首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet >Can differences in management processes explain different outcomes between stroke unit and stroke-team care?
【24h】

Can differences in management processes explain different outcomes between stroke unit and stroke-team care?

机译:管理流程上的差异能否解释卒中部门和卒中团队护理的不同结果?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Stroke units reduce mortality and dependence, but the reasons are unclear. We have compared differences in management and complications of patients with acute stroke who were admitted to a stroke unit or to a general ward as part of a previously reported randomised trial. METHODS: 304 patients had been randomly assigned to stroke units (n=152) or to general wards supported by a specialist stroke team (152). We used a structured format to gather prospective data on the frequency of prespecified interventions in each of the major aspects of stroke care. Observations were undertaken daily for the first week and every week for the next 3 months by independent observers. The effect of differences in management on outcome at 3 months was assessed with the modified Rankin score, dichotomised to good (0-3) and poor (4-6) outcome. FINDINGS: Patients in the stroke unit were monitored more frequently (odds ratio 2.1 [1.3-3.4]) and more patients received oxygen (2.0 [1.3-3.2]), antipyretics (6.4 [1.5-27.5]), measures to reduce aspiration (6.0 [2.3-15.5]), and early nutrition (14.4 [5.1-40.9]) than those in general wards. Complications were less frequent in patients in the stroke unit than those in general wards (0.6 [0.2-0.7]), with fewer patients having progression of stroke, chest infection, or dehydration. Measures to prevent aspiration, early feeding, stroke unit management, and frequency of complications independently affected outcome. INTERPRETATION: Differences in management and complications between the stroke unit and general wards differ substantially, even when specialist support is provided. Such differences could be responsible for the more favourable outcome seen in patients on stroke units than those on general wards.
机译:背景:卒中单元可降低死亡率和依赖性,但原因尚不清楚。我们比较了在先前报道的随机试验中被纳入卒中科或普通病房的急性卒中患者在管理和并发症方面的差异。方法:304例患者被随机分配到卒中病房(n = 152)或由专门的卒中小组支持的普通病房(152)。我们使用结构化格式收集有关中风护理各个主要方面的预先指定干预频率的前瞻性数据。独立观察员每天在第一周进行观察,在接下来的三个月中每周进行观察。用改良的Rankin评分评估了管理差异对3个月结局的影响,将结果分为良好(0-3)和较差(4-6)。结果:卒中病房的患者接受了更频繁的监测(比值比2.1 [1.3-3.4]),更多的患者接受了氧气治疗(2.0 [1.3-3.2]),退烧药(6.4 [1.5-27.5]),减少吸入的措施( 6.0 [2.3-15.5])和早期营养(14.4 [5.1-40.9])比普通病房要早。与普通病房相比,中风病房患者的并发症发生频率较低(0.6 [0.2-0.7]),患有中风,胸部感染或脱水的病患较少。预防误吸,早期喂养,中风单位管理和并发症发生频率的措施独立影响预后。解释:即使提供专家支持,中风病房与普通病房之间在管理和复杂性方面的差异也大不相同。与普通病房相比,这种差异可能导致卒中患者的转归更好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号