Barriers and facilitators to staying in work after stroke: insight from an online forum

OBJECTIVE: To explore barriers and facilitators to staying in work following stroke. DESIGN: Qualitative analysis of posts regarding staying in work following stroke using the archives of an online forum for stroke survivors. PARTICIPANTS: 60 stroke survivors (29 male, 23 female, 8 not stated; mean age at stroke 44 years) who have returned to work, identified using terms 'return to work' and 'back at work'. SETTING: Posts from UK stroke survivors and family members on Talkstroke, the forum of the Stroke Association, between 2004 and 2011. RESULTS: Stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA) survivors reported residual impairments that for many had impact on work. Most impairments were 'invisible', including fatigue, problems with concentration, memory and personality changes. Participants described positive (eg, back at work being better than expected) and negative work experiences, including being at risk of losing the job because of stroke-related impairments. Barriers to successfully staying in work included lack of understanding of stroke--in particular invisible impairments--of survivors, employers and general practitioners (GPs), and lack of support in terms of formal adjustments, and 'feeling supported'. Stroke survivors described how they developed their own coping strategies, and how workplace and employer helped them to stay in work. CONCLUSIONS: Despite having been able to return to work after a stroke, people may still experience difficulties in staying in work and risking losing their job. There is a need to improve awareness, in particular of invisible stroke-related impairments, among stroke survivors, work personnel and clinicians. This might be achieved through improved assessments of residual impairments in the workplace and in general practice. Future studies should investigate the effect of unrecognised fatigue and invisible impairments on staying in work following stroke, and explore the potential role for primary care in supporting stroke survivors who have returned to employment.Grant from Evelyn TrustThis is the final published version. It first appeared at http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/4/e009974.abstract

Schedules for Self-monitoring Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND Self-monitoring of blood pressure better predicts prognosis than clinic measurement, is popular with patients, and endorsed in hypertension guidelines. However, there is uncertainty over the optimal selfmonitoring schedule. We therefore aimed to determine the optimum schedule to predict future cardiovascular events and determine “true” underlying blood pressure. METHODS Six electronic databases were searched from November 2009 (updating a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] systematic review) to April 2017. Studies that compared aspects of self-monitoring schedules to either prognosis or reliability/reproducibility in hypertensive adults were included. Data on study and population characteristics, self-monitoring regime, and outcomes were extracted by 2 reviewers independently. RESULTS From 5,164 unique articles identified, 25 met the inclusion criteria. Twelve studies were included from the original NICE review, making a total of 37 studies. Increasing the number of days of measurement improved prognostic power: 72%–91% of the theoretical maximum predictive value (asymptotic maximum hazard ratio) was reached by 3 days and 86%–96% by 7 days. Increasing beyond 3 days of measurement did not result in better correlation with ambulatory monitoring. There was no convincing evidence that the timing or number of readings per day had an effect, or that ignoring the first day’s measurement was necessary. CONCLUSIONS Home blood pressure should be measured for 3 days, increased to 7 only when mean blood pressure is close to a diagnostic or treatment threshold. Other aspects of a monitoring schedule can be flexible to facilitate patient uptake of and adherence with self-monitoring.We thank Siobhan Milner, Nashat Qamar, and Sally Fillingham for their support in screening studies. This article presents independent research commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research funding scheme (RP-PG-1209–10051). R.J.M. was funded by an NIHR Professorship (NIHR-RP-R2-12–015). R.J.M. and F.D.R.H. receive support from the NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) Oxford. The guideline development work undertaken by R.O.M., R.J.M, and B.W. received funding from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health, or the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence

Estimated stroke risk, yield, and number needed to screen for atrial fibrillation detected through single time screening: a multicountry patient-level meta-analysis of 141,220 screened individuals

BackgroundThe precise age distribution and calculated stroke risk of screen-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) is not known. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the number needed to screen (NNS) to identify one treatable new AF case (NNS-Rx) (i.e., Class-1 oral anticoagulation [OAC] treatment recommendation) in each age stratum. If the NNS-Rx is known for each age stratum, precise cost-effectiveness and sensitivity simulations can be performed based on the age distribution of the population/region to be screened. Such calculations are required by national authorities and organisations responsible for health system budgets to determine the best age cutoffs for screening programs and decide whether programs of screening should be funded. Therefore, we aimed to determine the exact yield and calculated stroke-risk profile of screen-detected AF and NNS-Rx in 5-year age strata.Methods and findingsA systematic review of Medline, Pubmed, and Embase was performed (January 2007 to February 2018), and AF-SCREEN international collaboration members were contacted to identify additional studies. Twenty-four eligible studies were identified that performed a single time point screen for AF in a general ambulant population, including people ≥65 years. Authors from eligible studies were invited to collaborate and share patient-level data. Statistical analysis was performed using random effects logistic regression for AF detection rate, and Poisson regression modelling for CHA2DS2-VASc scores. Nineteen studies (14 countries from a mix of low- to middle- and high-income countries) collaborated, with 141,220 participants screened and 1,539 new AF cases. Pooled yield of screening was greater in males across all age strata. The age/sex-adjusted detection rate for screen-detected AF in ≥65-year-olds was 1.44% (95% CI, 1.13%–1.82%) and 0.41% (95% CI, 0.31%–0.53%) for <65-year-olds. New AF detection rate increased progressively with age from 0.34% (<60 years) to 2.73% (≥85 years). Neither the choice of screening methodology or device, the geographical region, nor the screening setting influenced the detection rate of AF. Mean CHA2DS2-VASc scores (n = 1,369) increased with age from 1.1 (<60 years) to 3.9 (≥85 years); 72% of ≥65 years had ≥1 additional stroke risk factor other than age/sex. All new AF ≥75 years and 66% between 65 and 74 years had a Class-1 OAC recommendation. The NNS-Rx is 83 for ≥65 years, 926 for 60–64 years; and 1,089 for <60 years. The main limitation of this study is there are insufficient data on sociodemographic variables of the populations and possible ascertainment biases to explain the variance in the samples.ConclusionsPeople with screen-detected AF are at elevated calculated stroke risk: above age 65, the majority have a Class-1 OAC recommendation for stroke prevention, and >70% have ≥1 additional stroke risk factor other than age/sex. Our data, based on the largest number of screen-detected AF collected to date, show the precise relationship between yield and estimated stroke risk profile with age, and strong dependence for NNS-RX on the age distribution of the population to be screened: essential information for precise cost-effectiveness calculations

How Representative Are Research Tissue Biobanks of the Local Populations? Experience of the Infectious Diseases Biobank at King's College, London, UK

Biobanks have a primary responsibility to collect tissues that are a true reflection of their local population and thereby promote translational research, which is applicable to the community. The Infectious Diseases BioBank (IDB) at King's College London is located in the southeast of the city, an area that is ethnically diverse. Transplantation programs have frequently reported a low rate of donation among some ethnic minorities. To determine whether patients who volunteered peripheral venous blood samples to the IDB were representative of the local community, we compared local government demographic data to characteristics of patients who have donated to the IDB. There was a good match between these statistics, indicating that the IDB's volunteer population of human immunodeficiency virus patients was similar to local demographics

Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension

The present paper provides an update of previous recommendations on Home Blood Pressure Monitoring from the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability sequentially published in years 2000, 2008 and 2010. This update has taken into account new evidence in this field, including a recent statement by the American Heart association, as well as technological developments, which have occurred over the past 20 years. The present document has been developed by the same ESH Working Group with inputs from an international team of experts, and has been endorsed by the ESH