...
首页> 外文期刊>Neuroepidemiology >Inpatient and community ischemic strokes in a university hospital.
【24h】

Inpatient and community ischemic strokes in a university hospital.

机译:大学医院的住院和社区缺血性中风。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that inpatient strokes are common and severe. We sought to characterize the risk factors, stroke subtypes, timing of acute stroke evaluation and frequency of thrombolytic therapy in inpatient ischemic strokes compared with community ischemic strokes. DESIGN/METHODS: The hospital records of patients admitted for acute ischemic stroke between 1996 and 2002 were reviewed. Acute stroke was defined as occurrence of stroke symptoms within 72 h, and in-hospital status was assigned if the patient was currently admitted for another illness at the time of the stroke. Patient demographics such as medical versus surgical service, admission diagnoses, clinical features including stroke risk factors, access to thrombolytic therapy and immediate outcome were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 947 patients with acute ischemic stroke, 161 (17.0%) had strokes occurring while already in the hospital (IHIS), compared to 786 (83%) that occurred in the outpatient community (CIS). Approximately twothirds of IHIS occurred on medical services (102, 63.4%) and one third on surgical services (59, 36.7%). Mean age, male gender, atherothrombotic etiology and risk factors including hypertension, diabetes and smoking history were of similar frequencies in IHIS and CIS, but penetrating artery disease was the cause of only 5.6% of IHIS compared to 21.8% of CIS (p<0.0001). The mean modified Rankin scale for IHIS at presentation was 4.33 +/- 0.74, compared to 3.67 +/- 1.03 for CIS (p<0.0001). Of 161 IHIS patients, 21 (13.0%) had neurological assessment within 3 h of symptom onset, compared to 16.0% of CIS patients (p=0.403, n.s.), and the rate of thrombolytic therapy was not significant between IHIS (3.7%) and CIS (5.6%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: IHIS are common and severer than CIS. The use of thrombolytic therapy in IHIS patients was limited because of time of recognition and inpatient-associated conditions. Increased vigilance for timely neurological assessment of these patients is warranted.
机译:背景:以前的研究表明住院中风是常见且严重的。我们试图确定住院缺血性卒中与社区缺血性卒中相比的危险因素,卒中亚型,急性卒中评估的时机和溶栓治疗的频率。设计/方法:回顾了1996年至2002年间住院的急性缺血性卒中患者的医院记录。急性中风的定义是在72小时内发生中风症状,如果患者在中风时目前因另一种疾病而入院,则确定其住院状态。分析了患者的人口统计数据,例如医疗服务与外科服务,入院诊断,包括中风危险因素在内的临床特征,溶栓治疗的可获得性和即时结果。结果:在947例急性缺血性中风患者中,有161例(17.0%)曾在医院(IHIS)住院时发生过中风,而门诊社区(CIS)则有786例(83%)。 IHIS约有三分之二发生在医疗服务(102,占63.4%),三分之一发生在外科手术(59,36.7%)。在IHIS和CIS中,平均年龄,男性,动脉粥样硬化血栓形成病因和包括高血压,糖尿病和吸烟史在内的危险因素的发生频率相似,但仅IHIS的原因是穿透性动脉疾病的发生率为5.6%,而CIS的发生率为21.8%(p <0.0001) )。提出时,IHIS的平均改良兰金评分为4.33 +/- 0.74,而CIS为3.67 +/- 1.03(p <0.0001)。在161例IHIS患者中,有21例(13.0%)在症状发作后3小时内接受了神经系统评估,而CIS患者为16.0%(p = 0.403,ns),IHIS之间的溶栓治疗率差异不显着(3.7%)和CIS(5.6%)患者。结论:IHIS较CIS更为常见和严重。由于识别时间长短和与患者相关的状况,在IHIS患者中使用溶栓治疗受到限制。必须提高对这些患者的及时神经学评估的警惕性。

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