Article

Recent Nationwide Trends in Discharge Statin Treatment of Hospitalized Patients With Stroke

Stroke Center and Department of Neurology, Ronald Reagan-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, Calif, USA.
Stroke (Impact Factor: 6.02). 07/2010; 41(7):1508-13. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.573618
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL) trial showed statins reduce vascular risk among patients with atherosclerotic stroke or transient ischemic attack. In this study, we assessed recent nationwide trends in discharge statin treatment after acute stroke and the influence of SPARCL on clinical practice.
Using data from eligible patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack admitted to Get With The Guidelines-Stroke (GWTG-Stroke) -participating hospitals between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2007, we assessed discharge statin use over time and in relation to dissemination of the SPARCL results.
Among 173,284 patients with ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack, overall discharge statin treatment was 83.5%. Discharge statin prescription climbed steadily but modestly over the 2-year study period from 75.7% to 84.8% (P<0.001) with a nonsignificant increase during SPARCL reporting but a return to prior levels thereafter. Factors associated with lower discharge statin use in patients without contraindications included female sex and South region.
Discharge statin prescription among hospitalized patients with stroke increased over time, but 1 in 5 patients still leaves the hospital without treatment. Primary drivers of increased use were secular trends and individual/hospital site characteristics.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
118 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Statins, due to their well-established pleiotropic effects, have noteworthy benefits in stroke prevention. Despite this, a significant proportion of high-risk patients still do not receive the recommended therapeutic regimens, and many others discontinue treatment after being started on them. The causes of non-adherence to current guidelines are multifactorial, and depend on both physicians and patients. The aim of this study is to identify the factors influencing statin prescription at Stroke Unit (SU) discharge. This study included 12,750 patients enrolled on the web-based Lombardia Stroke Registry (LRS) from July 2009 to April 2012 and discharged alive, with a diagnosis of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and without contra-indication to statin therapy. By logistic regression analysis and classification trees, we evaluated the impact of demographic data, risk factors, tPA treatment, in-hospital procedures and complications on statin prescription rate at discharge. We observed a slight increase in statins prescription during the study period (from 39.1 to 43.9%). Lower age, lower stroke severity and prestroke disability, the presence of atherothrombotic/lacunar risk factors, a diagnosis of non-cardioembolic stroke, tPA treatment, the absence of in-hospital complications, with the sole exception of hypertensive fits and hyperglycemia, were the patient-related predictors of adherence to guidelines by physicians. Overall, dyslipidemia appears as the leading factor, while TOAST classification does not reach statistical significance. In our region, Lombardia, adherence to guidelines in statin prescription at Stroke Unit discharge is very different from international goals. The presence of dyslipidemia remains the main factor influencing statin prescription, while the presence of well-defined atherosclerotic etiopathogenesis of stroke does not enhance statin prescription. Some uncertainties about the risk/benefit of statin therapy in stroke etiology subtypes (cardioembolism, other or undetermined causes) may partially justify the underuse of statin in ischemic stroke. The differences that exist between current international guidelines may prevent a more widespread use of statin and should be clarified in a consensus.
    BMC Neurology 03/2014; 14(1):53. DOI:10.1186/1471-2377-14-53 · 2.49 Impact Factor
    This article is viewable in ResearchGate's enriched format
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the ambulatory setting is recognized as the best arena for optimizing antihypertensive drug treatment after a stroke, little is known about recent office-based antihypertensive drug treatment patterns in the United States. We assessed national trends in antihypertensive treatment for stroke patients in office-based medical practice. Data from the 2000-2009 National Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys were analyzed comprising outpatient visits to physicians in office-based practice by patients aged 40 years or older with a diagnosis of stroke (weighted estimate = 46,317,269). The main outcome measure was visits with a prescription of antihypertensive medication(s). The proportion of total visits that included a prescription of antihypertensive medication was 35.6% in 2000-2002, 29.5% in 2003-2005, and 49.3% in 2006-2009 (P = .002); 50.9% were primary care physician (PCP) visits versus 26.2% neurologist visits (P < .0001). Age-adjusted logistic regression analyses confirmed a higher prescription rate in 2006-2009 versus 2000-2002 (1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-2.96) and PCP versus neurologists (2.82; 95% CI, 1.86-4.27). Use of 2 or more agent classes was 31.6% in 2000-2002, 44.2% in 2003-2005, and 56.7% in 2006-2009 (P = .014). Age-adjusted logistic regression analyses confirmed a higher prescription rate of 2 or more agent classes in 2006-2009 versus 2000-2002 (2.96; 95% CI, 1.40-6.24). There were no significant differences in agent class type or number between neurologists versus PCPs. Over the last decade, there was a significant rise in the use of antihypertensive drugs and combination of agent classes for patients aged 40 years or older seen in an ambulatory setting with a diagnosis of stroke. PCPs were more likely than neurologists to prescribe these agents.
    Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases: the official journal of National Stroke Association 07/2013; 22(8). DOI:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.06.022 · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Secondary stroke prevention guidelines recommend statins for the management of dyslipidemia in ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). This study assessed the guideline-based statin prescription (GBSP) rate in Korea and the associated physician and patient factors. A survey was conducted to assess Korean neurologists' knowledge of and attitude toward the current dyslipidemia management guidelines. The characteristics and discharge statin prescription for all consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke or TIA treated by participating neurologists during the 6 months prior to the survey were abstracted. Using algorithms to determine GBSP, we assessed the rate and independent factors of GBSP. Of the 174 participating neurologists, 79 (45.4%) were categorized as a higher-level knowledge group. For the 4407 patients (mean age, 66.4 years; female, 42.5%; 90.6% with ischemic stroke and 9.4% with TIA) enrolled in this study, the GBSP rate at discharge was 78.6%. The GBSP rate increased significantly with increasing physician knowledge level (test for trend, p<0.0001), and was higher among patients treated by the higher-level knowledge group than for those treated by the lower-level knowledge group (81.6% vs. 74.7%; unadjusted p<0.0001 and adjusted p=0.045). Other independent factors associated with a higher GBSP rate were hypercholesterolemia and higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, while those associated with a lower GBSP rate were cardioembolism, undetermined etiology due to negative or incomplete work-up, other determined etiology, and TIA presentation. More than three-quarters of acute ischemic stroke survivors and TIA patients receive a GBSP at discharge, and this proportion would be further improved by improving the knowledge of dyslipidemia management guidelines among neurologists.
    Journal of Clinical Neurology 10/2013; 9(4):214-222. DOI:10.3988/jcn.2013.9.4.214 · 1.81 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
22 Downloads
Available from
May 17, 2014