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.

Monday, February 28, 2022

Implementing a Neurohospitalist Program Improves Stroke Care Metrics and Patient Satisfaction Scores

But you blithering idiots aren't measuring 100% recovery metrics, so you don't give a shit about complete survivor recovery.   Without 100% recovery your patient satisfaction has to be zero, unless you are tipping the scale by biasing survivor responses by invoking your tyranny of low expectations.

Implementing a Neurohospitalist Program Improves Stroke Care Metrics and Patient Satisfaction Scores

 
First Published February 11, 2022 Research Article 

Compare the differences in health outcomes and patient satisfaction between a neurohospitalist model of care and a community-based neurologists model at a single community-based teaching hospital among in-patients diagnosed with a cerebrovascular accident (CVA).

Data was collected from the Stamford Hospital’s electronic medical records system. An assessment of patient health outcomes and satisfaction scores was conducted, comparing both discrete and continuous variables between the two time periods. An omnibus P-value of 0.05 (P < 0.05) was considered statistically significant.

The sample consisted of 341 patients between the two periods, pre-period n = 168 (49.3%) post-period n = 173 (50.7%). Door to lab and door to tPA times decreased significantly between pre- and post-periods (P = 0.003 and P = 0.002, respectively) as did the number of MRIs (P < 0.001). In addition, statistically significant increases were found between pre-period and post-period percentages, all increasing over time: stroke education (P < 0.001), discharged on anticoagulant medication (P < 0.001), and discharged on anti-thrombolytic medication (P = 0.019). Patient satisfaction scores demonstrated mean gain across both periods for five of six items. Two items “Doctor’s Concern of my Questions/Worries” and “Skill of Doctors” demonstrated statistical significance (P = 0.020 and P = 0.029, respectively).

The introduction of a neurohospitalist service at a community-based teaching hospital improved patient health outcomes on time to intervention, stroke education, discharge medications as well as patient satisfaction. Therefore, it may be beneficial for hospitals to implement a neurohospitalist model of care for their patients presenting with CVA.

No comments:

Post a Comment