The link between insurance and blood pressure control in U.S. stroke survivors.

BACKGROUND: After a stroke, poorly controlled blood pressure (BP) is associated with a higher risk of recurrent vascular events. Despite the importance of controlling BP to avert recurrent vascular events, fewer than half of stroke survivors in the United States achieve BP control. It is unclear to what extent insurance status affects BP levels after stroke. METHODS: We assessed BP control among adults with a history of stroke who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys from 1999 through 2016. The relationship between insurance type and BP level (low normal: <120/80 mmHg and normal: <140/90 mmHg) were evaluated using logistic regression before and after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and medical comorbidities for those <65 years and ≥ 65 years. RESULTS: Among 1646 adult stroke survivors (weighted n = 5,586,417), 30% had BP in the low normal range while 64% had BP in the normal range. Among 613 stroke survivors <65 years (weighted n = 2,396,980), only those with other government insurance (CHAMPVA, CHAMPUS/TRICARE) had better BP control than the uninsured (adjusted HR 2.68, 95% CI 0.99-7.25). Among 1033 participants ≥65 years (weighted n = 3,189,437), those with private insurance plus Medicare trended toward better normal BP compared to Medicare alone (adjusted HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.94-1.90). CONCLUSIONS: Only stroke survivors with CHAMPVA, CHAMPUS/TRICARE government insurance in the United States have lower odds of controlled BP compared to no insurance among those <65 years. Insurance alone does not improve BP control among stroke survivors.

Persistent Inequities in Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the United States: Results From the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

BACKGROUND: Despite its approval for acute ischemic stroke >25 years ago, intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) remains underused, with inequities by age, sex, race, ethnicity, and geography. Little is known about IVT rates by insurance status. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed temporal trends from 2002 to 2015 in IVT for acute ischemic stroke in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample using adjusted, survey-weighted logistic regression. We calculated odds ratios for IVT for each category in 2002 to 2008 (period 1) and 2009 to 2015 (period 2). IVT use for acute ischemic stroke increased from 1.0% in 2002 to 6.8% in 2015 (adjusted annual relative ratio, 1.15). Individuals aged ≥85 years had the most pronounced increase during 2002 to 2015 (adjusted annual relative ratio, 1.18) but were less likely to receive IVT compared with 18- to 44-year-olds in period 1 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.23) and period 2 (aOR, 0.36). Women were less likely than men to receive IVT, but the disparity narrowed over time (period 1: aOR, 0.81; period 2: aOR, 0.94). Inequities in IVT resolved for Hispanic individuals in period 2 (aOR, 0.96) but not for Black individuals (period 2: aOR, 0.81). The disparity in IVT for Medicare patients, compared with privately insured patients, lessened over time (period 1: aOR, 0.59; period 2: aOR, 0.75). Patients treated in rural hospitals remained less likely to receive IVT than in urban hospitals; a more dramatic increase in urbanity widened the inequity (period 2, urban nonteaching versus rural: aOR, 2.58, period 2, urban teaching versus rural: aOR, 3.90). CONCLUSIONS: IVT for acute ischemic stroke increased among adults. Despite some encouraging trends, the remaining disparities highlight the need for intensified efforts at addressing inequities.

Post-Traumatic Cerebral Infarction: A Narrative Review of Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common diagnosis requiring acute hospitalization. Long-term, TBI is a significant source of health and socioeconomic impact in the United States and globally. The goal of clinicians who manage TBI is to prevent secondary brain injury. In this population, post-traumatic cerebral infarction (PTCI) acutely after TBI is an important but under-recognized complication that is associated with negative functional outcomes. In this comprehensive review, we describe the incidence and pathophysiology of PTCI. We then discuss the diagnostic and treatment approaches for the most common etiologies of isolated PTCI, including brain herniation syndromes, cervical artery dissection, venous thrombosis, and post-traumatic vasospasm. In addition to these mechanisms, hypercoagulability and microcirculatory failure can also exacerbate ischemia. We aim to highlight the importance of this condition and future clinical research needs with the goal of improving patient outcomes after TBI.

