Temporal and age-specific trends in incidence and 1-year case-fatality of hospitalized ischaemic stroke in Victoria, Australia.

OBJECTIVES: Investigate temporal and age-specific trends in the incidence of ischaemic stroke and case-fatality risk in Victoria, Australia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients hospitalised with first ischaemic stroke between 2012 and 2018 were included. Trends in age-standardised incidence rates of ischaemic stroke were assessed using linear regression models. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to examine the case-fatality risk. RESULTS: Overall age-standardised incidence of ischaemic stroke was stable from 2012/13 to 2017/18 (87.6 to 84.8 events per 100,000 population; Annual percentage change [APC] -0.32; 95% Confidence interval [CI] -1.13 to 0.50). The incidence declined in females (APC -1.00; 95% CI -1.49 to -0.50), people aged 75-84 years (APC -1.60; 95% CI -2.83 to -0.36) and in metropolitan areas (APC -0.74; 95% CI -1.02 to -0.45). The risk of 1-year case-fatality (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.93) significantly declined in 2016/17 compared to 2012/13. CONCLUSIONS: Overall ischaemic stroke incidence remained stable while decreasing trends were observed in females, elderly and metropolitan areas. 1-year case-fatality declined from 2012 to 2017.

Shift from older- to newer-generation antiseizure medications in people with acute ischemic stroke in Australia: A population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the trends in antiseizure medications (ASMs) use following ischemic stroke and to examine factors associated with use of newer- and older-generation ASMs. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using state-wide linked health datasets. Patients who were hospitalized with a first-ever ischemic stroke between 2013 and 2017 and were dispensed ASM within 12 months from discharge were included. Logistic regression was used to examine the predictors of receiving newer-generation ASMs. Generalized linear modeling was used to identify factors associated with ASM use after ischemic stroke. RESULTS: Of 19 601 people hospitalized with a first-ever ischemic stroke, 989 were dispensed an ASM within 12 months from discharge. The most prevalent first ASMs were levetiracetam (38.0%), valproate (25.8%), and carbamazepine (10.3%). Most people were dispensed ASM monotherapy (86.9%). There was a shift toward the use of newer-generation ASMs between 2013 and 2017 (odds ratio [OR] 2.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.92-4.16). Metropolitan residents were more likely to be dispensed newer-generation ASMs as a first-line treatment (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.31-2.45). People over 85 years (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.23-0.64), with dementia (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.19-0.63) and psychotic comorbidities (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09-0.96) were less likely to be dispensed newer-generation ASMs. Older age (coefficient [ß] 0.23, P = 0.030), history of beta blocker use (ß 0.17, P = 0.029), multiple ASMs (ß 0.78, P < 0.001), and newer-generation ASM (ß 0.23, P = 0.001) were associated with higher defined daily dose (DDD) of ASM whereas female sex and being married were associated with lower DDD. SIGNIFICANCE: There has been a shift toward newer-generation ASMs for poststroke seizures and epilepsy. Concerningly, vulnerable patient groups were more likely to be dispensed older-generation ASMs. This may lead to unnecessary exposure to adverse events and drug-drug interactions. Further research is needed to evaluate comparative effectiveness and safety of newer- and older-generation ASMs in poststroke populations.

Reliability and Validity of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol for Public Hospitals in Korea.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to assess the applicability of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) for public hospitals in Korea. METHODS: In May 2016, 1500 admission claims were collected from Korean public district hospitals using stratified random sampling. Of these claims, 560 admissions to 37 hospitals were retrieved for analysis. Medical records administrators determined the appropriateness of admission using the criteria detailed in the AEP, and a physician separately assessed the appropriateness of admission based on her clinical judgment. To examine the applicability of the AEP, the concordance of the decisions made between a pair of AEP reviewers and between an AEP reviewer and a physician reviewer was compared. RESULTS: The results showed an almost perfect inter-rater agreement between the AEP reviewers and a moderate agreement between the AEP reviewers and the physician. The sensitivity and specificity of the AEP were calculated as 0.86 and 0.56, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the AEP could potentially be applied to Korean public hospitals as a reliable and valid instrument for assessing the appropriateness of admissions.