Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Friday, October 18, 2013

Comparison of Performance Achievement Award Recognition With Primary Stroke Center Certification for Acute Ischemic Stroke Care

 Anything written about here is totally worthless because there are no useful measures on deaths or recoveries. If they  had better than 10% full recovery they would shout it from the rooftops.
http://jaha.ahajournals.org/content/2/5/e000451.abstract
  1. GWTG‐Stroke Steering Committee & Investigators
+ Author Affiliations
  1. 1Division of Cardiology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA (G.C.F.)
  2. 2Division of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA (J.L.S.)
  3. 3Duke Clinical Research Center, Durham, NC (L.L., Y.X., A.F.H., E.D.P.)
  4. 4Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada (E.E.S.)
  5. 5Department of Epidemiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI (M.J.R.)
  6. 6Division of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA (L.H.S.)
  1. Correspondence to:
    Gregg C. Fonarow, MD, Ahmanson‐UCLA Cardiomyopathy Center, UCLA Medical Center, 10833 LeConte Avenue, Room 47‐123 CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095‐1679. E‐mail: gfonarow@mednet.ucla.edu

Abstract

Background Hospital certification and recognition programs represent 2 independent but commonly used systems to distinguish hospitals, yet they have not been directly compared. This study assessed acute ischemic stroke quality of care measure conformity by hospitals receiving Primary Stroke Center (PSC) certification and those receiving the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines‐Stroke (GWTG‐Stroke) Performance Achievement Award (PAA) recognition.
Methods and Results The patient and hospital characteristics as well as performance/quality measures for acute ischemic stroke from 1356 hospitals participating in the GWTG‐Stroke Program 2010–2012 were compared. Hospitals were classified as PAA+/PSC+ (hospitals n=410, patients n=169 302), PAA+/PSC− (n=415, n=129 454), PAA−/PSC+ (n=88, n=26 386), and PAA−/PSC− (n=443, n=75 565). A comprehensive set of stroke measures were compared with adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics. Patient characteristics were similar by PAA and PSC status but PAA−/PSC− hospitals were more likely to be smaller and nonteaching. Measure conformity was highest for PAA+/PSC+ and PAA+/PSC− hospitals, intermediate for PAA−/PSC+ hospitals, and lowest for PAA−/PSC− hospitals (all‐or‐none care measure 91.2%, 91.2%, 84.3%, and 76.9%, respectively). After adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, PAA+/PSC+, PAA+/PSC−, and PAA−/PSC+ hospitals had 3.15 (95% CIs 2.86 to 3.47); 3.23 (2.93 to 3.56) and 1.72 (1.47 to 2.00), higher odds for providing all indicated stroke performance measures to patients compared with PAA−/PSC− hospitals.
Conclusions While both PSC certification and GWTG‐Stroke PAA recognition identified hospitals providing higher conformity with care measures for patients hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke, PAA recognition was a more robust identifier of hospitals with better performance.

No comments:

Post a Comment