Persistent Inequities in Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the United States: Results from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

Background: Despite its approval for use in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) >25 years ago, intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) remains underutilized, with inequities by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and geography. Little is known about IVT rates by insurance status. We aimed to assess temporal trends in the inequities in IVT use. Methods: We assessed trends from 2002 to 2015 in IVT for AIS in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample by sex, age, race/ethnicity, hospital location/teaching status, and insurance, using survey-weighted logistic regression, adjusting for sociodemographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics. We calculated odds ratios for IVT for each category in 2002-2008 (Period 1) and 2009-2015 (Period 2). Results: Among AIS patients (weighted N=6,694,081), IVT increased from 1.0% in 2002 to 6.8% in 2015 (adjusted annual relative ratio (AARR) 1.15, 95% CI 1.14-1.16). Individuals ≥85 years had the most pronounced increase from 2002 to 2015 (AARR 1.18, 1.17-1.19), but were less likely to receive IVT compared to those aged 18-44 years in both Period 1 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.23, 0.21-0.26) and Period 2 (aOR 0.36, 0.34-0.38). Women were less likely than men to receive IVT, but the disparity narrowed over time (Period 1 aOR 0.81, 0.78-0.84, Period 2 aOR 0.94, 0.92-0.97). Inequities in IVT by race/ethnicity resolved for Hispanic individuals in Period 2 but not for Black individuals (Period 2 aOR 0.81, 0.78-0.85). The disparity in IVT for Medicare patients, compared to privately insured patients, lessened over time (Period 1 aOR 0.59, 0.56-0.52, Period 2 aOR 0.75, 0.72-0.77). Patients treated in rural hospitals were less likely to receive IVT than those treated in urban hospitals; a more dramatic increase in urban areas widened the inequity (Period 2 urban non-teaching vs. rural aOR 2.58, 2.33-2.85, urban teaching vs. rural aOR 3.90, 3.55-4.28). Conclusion: From 2002 through 2015, IVT for AIS increased among adults. Despite encouraging trends, only 1 in 15 AIS patients received IVT and persistent inequities remained for Black individuals, women, government-insured, and those treated in rural areas, highlighting the need for intensified efforts at addressing inequities.

Effects of System-Level Factors on Race/Ethnic Differences in In-Hospital Mortality after Acute Ischemic Stroke.

Introduction: Stroke mortality has declined, with differential changes by race; stroke is now the 5th leading cause of death overall, but 2nd leading cause of death in Black individuals. Little is known about recent race/ethnic and sex trends in in-hospital mortality after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and whether system-level factors contribute to possible differences. Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample, adults (≥18 years) with a primary diagnosis of AIS from 2006 to 2017 (n=643,912) were identified. We assessed in-hospital mortality by race/ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander [API], other), sex, and age. Hospitals were categorized by proportion of non-White patients served: <25% ("predominantly White patients"), 25-50% ("mixed race/ethnicity profile"), and ≥50% ("predominantly non-White patients"). Using survey adjusted logistic regression, the association between race/ethnicity and odds of mortality was assessed, adjusting for key sociodemographic, clinical, and hospital characteristics (e.g., age, comorbidities, stroke severity, do not resuscitate orders, and palliative care). Results: Overall, mortality decreased from 5.0% in 2006 to 2.9% in 2017 (p<0.001). Comparing 2012-2017 to 2006-2011, there was a 68% reduction in mortality odds overall after adjusting for covariates, most prominent in White individuals (69%) and smallest in Black individuals (57%). Compared to White patients, Black and Hispanic patients had lower odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.78-0.87 and aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-1.00), primarily driven by those >65 years (age x ethnicity interaction p < 0.0001). Compared to White men, Black, Hispanic, and API men, and Black women had lower aOR of mortality. The differences in mortality between White and non-White patients were most pronounced in hospitals predominantly serving White patients (aOR 0.80, 0.74-0.87) compared to mixed hospitals (aOR 0.85, 0.79-0.91) and predominantly non-White hospitals (aOR 0.88, 0.81-0.95; interaction effect: p=0.005). Discussion: AIS mortality decreased dramatically in recent years in all race/ethnic subgroups. Overall, non-White AIS patients had lower mortality than their White counterparts, a difference that was most striking in hospitals predominantly serving White patients. Further study is needed to understand these differences and to what extent biological, sociocultural, and system-level factors play a role.

