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, November 10, 2023

Heart Brain Clinic An Integrated Approach to Stroke Care

 

Notice how useless this is! 'Care'; NOT RECOVERY OR RESULTS!

Survivors don't want 'care', they want recovery; namely 100% recovery protocols!

Heart Brain Clinic: An Integrated Approach to Stroke Care

Muhammad Bilal Tariq, Syed Kalimullah S. Qadri, Anjail Sharrief, Kathleen Tulod, Abhijeet Dhoble, Sidhanta Gurung, Maria Jamilla Lacap, Munachi Okpala, Bharti Manwani, Richard W. Smalling, Nicole Gonzales

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

Abstract

Background and Objectives Multidisciplinary clinics have been shown to improve care. Patients with patent foramen ovale (PFO)–associated stroke need evaluation by cardiology and neurology specialists. We report our experience creating a multidisciplinary Structural Heart Brain Clinic (HBC) with a focus on patients with PFO-associated stroke.

Methods Demographic and clinical data were retrospectively collected for patients with PFO-associated ischemic stroke. Patients with PFO-associated stroke were divided into a standard care group and Heart Brain Clinic group for analysis. Outcome measures included time from stroke to PFO closure and number of clinic visits before decision regarding closure. Nonparametric analysis evaluated differences in median time to visit and clinical decision, while the chi square analysis compared differences in categorical variables between groups.

Results From February 2017 to December 2021, 120 patients were evaluated for PFO-associated stroke. The Structural HBC began in 12/2018 with coordination between Departments of Neurology and Cardiology. For this analysis, 41 patients were considered in the standard care group and 79 patients in the HBC group. During data analysis, 107 patients had received recommendations about PFO closure. HBC patients required fewer clinic visits (p = 0.001) before decision about closure; however, among patients who underwent PFO closure, there was no significant difference in weeks from stroke to PFO closure. Clinicians were more likely to recommend against PFO closure among patients seen in HBC compared with those seen in standard care (p = 0.021).

Discussion Our data demonstrate that a multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach to management of patients with PFO-associated ischemic stroke is feasible and may improve the quality of care in this younger patient population. The difference in recommendation to not pursue PFO closure between groups may reflect selection and referral bias. Additional work is needed to determine whether this approach improves other aspects of care and outcomes.

No comments:

Post a Comment