authors. The analysis was conducted in RevMan 5.3 and MAGICapp based on GRADE methodology. RESULTS:Three eligible trials involving 10?447 participants were identified. Compared with aspirin alone, dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin that was started within 24 hours of symptom onset reduced the risk of non-fatal recurrent stroke (relative risk 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.80, I2=0%, absolute risk reduction 1.9%, high quality evidence), without apparent impact on all cause mortality (1.27, 0.73 to 2.23, I2=0%, moderate quality evidence) but with a likely increase in moderate or severe extracranial bleeding (1.71, 0.92 to 3.20, I2=32%, absolute risk increase 0.2%, moderate quality evidence). Most stroke events, and the separation in incidence curves between dual and single therapy arms, occurred within 10 days of randomisation; any benefit after 21 days is extremely unlikely. CONCLUSIONS:Dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin given within 24 hours after high risk TIA or minor ischaemic stroke reduces subsequent stroke by about 20 in 1000 population, with a possible increase in moderate to severe bleeding of 2 per 1000 population. Discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy within 21 days, and possibly as early as 10 days, of initiation is likely to maximise benefit and minimise harms.

Project description:IntroductionAntiplatelet therapy combining aspirin and clopidogrel is considered to be a key intervention for acute ischaemic minor stroke (AIMS) and transient ischaemic attack (TIA). However, the interindividual variability in response to clopidogrel resulting from the polymorphisms in clopidogrel metabolism-related genes has greatly limited its efficacy. To date, there are no reports on individualised antiplatelet therapy for AIMS and TIA based on the genetic testing and clinical features. Therefore, we conduct this randomised controlled trial to validate the hypothesis that the individualised antiplatelet therapy selected on the basis of a combination of genetic information and clinical features would lead to better clinical outcomes compared with the standard care based only on clinical features in patients with AIMS or TIA.Methods and analysisThis trial will recruit 2382 patients with AIMS or TIA who meet eligibility criteria. Patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to pharmacogenetic group and standard group. Both groups receive a loading dose of 300 mg aspirin and 300 mg clopidogrel on day 1, followed by 100 mg aspirin per day on days 2-365. The P2Y12 receptor antagonist is selected by the clinician according to the genetic information and clinical features for pharmacogenetic group and clinical features for the standard group on days 2-21. The primary efficacy endpoint is a new stroke event (ischaemic or haemorrhagic) that happens within 1 year. The secondary efficacy endpoint is analysed as the individual or composite outcomes of the new clinical vascular event (ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, myocardial infarction or vascular death). Baseline characteristics and outcomes after treatment will be evaluated.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol has been approved by the ethics committee of Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine (No. LL-2018-KY-012). We will submit the results of this trial for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberChiCTR1800019911; Pre-results.

Project description:ObjectiveCerebral autoregulation (CA) is critical to maintenance of cerebral perfusion but its relevance to the risk of stroke and dementia has been under-studied due to small study sizes and a lack of consensus as to the optimal method of measurement. We determined the reliability and reproducibility of multiple CA indices and the effect of intensive data-processing in a large population with transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke.ApproachConsecutive, consenting patients in the population-based Oxford Vascular Study (OXVASC) Phenotyped cohort underwent up to 10-min supine continuous blood pressure monitoring (Finometer) with bilateral middle cerebral artery (MCA) transcranial ultrasound (DWL-Dopplerbox). Un-processed waveforms (Un-A) were median-filtered, systematically reviewed, artefacts corrected and their quality blindly graded (optimal (A) to worst (E)). CA metrics were derived in time-domain (autoregulatory index (ARI), Pearson's Mx, Sx, Dx) and in very-low (VLF) and low-frequency (LF) domains (WPS-SI: wavelet phase synchronisation, transfer function analysis), stratified by recording quality. Reliability and reproducibility (Cronbach's alpha) were determined comparing MCA sides and the first vs. second 5-min of monitoring.Main resultsIn 453 patients, following manual data-cleaning, there was good reliability of indices when comparing MCA sides (Mx: 0.77; WPS-SI-VLF: 0.85; WPS-SI-LF 0.84), or repeated five minute epochs (Mx: 0.57; WPS-SI-VLF: 0.69; WPS-SI-LF 0.90), with persistently good reliability between sides even in lower quality Groups (Group D: Mx: 0.79; WPS-SI-VLF: 0.92; WPS-SI-LF: 0.91). Reliability was greatest for Pearson's Mx and wavelet synchronisation index, with reasonable reliability of transfer function analyses, but ARI was prone to occasional, potentially defective, extreme estimates (left vs right MCA: 0.68).SignificanceResting-state measures of CA were valid, reproducible and robust to moderate noise, but require careful data-processing. Mx and wavelet synchronisation index were the most reliable indices for determining the prognostic value of CA in large epidemiological cohorts and its potential as a treatment target.