Recommendations on Social Determinants of Health in Neurologic Disease.

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are increasingly recognized as important drivers of inequities in neurologic disease and outcomes. However, our understanding of the biopsychosocial mechanisms by which SDOH affect neurologic disease remains in its infancy. The most robust epidemiologic research has been on the associations between education, schooling, and place-based social determinants on cognition, dementia, and cerebrovascular disease later in life. Further research is needed to more deeply understand the complex interplay of SDOH on neurologic disease. Few SDOH screening tools have been validated in populations with neurologic disease. In addition, comparison across studies and populations is hampered by lack of standardized common data elements. Experiences of populations historically underrepresented in research should be centered in future research studies, and changes should be made in recruitment expectations and measurement choices. For research on inequities, it is critical to support and incentivize institutional infrastructure to foster meaningful engagement with populations affected by research. Finally, it remains to be seen whether individual-level health or behavioral interventions or place-level, systemic or policy interventions to reduce population burden will be most effective in reducing inequities in neurologic disease and outcomes. Although numerous clinical trials have focused on addressing downstream SDOH such as health literacy and health behaviors (e.g., medication adherence, physical activity, diet), few have addressed upstream, structural determinants which may have a more profound impact on addressing inequities in neurologic disease. Ultimately, further research is needed to determine which specific SDOH should be targeted and how, when, and by whom they should be addressed to improve neurologic outcomes.

Determinants of Inequities in Neurologic Disease, Health, and Well-being: The NINDS Social Determinants of Health Framework.

A National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke working group developed the Determinants of Inequities in Neurological Disease, Health, and Well-being framework. Our goal was to guide and inspire a new generation of neurologic research that pushes the field to design and test new approaches in pursuit of health equity, population health, and social justice. We seek to expand the lens of those looking to reduce or eliminate racial, socioeconomic status, and other inequities in neurologic disease, health, and well-being to improve our collective ability to create research, programs, and policies that lead to larger, more impactful, and more sustainable change in neurologic disease patterns. In this context, we outline a framework that includes and highlights "upstream" factors in the hopes of enhancing the focus of research, programmatic, and policy efforts to reduce and eliminate inequities in neurologic health and well-being. We explicitly discuss racism and other structural factors to clarify that social determinants are not natural and unchangeable. Populations with a disproportionate burden of neurologic disease are not inherently deficient, despite what some approaches to framing health inequities imply. The framework is presented linearly, but the pathways linking the determinants of neurologic disease, health, and well-being are far more complex than those demonstrated by the arrows included in the figure. The framework highlights the different levels and scale of causation, including the structural and intermediary social determinants and their impact on neurologic health. We offer this framework to refine efforts to contextualize the interpretation of neurologic research findings and suggest new avenues for their application. We illustrate how behavioral and biological factors occur in a social and economic context, factors that have been understudied as points of intervention to reduce inequities in neurologic disease. Considering social and structural determinants of health provides promising new opportunities to achieve neurologic health equity, reach social justice, and improve our science. Extending our work in this fashion is not simply about health equity or social justice but to fundamentally improve the quality of neurologic research by enhancing underlying theory and improving study design and implementation.

