Sex differences in quality of life after stroke were explained by patient factors, not clinical care: evidence from the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Women may receive stroke care less often than men. We examined the contribution of clinical care on sex differences and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after stroke. METHODS: We included first-ever strokes registered in the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (2010-2014) with HRQoL assessed between 90 and 180 days after onset (EQ-5D-3L instrument) that were linked to hospital administrative data (up to 2013). Study factors included sociodemographics, comorbidities, walking ability on admission (stroke severity proxy) and clinical care (e.g. stroke unit care). Responses to the EQ-5D-3L were transformed into a total utility value (-0.516 'worse than death' to 1 'best' health). Quantile regression models, adjusted for confounding factors, were used to determine median differences (MD) in utility scores by sex. RESULTS: Approximately 60% (6852/11 418) of stroke survivors had an EQ-5D-3L assessment (median 139 days; 44% female). Compared with men, women were older (median age 77.1 years vs. men 71.2 years) and fewer could walk on admission (37.9% vs. men 46.1%, P < 0.001). Women had lower utility values than men, and the difference was explained by age and stroke severity, but not clinical care [MDadjusted = -0.039, 95% confidence interval: -0.056, -0.021]. Poorer HRQoL was observed in younger men (aged <65 years), particularly those with more comorbidities, and in older women (aged ≥75 years). CONCLUSIONS: Stroke severity and comorbidities contribute to the poorer HRQoL in young men and older women. Further studies are needed to understand age-sex interaction to better inform treatments for different subgroups and ensure evidence-based treatments to reduce the severity of stroke are prioritized.

Accuracy of clinical signs, SEP, and EEG in predicting outcome of hypoxic coma: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Accurate prediction of neurologic outcome after hypoxic coma is important. Previous systematic reviews have not used summary statistics to summarize and formally compare the accuracy of different prognostic tests. We therefore used summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) and cluster regression methods to compare motor and pupillary responses with sensory evoked potential (SEP) and EEG in predicting outcome after hypoxic coma. METHODS: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase (1966-2007) for reports in English, German, and French and identified 25 suitable studies. An SROC was constructed for each marker (SEP, EEG, M1 and M < or = 3), and the area under the curve (AUC), a measure of diagnostic accuracy, was determined. For comparison, we calculated the differences between the AUC for each test and M1 reference standard. RESULTS: The AUC for absent SEP was larger than those for M1, M < or = 3, absent pupillary response, and EEG when the examinations were performed within the first 24 hours. The difference between the AUC for SEP (AUC 0.891) and that for M1 (AUC 0.786) was small (0.105, 95% confidence interval 0.023-0.187), only reaching significance on day 1 after coma onset. The use of M < or = 3 improved the diagnostic accuracy of motor signs. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that sensory evoked potential (SEP) is marginally better than M1 at predicting outcome after hypoxic coma. However, the superiority of SEP diminishes after day 1 and when M < or = 3 is used. The findings therefore caution against the tendency to generalize that SEP is a better marker than clinical signs.