Long-term psychological outcomes following stroke: the OX-CHRONIC study.

BACKGROUND: Stroke survivors rate longer-term (> 2 years) psychological recovery as their top priority, but data on how frequently psychological consequences occur is lacking. Prevalence of cognitive impairment, depression/anxiety, fatigue, apathy and related psychological outcomes, and whether rates are stable in long-term stroke, is unknown. METHODS: N = 105 long-term stroke survivors (M [SD] age = 72.92 [13.01]; M [SD] acute NIH Stroke Severity Score = 7.39 [6.25]; 59.0% Male; M [SD] years post-stroke = 4.57 [2.12]) were recruited (potential N = 208). Participants completed 3 remote assessments, including a comprehensive set of standardized cognitive neuropsychological tests comprising domains of memory, attention, language, and executive function, and questionnaires on emotional distress, fatigue, apathy and other psychological outcomes. Ninety participants were re-assessed one year later. Stability of outcomes was assessed by Cohen's d effect size estimates and percent Minimal Clinically Important Difference changes between time points. RESULTS: On the Montreal Cognitive Assessment 65.3% scored < 26. On the Oxford Cognitive Screen 45.9% had at least one cognitive impairment. Attention (27.1%) and executive function (40%) were most frequently impaired. 23.5% and 22.5% had elevated depression/anxiety respectively. Fatigue (51.4%) and apathy (40.5%) rates remained high, comparable to estimates in the first-year post-stroke. Attention (d = -0.12; 85.8% stable) and depression (d = 0.09, 77.1% stable) were the most stable outcomes. Following alpha-adjustments, only perceptuomotor abilities (d = 0.69; 40.4% decline) and fatigue (d = -0.33; 45.3% decline) worsened over one year. Cognitive impairment, depression/anxiety, fatigue and apathy all correlated with worse quality of life. CONCLUSION: Nearly half of participants > 2 years post-event exhibited psychological difficulties including domains of cognition, mood, and fatigue, which impact long-term quality of life. Stroke is a chronic condition with highly prevalent psychological needs, which require monitoring and intervention development.

European Stroke Organisation and European Academy of Neurology joint guidelines on post-stroke cognitive impairment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The optimal management of post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) remains controversial. These joint European Stroke Organisation (ESO) and European Academy of Neurology (EAN) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians in decision making regarding prevention, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. METHODS: Guidelines were developed according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The working group identified relevant clinical questions, performed systematic reviews, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and made specific recommendations. Expert consensus statements were provided where insufficient evidence was available to provide recommendations. RESULTS: There was limited randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence regarding single or multicomponent interventions to prevent post-stroke cognitive decline. Lifestyle interventions and treating vascular risk factors have many health benefits, but a cognitive effect is not proven. We found no evidence regarding routine cognitive screening following stroke, but recognize the importance of targeted cognitive assessment. We describe the accuracy of various cognitive screening tests, but found no clearly superior approach to testing. There was insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for use of cholinesterase inhibitors, memantine nootropics or cognitive rehabilitation. There was limited evidence on the use of prediction tools for post-stroke cognition. The association between PSCI and acute structural brain imaging features was unclear, although the presence of substantial white matter hyperintensities of presumed vascular origin on brain magnetic resonance imaging may help predict cognitive outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines highlight fundamental areas where robust evidence is lacking. Further definitive RCTs are needed, and we suggest priority areas for future research.

Prognostic rules for predicting cognitive syndromes following stroke: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Stroke survivors are at high risk of developing cognitive syndromes, such as delirium and dementia. Accurate prediction of future cognitive outcomes may aid timely diagnosis, intervention planning, and stratification in clinical trials. We aimed to identify, describe and appraise existing multivariable prognostic rules for prediction of post-stroke cognitive status. METHOD: We systematically searched four electronic databases from inception to November 2019 for publications describing a method to estimate individual probability of developing a cognitive syndrome following stroke. We extracted data from selected studies using a pre-specified proforma and applied the Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) for critical appraisal. FINDINGS: Of 17,390 titles, we included 10 studies (3143 participants), presenting the development of 11 prognostic rules - 7 for post-stroke cognitive impairment and 4 for delirium. Most commonly incorporated predictors were: demographics, imaging findings, stroke type and symptom severity. Among studies assessing predictive discrimination, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) in apparent validation ranged from 0.80 to 0.91. The overall risk of bias for each study was high. Only one prognostic rule had been externally validated.Discussion/conclusion: Research into the prognosis of cognitive outcomes following stroke is an expanding field, still at its early stages. Recommending use of specific prognostic rules is limited by the high risk of bias in all identified studies, and lack of supporting evidence from external validation. To ensure the quality of future research, investigators should adhere to current, endorsed best practice guidelines for conduct of prediction model studies.

Long-term psychological consequences of stroke (OX-CHRONIC): A longitudinal study of cognition in relation to mood and fatigue after stroke: Protocol.