Strategies to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Stroke Preparedness, Care, Recovery, and Risk Factor Control: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Stroke is a disease of disparities, with tremendous racial and ethnic inequities in incidence, prevalence, treatment, and outcomes. The accumulating literature on the relationship between stroke and social determinants of health (ie, the structural conditions of the places where people live, learn, work, and play) contributes to our understanding of stroke inequities. Several interventions have been tested concurrently to reduce racial and ethnic inequities in stroke preparedness, care, recovery, and risk factor control. It is regrettable that no common theoretical framework has been used to facilitate comparison of interventions. In this scientific statement, we summarize, across the stroke continuum of care, trials of interventions addressing racial and ethnic inequities in stroke care and outcomes. We reviewed the literature on interventions to address racial and ethnic inequities to identify gaps and areas for future research. Although numerous trials tested interventions aimed at reducing inequities in prehospital, acute care, transitions in care, and poststroke risk factor control, few addressed inequities in rehabilitation, recovery, and social reintegration. Most studies addressed proximate determinants (eg, medication adherence, health literacy, and health behaviors), but upstream determinants (eg, structural racism, housing, income, food security, access to care) were not addressed. A common theoretical model of social determinants can help researchers understand the heterogeneity of social determinants, inform future directions in stroke inequities research, support research in understudied areas within the continuum of care, catalyze implementation of successful interventions in additional settings, allow for comparison across studies, and provide insight into whether addressing upstream or downstream social determinants has the strongest effect on reducing inequities in stroke care and outcomes.

Race, Ethnic, Sex, and Socioeconomic Inequities in Interhospital Transfer for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patients with stroke in the United States can be transferred for higher level of care. Little is known about possible inequities in interhospital transfers (IHTs) for acute ischemic stroke. We hypothesized that historically marginalized populations would have lower odds of IHT. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was done for adults with a primary diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke in 2010 to 2017; n=747 982 were identified in the National Inpatient Sample. Yearly rates for IHT were assessed and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of IHT in 2014 to 2017 were compared with that of 2010 to 2013. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine the aOR of IHT, adjusting for sociodemographic variables (model 1), sociodemographic and medical variables such as comorbidity and mortality risk (model 2), and sociodemographic, medical, and hospital variables (model 3). RESULTS: After adjusting for sociodemographic, medical, and hospital characteristics, there were no significant temporal differences in IHT from 2010 to 2017. Overall, women were less likely than men to be transferred in all models (model 3: aOR, 0.89 [0.86-0.92]). Compared with those who were White, individuals who were Black (aOR, 0.93 [0.88-0.99]), Hispanic (aOR, 0.90 [0.83-0.97]), other (aOR, 0.90 [0.82-0.99]), or of unknown race, ethnicity (aOR, 0.89 [0.80-1.00]) were less likely to be transferred (model 2), but these differences dissipated when further adjusting for hospital-level characteristics (model 3). Compared with those with private insurance, those with Medicaid (aOR, 0.86 [0.80-0.91]), self-pay (aOR, 0.64 [0.59-0.70]), and no charge (aOR, 0.64 [0.46-0.88]) were less likely to be transferred (model 3). Individuals with lower income were less likely to be transferred compared with those with higher income (model 3: aOR, 0.85 [0.80-0.90], third versus fourth quartile). CONCLUSIONS: Adjusted odds of IHT for acute ischemic stroke remained stable from 2010 to 2017. There are numerous inequities in the rates of IHT by race, ethnicity, sex, insurance, and income. Further studies are needed to understand these inequities and develop policies and interventions to mitigate them.

All-Cause, Cardiovascular, and Stroke Mortality Among Foreign-Born Versus US-Born Individuals of African Ancestry.

