Article

Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Access to Mechanical Revascularization Procedures for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Department of Neurological Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: .
Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases: the official journal of National Stroke Association (Impact Factor: 1.99). 05/2013; 23(2). DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.03.036
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Mechanical revascularization procedures performed for treatment of acute ischemic stroke have increased in recent years. Data suggest association between operative volume and mortality rates. Understanding procedural allocation and patient access patterns is critical. Few studies have examined these demographics. METHODS: Data were collected from the 2008 Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Patients hospitalized with ischemic stroke and the subset of individuals who underwent mechanical thrombectomy were characterized by race, payer source, population density, and median wealth of the patient's zip code. Demographic data among patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy procedures were examined. Stroke admission demographics were analyzed according to thrombectomy volume at admitting centers and patient demographics assessed according to the thrombectomy volume at treating centers. RESULTS: Significant allocation differences with respect to frequency of mechanical thrombectomy procedures among stroke patients existed according to race, expected payer, population density, and wealth of the patient's zip code (P < .0001). White, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients received endovascular treatment at higher rates than black and Native American patients. Compared with the white stroke patients, black (P < .001), Hispanic (P < .001), Asian/Pacific Islander (P < .001), and Native American stroke patients (P < .001) all demonstrated decreased frequency of admission to hospitals performing mechanical thrombectomy procedures at high volumes. Among treated patients, blacks (P = .0876), Hispanics (P = .0335), and Asian/Pacific Islanders (P < .001) demonstrated decreased frequency in mechanical thrombectomy procedures performed at high-volume centers when compared with whites. While present, socioeconomic disparities were not as consistent or pronounced as racial differences. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate variances in endovascular acute stroke treatment allocation according to racial and socioeconomic factors in 2008. Efforts should be made to monitor and address potential disparities in treatment utilization.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Shuhan He, Jul 05, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
95 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9) diagnostic codes can identify racial disparities in ischemic stroke hospitalizations; however, inclusion of revascularization procedure codes as acute stroke events may affect the magnitude of the risk difference. This study assesses the impact of excluding revascularization procedure codes in the ICD-9 definition of ischemic stroke, compared with the traditional inclusive definition, on racial disparity estimates for stroke incidence and recurrence.
    Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases: the official journal of National Stroke Association 09/2014; 23(10). DOI:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2014.06.008 · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Stroke disproportionately kills and disables ethnic minority seniors. Up to 30 % of ischemic strokes in the U.S. can be attributed to physical inactivity, yet most Americans, especially older racial/ethnic minorities, fail to participate in regular physical activity. We are conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test a culturally-tailored community-based walking intervention designed to reduce stroke risk by increasing physical activity among African American, Latino, Chinese, and Korean seniors with hypertension. We hypothesize that the intervention will yield meaningful changes in seniors’ walking levels and stroke risk with feasibility to sustain and scale up across the aging services network. Methods/Design In this randomized single-blind wait-list control study, high-risk ethnic minority seniors are enrolled at senior centers, complete baseline data collection, and are randomly assigned to receive the intervention “Worth the Walk” immediately (N = 120, intervention group) or in 90 days upon completion of follow-up data collection (N = 120, control group). Trained case managers employed by the senior centers implement hour-long intervention sessions twice weekly for four consecutive weeks to the intervention group. Research staff blinded to participants’ group assignment collect outcome data from both intervention and wait-list control participants 1 and 3-months after baseline data collection. Primary outcome measures are mean steps/day over 7 days, stroke knowledge, and self-efficacy for reducing stroke risk. Secondary and exploratory outcome measures include selected biological markers of health, healthcare seeking, and health-related quality of life. Outcomes will be compared between the two groups using standard analytic methods for randomized trials. We will conduct a formal process evaluation to assess barriers and facilitators to successful integration of Worth the Walk into the aging services network and to calculate estimated costs to sustain and scale up the intervention. Data collection is scheduled to be completed in December 2016. Discussion If this RCT demonstrates superior improvements in physical activity and stroke knowledge in the intervention group compared to the control group and is found to be sustainable and scalable, Worth the Walk could serve as a primary stroke prevention model for racial/ethnic communities across the nation. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02181062; registered on June 30, 2014. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12883-015-0346-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
    BMC Neurology 06/2015; 15(1). DOI:10.1186/s12883-015-0346-9 · 2.49 Impact Factor