Lack of epidemiological data on secondary stroke prevention

The Lancet Neurology (Impact Factor: 21.82). 10/2005; 4(9):518-9. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(05)70148-4
Source: PubMed
1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background In current literature, strokes of all description have been linked with cervical manipulation. At present, there are no accurate data regarding relative risk or background incidence rates. The background rate of all types of stroke for the UK chiropractic patient population is calculated in this study. Methods The age profiles of 728 consecutive (both new and existing) patients attending four chiropractic clinics were banded into groups to enable comparison with previous major studies of stroke incidence. The number of patients receiving chiropractic neck manipulation was calculated by multiplying the number of registered chiropractors by the known average number of cervical manipulations. These data were then used to extrapolate the expected background rate (i.e. non-causative) of stroke in the chiropractic population. Findings Estimated number of neck manipulations annually by UK chiropractors was 4,439,800, representing 554,975 patients. Estimated number of background strokes in this population over the course of 1 year was 1645. The inferred number of background strokes within 1 and 3 days of manipulation was 36 and 108, respectively. Discussion It is not surprising that some patients presenting to neurologists with stroke have had a recent history of chiropractic cervical manipulation, owing to the high background incidence of stroke and the number manipulations performed annually. The authors propose future prospective studies to ascertain the so far un-elicited risk ratio as well as a co-ordinated neurology based education programme for the recognition of early signs of stroke in chiropractic clinics.
    Clinical Chiropractic 03/2008; 11(1):15-22. DOI:10.1016/j.clch.2008.01.002
  • Stroke 03/2006; 37(2):320-2. DOI:10.1161/01.STR.0000200555.89117.d2 · 6.02 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Stroke is a worldwide problem and is a leading cause of adult disability, resulting in dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) for around half of stroke survivors. It is estimated that up to 25% of all care home residents in the USA and in the UK have had a stroke. Stroke survivors who reside in care homes are likely to be more physically and cognitively impaired and therefore more dependent than those able to remain in their own home. Overall, 75% of care home residents are classified as severely disabled, and those with stroke are likely to have high levels of immobility, incontinence and confusion, as well as additional co-morbidities. It is not known whether this clinically complex population could benefit from occupational therapy in the same way as community-dwelling stroke survivors. The care home population with stroke differs from the general stroke population living at home, and a review was needed to examine the benefits of occupational therapy provided to this specific group. This review therefore focused on occupational therapy interventions for ADL for stroke survivors residing in care homes. OBJECTIVES: To measure the effects of occupational therapy interventions (provided directly by an occupational therapist or under the supervision of an occupational therapist) targeted at improving, restoring and maintaining independence in ADL among stroke survivors residing in long-term institutional care, termed collectively as 'care homes'. As a secondary objective, we aimed to evaluate occupational therapy interventions for reducing complications such as depression and low mood. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (August 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, September 2012), MEDLINE (1948 to September 2012), EMBASE (1980 to September 2012), CINAHL (1982 to September 2012) and 10 additional bibliographic databases and six trials registers. We also handsearched seven journals, checked reference lists and obtained further information from individual trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials investigating the impact of an occupational therapy intervention for care home residents with stroke versus standard care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The lead review author performed all searches. Two review authors then independently assessed all titles and abstracts of studies and selected trials for inclusion, with a third review author resolving any discrepancies. The same two review authors independently extracted data from all included published sources to ensure reliability. Primary outcomes were performance in ADL at the end of scheduled follow-up and death or a poor outcome. Secondary outcomes aimed to reflect the domains targeted by an occupational therapy intervention. MAIN RESULTS: We included in the review one study involving 118 participants. We found one ongoing study that also met the inclusion criteria for the review, but the data were not yet available. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence to support or refute the efficacy of occupational therapy interventions for improving, restoring or maintaining independence in ADL for stroke survivors residing in care homes. The effectiveness of occupational therapy for the population of stroke survivors residing in care homes remains unclear, and further research in this area is warranted.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 06/2013; 6(6):CD010116. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD010116.pub2 · 5.94 Impact Factor