Background Little is known about the effect of region of origin on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke mortality among Black individuals. We examined associations between nativity and mortality (all-cause, cardiovascular, and stroke) in Black individuals in the United States. Methods and Results Using the National Health Interview Service 2000 to 2014 data and mortality-linked files through 2015, we identified participants aged 25 to 74 years who self-identified as Black (n=64 717). Using a Cox regression model, we examined the association between nativity and all-cause, cardiovascular, and stroke mortality. We recorded 4329 deaths (205 stroke and 932 cardiovascular deaths). In the model adjusted for age and sex, compared with US-born Black individuals, all-cause (hazard ratio [HR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.37-0.53]) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.44-0.87]) rates were lower among Black individuals born in the Caribbean, South America, and Central America, but stroke mortality rates were similar (HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.52-1.94]). African-born Black individuals had lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.27-0.69]) and lower cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.18-0.98]) but comparable stroke mortality (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.11-2.05]). When the model was further adjusted for education, income, smoking, body mass index, hypertension, and diabetes, the difference in mortality between foreign-born Black individuals and US-born Black individuals was no longer significant. Time since migration did not significantly affect mortality outcomes among foreign-born Black individuals. Conclusions In the United States, foreign-born Black individuals had lower all-cause mortality, a difference that was observed in recent and well-established immigrants. Foreign-born Black people had age- and sex-adjusted lower cardiovascular mortality than US-born Black people.

Health Equity and Actionable Disparities in Stroke: 2022 Update.

There are stark inequities in stroke incidence, prevalence, care, and outcomes. This issue of Stroke features manuscripts from the third annual HEADS-UP (Health Equity and Actionable Disparities in Stroke: Understanding and Problem-Solving) symposium, which took place the day before the International Stroke Conference in February 2022. The 2022 HEADS-UP symposium focused on clinical trials to address stroke inequities. The 2022 Edgar J. Kenton III award was awarded to Moira Kapral. In Kenton Award Lecture-Stroke Disparities Research: Learning from the Past, Planning for the Future, Kapral details 10 key considerations for researchers interested in addressing inequities in stroke. These considerations provide an insightful, evidence-based roadmap for the future of stroke inequities research. In the article, Care Transition Interventions to Improve Stroke Outcomes, Reeves et al highlight barriers faced by historically disenfranchised populations navigating transitions in the stroke continuum of care; summarize clinical trials aimed at enhancing transitions in care, particularly in historically marginalized populations; and stress the importance of co-designing future interventions with patient populations to address inequities. In Telehealth Trials to Enhance Health Equity for Patients With Stroke, Sharrief et al detail how telehealth interventions have the potential to address inequities if they are implemented in a thoughtful manner, addressing the potential factors than can exacerbate a digital divide. Finally, in Polypill Programs to Prevent Stroke and Cut Costs in Low Income Countries: From Clinical Efficacy to Implementation, Sarfo et al review the evidence for polypill strategies in primary and secondary cardiovascular disease prevention in low- and middle-income countries, who bear the majority of the worldwide burden of stroke.

Prevalence and Predictors of Food Insecurity Among Stroke Survivors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Food insecurity (FI)-lack of consistent access to food due to poor financial resources-limits the ability to eat a healthy diet, which is essential for secondary stroke prevention. Yet, little is known about FI in stroke survivors. METHODS: Using data from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 1999 to 2015, we analyzed the prevalence, predictors, and temporal trends in FI among adults with and without self-reported prior stroke in this cross-sectional study. Age-standardized prevalence estimates were computed by self-reported history of stroke over survey waves. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed for the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey participants who had a prior stroke to identify independent predictors of FI by self-reported history of stroke. RESULTS: Among 48 242 adults ≥20 years of age, 1877 self-reported history of stroke. FI was more prevalent among people with prior stroke (17%) versus those without prior stroke (12%; P<0.001). Prevalence of FI increased over time from 7.8% in 1999 to 42.1% in 2015 among stroke survivors and from 8% to 17% among individuals without prior stroke (P<0.001). The age-standardized prevalence of FI over the entire time was 24% among stroke survivors versus 11% among individuals without prior stroke (P<0.001). In the adjusted model, younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.96 [0.95-0.97]; P<0.01), Hispanic ethnicity (aOR, 2.12 [1.36-3.31]; P<0.01), lower education (aOR, 1.67 [1.17-2.38]; P<0.01), nonmarried status (aOR, 1.49 [1.01-2.19]; P=0.04), and poverty income ratio <130% (aOR, 3.78 [2.55-5.59]; P<0.01) were associated with FI in those with prior stroke. CONCLUSIONS: One in 3 stroke survivors reported FI in 2015, nearly double the prevalence in those without stroke. Addressing the fundamental drivers of FI and targeting vulnerable demographic groups may have a profound influence on stroke prevalence.

