Response to symptoms of stroke in the UK: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The English National Stroke Strategy suggests that there is a need to improve the response of patients and witnesses to the symptoms of acute stroke to increase rapid access to specialist care. We wished to review the evidence base regarding the knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of stroke patients, witnesses and the public to the symptoms of stroke and the need for an urgent response at the onset of symptoms.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic review of UK articles reporting empirical research on a) awareness of and response to the symptoms of acute stroke or TIA, and b) beliefs and attitudes about diagnosis, early treatment and consequences of acute stroke or TIA. Nine electronic databases were searched using a robust search strategy. Citations and abstracts were screened independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted by two researchers independently using agreed criteria.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>11 studies out of 7144 citations met the inclusion criteria. Methods of data collection included: postal survey (n = 2); interview survey (n = 6); review of hospital documentation (n = 2) and qualitative interviews (n = 1). Limited data reveal a good level of knowledge of the two commonest stroke symptoms (unilateral weakness and speech disturbance), and of the need for an emergency response among the general public and at risk patients. Despite this, less than half of patients recognised they had suffered a stroke. Symptom recognition did not reduce time to presentation. For the majority, the first point of contact for medical assistance was a general practitioner.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>There is an assumption that, in the UK, public knowledge of the symptoms of stroke and of the need for an emergency response is lacking, but there is little published research to support this. Public awareness raising campaigns to improve response to the symptoms of stroke therefore may not produce an increase in desired behaviours. Further research is needed to understand why people who experience or witness stroke symptoms frequently do not call emergency services.</p

Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced MR angiography in severe carotid stenosis: meta-analysis with metaregression of different techniques

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) has become a well-established noninvasive imaging method for the assessment of severe carotid stenosis (70–99% by NASCET criteria). However, CE-MRA is not a standardised technique, but encompasses different concurrent techniques. This review analyses possible differences. A bivariate random effects meta-analysis of 17 primary diagnostic accuracy studies confirmed a high pooled sensitivity of 94.3% and specificity of 93.0% for carotid CE-MRA in severe carotid stenosis. Sensitivity was fairly uniform among the studies, while specificity showed significant variation (I2 = 73%). Metaregressions found significant differences for specificity with two covariates: specificity was higher when using not only maximum intensity projection (MIP) images, but also three-dimensional (3D) images (P = 0.01). Specificity was also higher with electronic images than with hardcopies (P = 0.02). The timing technique (bolus-timed, fluoroscopically triggered or time-resolved) did not result in any significant differences in diagnostic accuracy. Some nonsignificant trends were found for the percentages of severe carotid disease, acquisition time and voxel size. In conclusion, in CE-MRA of severe carotid stenosis the three major timing techniques yield comparably high diagnostic accuracy, electronic images are more specific than hardcopies, and 3D images should be used in addition to MIP images to increase the specificity

Preclinical stroke research - advantages and disadvantages of the most common rodent models of focal ischaemia

This review describes the most commonly used rodent models and outcome measures in preclinical stroke research and discusses their strengths and limitations. Most models involve permanent or transient middle cerebral artery occlusion with therapeutic agents tested for their ability to reduce stroke-induced infarcts and improve neurological deficits. Many drugs have demonstrated preclinical efficacy but, other than thrombolytics, which restore blood flow, none have demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials. This failure to translate efficacy from bench to bedside is discussed alongside achievable steps to improve the ability of preclinical research to predict clinical efficacy: (i) Improvements in study quality and reporting. Study design must include randomization, blinding and predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, and journal editors have the power to ensure statements on these and mortality data are included in preclinical publications. (ii) Negative and neutral studies must be published to enable preclinical meta-analyses and systematic reviews to more accurately predict drug efficacy in man. (iii) Preclinical groups should work within networks and agree on standardized procedures for assessing final infarct and functional outcome. This will improve research quality, timeliness and translational capacity. (iv) Greater uptake and improvements in non-invasive diagnostic imaging to detect and study potentially salvageable penumbral tissue, the target for acute neuroprotection. Drug effects on penumbra lifespan studied serially, followed by assessment of behavioural outcome and infarct within in the same animal group, will increase the power to detect drug efficacy preclinically. Similar progress in detecting drug efficacy clinically will follow from patient recruitment into acute stroke trials based on evidence of remaining penumbra