Different Effects of Normobaric Oxygen in Normotensive Versus Hypertensive Rats After Focal Cerebral Ischemia

Does your doctor even know what normobaric oxygen is? Or is s/he waiting for  SOMEONE ELSE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM and deliver a protocol? 
How fucking hard is it to deliver oxygen to stroke patients? Or aren't you willing to take the chance on translating this research from rats to humans?  

There is this from March, 2005:

A Pilot Study of Normobaric Oxygen Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke

 And this in October, 2010

Normobaric oxygen therapy in acute ischemic stroke: A pilot study in Indian patients

And this from October 2012:

Normobaric Oxygen Therapy

HOW FUCKING LONG WILL YOU LET YOUR INCOMPETENT STROKE HOSPITAL STILL TREAT PATIENTS LIKE NOTHING NEW HAS OCCURRED IN THE PAST 50 YEARS?

Different Effects of Normobaric Oxygen in Normotensive Versus Hypertensive Rats After Focal Cerebral Ischemia

Jing Lan, Elga Esposito, Cenk Ayata, Aneesh B. Singhal, Eng H. Lo, Xunming Ji

https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.020626

Stroke. 2018;49:1534-1537

Originally published April 30, 2018

• Article
• Figures & Tables
• Supplemental Materials
• Info & Metrics

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.

---

Visual Overview

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Abstract

Background and Purpose—The efficacy of neuroprotective approaches in stroke may be influenced by existing comorbidities. Here, we compared the effects of normobaric hyperoxia (NBO) in normotensive versus hypertensive rats subjected to transient focal cerebral ischemia.

Methods—Male Sprague–Dawley and spontaneously hypertensive rats were subjected to transient focal ischemia via intraluminal filament occlusions of the middle cerebral artery. NBO was started 15 minutes after ischemic onset and stopped at the time of reperfusion. Acute neurological deficits and tetrazolium-stained infarct volumes were quantified at 24 hours.

P=0.0064) in normotensive Sprague–Dawley rats subjected to 100 minutes transient ischemia. No effects of NBO were observed in hypertensive spontaneously hypertensive rats subjected to either 100 minutes or 75 minutes of transient ischemia. No significant changes in neurological outcomes were detectable in any group.

Conclusions—NBO reduced infarction in Sprague–Dawley but not in spontaneously hypertensive rats. These findings suggest that comorbidities may influence responses to potential treatments after stroke.

• hypertension
• middle cerebral artery
• neuroprotection
• reperfusion
• transient ischemic attack

• Received January 19, 2018.
• Revision received March 16, 2018.
• Accepted March 22, 2018.

• © 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.

View Full Text

American Heart Association Professional?

Log in with your Professional Heart Daily username and password. Not an American Heart Association Professional? Continue below.

Log in using your username and password

Coding of significant comorbidities and complications for stroke in rehabilitation

I see nothing here that accurately defines what causes death after stroke. Stroke is not an accurate enough reason for dying. We need to have an accurate description of the size and location of the brain death area if we are ever to correlate and find interventions that would stop or lessen that brain death area. Old age is no longer allowed on death certificates, stroke should not be allowed either. 
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1833358317699841

Joanne Murray, PhD, CPSP, Rhonda Pfeiffer, GradDip(AppInfoSystems), ADip(MRA), Ingrid Scholten, Ed.D

First Published March 30, 2017

Abstract

Background

Comorbidities and complications of stroke have implications for level of care and hospital resources. It is critical, therefore, that hospital morbidity data accurately reflect the prevalence of these additional diagnoses.

Objective

This study aimed to measure and describe the concordance between stroke clinicians/researchers and medical record coders when recording stroke and related diagnoses.

Method

Diagnoses recorded prospectively, according to defined criteria by a clinical research team, were compared with the coding of stroke comorbidities and complications as per the Australian Coding Standards (ACS) from the separations of 100 inpatients from three rehabilitation facilities in South Australia. Percentage agreement, kappa coefficient, sensitivity and specificity values were calculated.

Results

Kappa coefficients for agreement of prospective diagnoses with coding ranged from 0.08 to 0.819. The diagnoses with the highest agreement were stroke, aspiration pneumonia (nil cases), aphasia and dysphagia. The diagnoses with the lowest agreement were apraxia, cognitive impairment, constipation and dehydration.

Conclusion

Not all stroke comorbidities are represented accurately in hospital morbidity datasets. Education of stroke clinicians about the current ACS may clarify expectations about medical record documentation for coding purposes which in turn may result in more accurate morbidity data and therefore costings for the rehabilitation sector.

Applying Clinical Practice Guidelines to the Complex Patient: Insights for Practice and Policy from Stroke Rehabilitation

Oh you poor babies, having to deal with real world patients. Survivors have it much worse, having to deal with doctors that don't know one damn thing about stroke recovery.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michelle_Nelson9/publication/307951994_IMPROVING_EVIDENCE_AND_MEASURES_OF_PERFORMANCE_Applying_Clinical_Practice_Guidelines_to_the_Complex_Patient_Insights_for_Practice_and_Policy_from_Stroke_Rehabilitation/links/57d2e8f008ae0c0081e26ad0.pdf

Abstract

In Canada, policy makers are working to align services with the Stroke Rehabilitation Best Practice Recommendations (SRBPR). Complicating the application of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is the fact that most strokes occur in the context of other diagnoses. We sought to understand clinicians’ use of the CPGs and ascertain how much guidance regarding multimorbidity was available in the SRBPR. Study results  indicated  that  using  the  recommendations was problematic due to a perceived lack of guidance regarding comorbidities and multimorbidity, and concerns regarding

the applicability to “real-life patients.” Comorbidities were mentioned in less than half of the recommendations, but no explicit guidance was provided regarding the management

of comorbidities. Given the prevalence of multimorbidity in stroke rehabilitation, this clinical context is ideal for development and testing of CPGs that account for multimorbidity and  other  complexity  factors.  Results  may  also  suggest limitations to using CPGs in the development of activity-

based funding models.