Moving Towards Equity With Digital Health Innovations for Stroke Care.

Digital health has long been championed as a means to expanding access to health care. Now that the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated many health systems' integration of digital tools for care, digital health may provide a path towards more accessible stroke prevention and treatment, particularly for historically disadvantaged patient populations. Stroke management is composed of multiple time points where digital health innovations have the potential to augment health access and treatment: from primary prevention, to the time-sensitive detection of ischemic stroke, administration of thrombolytic agents and consideration for endovascular interventions, to appropriate post-acute care, rehabilitation, and lifelong secondary stroke prevention-stroke care relies on a multidisciplinary and standardized approach. However, as we discuss pointedly in this Focused Update, underrepresented individuals face multilevel digital health disparities that potentially diminish the benefits of these digital advances. As such, these multilevel needs must be discussed and accounted for as health systems seek to integrate innovative and equitable digital health solutions towards stroke care.

Health Equity and Actionable Disparities in Stroke: 2021 Update.

There are stark inequities in stroke incidence, prevalence, acute care, rehabilitation, risk factor control, and outcomes. To address these inequities, it is critical to engage communities in identifying priorities and designing, implementing, and disseminating interventions. This issue of Stroke features health equity themed lectures delivered during the International Stroke Conference and Health Equity and Actionable Disparities in Stroke: Understanding and Problem-Solving meetings in 2021 as well as articles covering issues of disparities and diversity in stroke. Bruce Ovbiagele, MD, MSc, MAS, MBA, MLS, received the 2021 William Feinberg Award Lecture for his lifetime achievements in seeking global and local solutions to cerebrovascular health inequities. The second annual Health Equity and Actionable Disparities in Stroke: Understanding and Problem-Solving symposium, which took place the day before the International Stroke Conference in February 2021, focused on community-engaged research for reducing inequities in stroke. Phil Gorelick, MD was awarded the Edgar J. Kenton III Award for his lifetime achievements in using community engagement strategies to recruit and retain Black participants in observational studies and clinical trials. Walter Koroshetz, MD, Director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke delivered the keynote lecture on stroke inequities and Richard Benson, MD, PhD, Director of the Office of Global Health and Health Disparities at National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, gave a lecture focused on National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke efforts to address inequities. Nichols et al highlighted approaches of community-based participatory research to address stroke inequities. Verma et al showcased digital health innovations to reduce inequities in stroke. Das et al showed that the proportion of underrepresented in medicine vascular neurology fellows has lowered over the past decade and authors provided a road map for enhancing the diversity in vascular neurology. Clearly, to overcome inequities, multipronged strategies are required, from broadening representation among vascular neurology faculty to partnering with communities to conduct research with meaningful impact.