Project description:IntroductionImpaired glucose tolerance (IGT) is highly prevalent after stroke and is associated with recurrent stroke and unfavourable outcome.ObjectivesWe aimed to assess the feasibility, safety and effects on glucose metabolism of metformin or sitagliptin in patients with transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or minor ischaemic stroke and IGT.DesignWe performed a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label phase II trial with blinded outcome assessment.InterventionsPatients were randomised in a 2:1:1 ratio to 'no medication', sitagliptin or metformin.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcome measures were baseline adjusted differences of 2-hour postload glucose; secondary outcome measures fasting glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin 1c (HbA1c) levels, tolerability and safety of metformin and sitagliptin at 6 months. Patients on metformin or sitagliptin were contacted by telephone for recording of possible adverse events and to support continuation of treatment at 2 weeks, 6 weeks and 3 months after inclusion. These events were not analysed as outcome measures.ResultsFifty-three patients were randomised to control group, 26 to metformin and 22 to sitagliptin. We found no significant differences in 2-hour postload glucose between patients on antidiabetic drugs and controls ((-0.04 mmol/L (95% CI -0.53 to 0.45)). Patients in the treatment arms had reduced fasting glucose: ((-0.21 mmol/L (95% CI -0.36 to -0.06)) and HbA1c levels ((-1.16 mmol/mol (95% CI -1.84 to -0.49)). Thirteen patients (50%) on metformin and 7 (32%) on sitagliptin experienced side effects. Sixteen patients (61%) in the metformin and 13 (59%) in the sitagliptin group were still on treatment after 6 months.ConclusionsMetformin and sitagliptin were both effective in reducing fasting glucose and HbA1c levels in patients with recent TIA or minor ischaemic stroke and IGT. However, the reduction of glucose levels and sample size was relatively small. The clinical relevance, therefore, needs to be tempered. A phase III trial is needed to investigate whether medical treatment, compared with lifestyle intervention or a combination of both, not only improves glucose metabolism in IGT, but also leads to reduction of recurrent TIA or ischaemic stroke in these patients.Trial registration numberNL3048.

Project description:ObjectiveTo validate the previously derived Canadian TIA Score to stratify subsequent stroke risk in a new cohort of emergency department patients with transient ischaemic attack.DesignProspective cohort study.Setting13 Canadian emergency departments over five years.Participants7607 consecutively enrolled adult patients attending the emergency department with transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was subsequent stroke or carotid endarterectomy/carotid artery stenting within seven days. The secondary outcome was subsequent stroke within seven days (with or without carotid endarterectomy/carotid artery stenting). Telephone follow-up used the validated Questionnaire for Verifying Stroke Free Status at seven and 90 days. All outcomes were adjudicated by panels of three stroke experts, blinded to the index emergency department visit.ResultsOf the 7607 patients, 108 (1.4%) had a subsequent stroke within seven days, 83 (1.1%) had carotid endarterectomy/carotid artery stenting within seven days, and nine had both. The Canadian TIA Score stratified the risk of stroke, carotid endarterectomy/carotid artery stenting, or both within seven days as low (risk ≤0.5%; interval likelihood ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.09 to 0.44), medium (risk 2.3%; interval likelihood ratio 0.94, 0.85 to 1.04), and high (risk 5.9% interval likelihood ratio 2.56, 2.02 to 3.25) more accurately (area under the curve 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.73) than did the ABCD2 (0.60, 0.55 to 0.64) or ABCD2i (0.64, 0.59 to 0.68). Results were similar for subsequent stroke regardless of carotid endarterectomy/carotid artery stenting within seven days.ConclusionThe Canadian TIA Score stratifies patients' seven day risk for stroke, with or without carotid endarterectomy/carotid artery stenting, and is now ready for clinical use. Incorporating this validated risk estimate into management plans should improve early decision making at the index emergency visit regarding benefits of hospital admission, timing of investigations, and prioritisation of specialist referral.