28 research outputs found

    Effects of fluoxetine on functional outcomes after acute stroke (FOCUS): a pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background Results of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects. Methods FOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762. Findings Between Sept 10, 2012, and March 31, 2017, 3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99·3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0·951 [95% CI 0·839–1·079]; p=0·439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13·43%] patients vs 269 [17·21%]; difference 3·78% [95% CI 1·26–6·30]; p=0·0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2·88%] vs 23 [1·47%]; difference 1·41% [95% CI 0·38–2·43]; p=0·0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months. Interpretation Fluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function. Funding UK Stroke Association and NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme

    Case costing of mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke in routine clinical setting::cost differences between mothership vs drip and ship

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Reducing stroke related mortality and morbidity is a Government priority. In 2007, the National Stroke Strategy recommended reviewing stroke survivors at 6 week, 6 months and annually thereafter but there has been limited evaluation. This study focused on the 6-month review when statutory services have withdrawn and patients report feeling abandoned. Methods: A multiple case study approach used interviews, observations and policy analysis. Overall, 46 patients, 30 carers and 27 professionals were interviewed. 29 reviews were observed. Data was analysed within and across sites to develop a theoretical understanding of the review that could be extended to a broader context. Results: The review identified unmet needs and acted as a gateway to further services. 6-month reviews carried out by stroke nurse specialists were underpinned by a biomedical approach whereas those carried out by the Stroke Association focused on social issues. Patients valued both models but their views were influenced by their experiences of the care pathway, orientation to rehabilitation and the nature of their relationships with clinicians during rehabilitation. Self-management was incorporated into the review but was limited by its one-off nature and gaps in community services. Conclusion: The 6-month review needs to be embedded into the care pathway and strategies for secondary prevention reviewed and consolidated at each stage. Reviewers should be allowed the freedom to individualise the process on a needs-led basis. The 6-month review ought to relate back to therapy goals and forward to community services to encourage participation in valued activities and community integration

    The cost of providing mechanical thrombectomy in the UK NHS: a micro-costing study

    Get PDF
    Introduction The clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for the treatment of large vessel occlusion stroke is well established, but uncertainty remains around the true cost of delivering this treatment within the NHS. The aim of this study was to establish the cost of providing MT within the hyperacute phase of care and to explore differences in resources used and costs across different neuroscience centres in the UK. Method This was a multicentre retrospective study using micro-costing methods to enable a precise assessment of the costs of MT from an NHS perspective. Data on resources used and their costs were collected from five UK neuroscience centres between 2015 and 2018. Results Data were collected on 310 patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with MT. The mean total cost of providing MT and inpatient care within 24 hours was £10,846 (95% confidence interval (CI) 10,527–11,165) per patient. The main driver of cost was MT procedure costs, accounting for 73% (£7,943; 95% CI 7,649–8,237) of the total 24-hour cost. Costs were higher for patients treated under general anaesthesia (£11,048; standard deviation (SD) 2,654) than for local anaesthesia (£9,978; SD 2,654), mean difference £1,070 (95% CI 381–1,759; p=0.003); admission to an intensive care unit (ICU; £12,212; SD 3,028) against for admission elsewhere (£10,179; SD 2,415), mean difference £2,032 (95% CI 1,345–2,719; p The mean cost within 72 hours was £12,440 (95% CI 10,628–14,252). The total costs for the duration of inpatient care before discharge from a thrombectomy centre was £14,362 (95% CI 13,603–15,122). Conclusions Major factors contributing to costs of MT for stroke include consumables and staff for intervention, use of general anaesthesia and ICU admissions. These findings can inform the reimbursement, provision and strategic planning of stroke services and aid future economic evaluations.</p
    corecore