Biological and Social Determinants of Hypertension Severity Before vs After Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although blood pressure (BP) control is considered the most effective measure to prevent functional decline after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), fewer than half of survivors achieve treatment goals. We hypothesized that long-term (i.e., prehemorrhage) hypertension severity may be a crucial factor in explaining poor BP control after ICH. We investigated changes in hypertension severity after vs before ICH using latent class analysis (LCA) and identified patient characteristics predictive of individuals' BP trajectories. METHODS: We analyzed data for ICH survivors enrolled in a study conducted at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) from 2002 to 2019 in Boston, a high-resource setting with near-universal medical insurance coverage. We captured BP measurements in the 12 months preceding and following the acute ICH hospitalization. Using LCA, we identified patient groups (classes) based on changes in hypertension severity over time in an unbiased manner. We then created multinomial logistic regression models to identify patient factors associated with these classes. RESULTS: Among 336 participants, the average age was 74.4 years, 166 (49%) were male, and 288 (86%) self-reported White race/ethnicity. LCA identified 3 patient classes, corresponding to minimal (n = 114, 34%), intermediate (n = 128, 38%), and substantial (n = 94, 28%) improvement in hypertension severity after vs before ICH. Survivors with undertreated (relative risk ratio [RRR] 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.23) or resistant (RRR 0.03, 95% CI 0.01-0.06) hypertension before ICH were less likely to experience substantial improvement afterwards. Residents of high-income neighborhoods were more likely to experience substantial improvement (RRR 1.14 per $10,000, 95% CI 1.02-1.28). Black, Hispanic, and Asian participants with uncontrolled hypertension before ICH were more likely to experience minimal improvement after hemorrhagic stroke (interaction p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Most ICH survivors do not display consistent improvement in hypertension severity after hemorrhagic stroke. BP control after ICH is profoundly influenced by patient characteristics predating the hemorrhage, chiefly prestroke hypertension severity and socioeconomic status. Neighborhood income was associated with hypertension severity after ICH in a high-resource setting with near-universal health care coverage. These findings likely contribute to previously documented racial/ethnic disparities in BP control and clinical outcomes following ICH.

Racial Inequities Across Rural Strata in Acute Stroke Care and In-Hospital Mortality: National Trends Over 6 Years.

BACKGROUND: There are glaring racial and rural-urban inequities in stroke outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine whether there were recent changes to trends in racial inequities in stroke treatment and in-hospital mortality, and whether racial inequities differed across rural strata. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of Black and White patients >18 years old admitted to US acute care hospitals with a primary discharge diagnosis of stroke (unweighted N=652 836) from the National Inpatient Sample from 2012 to 2017. Rural residence was classified by county as urban, town, or rural. The primary outcomes were intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular therapy use among patients with acute ischemic stroke, and in-hospital mortality for all stroke patients. Logistic regression models were run for each outcome adjusting for age, comorbidities, primary payer, and ZIP code median income. RESULTS: The sample was 53% female, 81% White, and 19% Black. Black patients from rural areas had the lowest odds of receiving intravenous thrombolysis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.37-0.50]) and endovascular therapy (aOR, 0.60 [0.46-0.78]), compared with White urban patients. Black rural patients were the least likely to be discharged home after a stroke compared with White/urban patients (aOR, 0.79 [0.75-0.83]), this was true for Black patients across the urban-rural spectrum when compared with Whites. Black patients from urban areas had lower mortality than White patients from urban areas (aOR, 0.87 [0.84-0.91]), while White patients from rural areas (aOR, 1.14 [1.10-1.19]) had the highest mortality of all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients living in rural areas represent a particularly high-risk group for poor access to advanced stroke care and impaired poststroke functional status. Rural White patients have the highest in-hospital mortality. Clinical and policy interventions are needed to improve access and reduce inequities in stroke care and outcomes.

Primary Care of Adult Patients After Stroke: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.

Primary care teams provide the majority of poststroke care. When optimally configured, these teams provide patient-centered care to prevent recurrent stroke, maximize function, prevent late complications, and optimize quality of life. Patient-centered primary care after stroke begins with establishing the foundation for poststroke management while engaging caregivers and family members in support of the patient. Screening for complications (eg, depression, cognitive impairment, and fall risk) and unmet needs is both a short-term and long-term component of poststroke care. Patients with ongoing functional impairments may benefit from referral to appropriate services. Ongoing care consists of managing risk factors such as high blood pressure, atrial fibrillation, diabetes, carotid stenosis, and dyslipidemia. Recommendations to reduce risk of recurrent stroke also include lifestyle modifications such as healthy diet and exercise. At the system level, primary care practices can use quality improvement strategies and available resources to enhance the delivery of evidence-based care and optimize outcomes.