Background: The long-term psychological consequences of stroke and how cognitive problems change over time after the first-year following stroke remain unclear. Particularly, trajectories of domain-specific and domain-general cognitive functions and how cognition interacts with mood, fatigue and quality of life are not well described. Aims: To determine the prevalence, trajectories and wider impact of domain-specific cognitive impairment in long-term stroke survivors, in relation to mood, fatigue and quality of life. Methods: Participants who previously took part in the Oxford Cognitive Screening study, completed the 6-month follow-up with cognitive, mood, fatigue and quality of life assessments and agreed to be contacted for future research will be recruited into OX-CHRONIC. The eligible cohort is between 2- and 9-years post-stroke. Cognition will be assessed with a detailed neuropsychological battery, alongside questionnaire measures of mood, fatigue, activities of daily life and quality of life measures at two timepoints, 1 year apart. Additionally, medical records will be accessed to extract further clinical information about the stroke and patients may opt-in to wear an activity monitor for 1 week to provide fine-grained measures of sleep and activity. The study protocol and study materials were approved by the national ethics committee (REC Ref: 19/SC/0520). Planned outputs: OX-CHRONIC will provide detailed data on the evolving cognitive profiles of stroke survivors over several years post-stroke. Estimates of long-term prevalence as well as the effect of changes in cognitive profiles on mood, fatigue and quality of life will be examined. This study is funded by a Priority Programme Grant from the Stroke Association (SA PPA 18/100032).

European Stroke Organisation and European Academy of Neurology joint guidelines on post-stroke cognitive impairment.

The optimal management of post-stroke cognitive impairment remains controversial. These joint European Stroke Organisation (ESO) and European Academy of Neurology (EAN) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations to assist clinicians in decision making around prevention, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. These guidelines were developed according to ESO standard operating procedure and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The working group identified relevant clinical questions, performed systematic reviews and, where possible, meta-analyses of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence and made specific recommendations. Expert consensus statements were provided where insufficient evidence was available to provide recommendations based on the GRADE approach. There was limited randomised controlled trial evidence regarding single or multicomponent interventions to prevent post-stroke cognitive decline. Interventions to improve lifestyle and treat vascular risk factors may have many health benefits but a beneficial effect on cognition is not proven. We found no evidence around routine cognitive screening following stroke but recognise the importance of targeted cognitive assessment. We described the accuracy of various cognitive screening tests but found no clearly superior approach to testing. There was insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for use of cholinesterase inhibitors, memantine nootropics or cognitive rehabilitation. There was limited evidence on the use of prediction tools for post-stroke cognitive syndromes (cognitive impairment, dementia and delirium). The association between post-stroke cognitive impairment and most acute structural brain imaging features was unclear, although the presence of substantial white matter hyperintensities of presumed vascular origin on acute MRI brain may help predict cognitive outcomes. These guidelines have highlighted fundamental areas where robust evidence is lacking. Further, definitive randomised controlled trials are needed, and we suggest priority areas for future research.

Cardiovascular risk factors indirectly affect acute post-stroke cognition through stroke severity and prior cognitive impairment: a moderated mediation analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment is an important consequence of stroke and transient ischaemic attack, but its determinants are not fully understood. Simple univariable or multivariable models have not shown clinical utility for predicting cognitive impairment. Cardiovascular risk factors may influence cognition through multiple, direct, and indirect pathways, including effects on prior cognition and stroke severity. Understanding these complex relationships may help clinical teams plan intervention and follow-up strategies. METHODS: We analysed clinical and demographic data from consecutive patients admitted to an acute stroke ward. Cognitive assessment comprised Abbreviated Mental Test and mini-Montreal Cognitive Assessment. We constructed bias-corrected confidence intervals to test indirect effects of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, vascular disease, atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, previous stroke) on cognitive function, mediated through stroke severity and history of dementia, and we assessed moderation effects due to comorbidity. RESULTS: From 594 eligible patients, we included 587 in the final analysis (age range 26-100; 45% female). Our model explained R2 = 62.10% of variance in cognitive test scores. We found evidence for an indirect effect of previous stroke that was associated with increased risk of prevalent dementia and in turn predicted poorer cognitive score (estimate = - 0.39; 95% bias-corrected CI, - 0.75 to - 0.13; p = 0.02). Atrial fibrillation was associated with greater stroke severity and in turn with a poorer cognitive score (estimate = - 0.27; 95% bias-corrected CI, - 0.49 to - 0.05; p = 0.02). Conversely, previous TIA predicted decreased stroke severity and, through that, lesser cognitive impairment (estimate = 0.38; 95% bias-corrected CI, 0.08 to 0.75; p = 0.02). Through an association with reduced stroke severity, vascular disease was associated with lesser cognitive impairment, conditional on presence of hypertension and absence of diabetes mellitus (estimate = 0.36; 95% bias-corrected CI, 0.03 to 0.68; p = 0.02), although the modelled interaction effects did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that relationships between cardiovascular risk factors and cognition are complex and simple multivariable models may be overly reductionist. Including direct and indirect effects of risk factors, we constructed a model that explained a substantial proportion of variation in cognitive test scores. Models that include multiple paths of influence and interactions could be used to create dementia prognostic tools for use in other healthcare settings.

Thinking About the Future: A Review of Prognostic Scales Used in Acute Stroke.

Background: There are many prognostic scales that aim to predict functional outcome following acute stroke. Despite considerable research interest, these scales have had limited impact in routine clinical practice. This may be due to perceived problems with internal validity (quality of research), as well as external validity (generalizability of results). We set out to collate information on exemplar stroke prognosis scales, giving particular attention to the scale content, derivation, and validation. Methods: We performed a focused literature search, designed to return high profile scales that use baseline clinical data to predict mortality or disability. We described prognostic utility and collated information on the content, development and validation of the tools. We critically appraised chosen scales based on the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modeling Studies (CHARMS). Results: We chose 10 primary scales that met our inclusion criteria, six of which had revised/modified versions. Most primary scales used 5 input variables (range: 4-13), with substantial overlap in the variables included. All scales included age, eight included a measure of stroke severity, while five scales incorporated pre-stroke level of function (often using modified Rankin Scale), comorbidities and classification of stroke type. Through our critical appraisal, we found issues relating to excluding patients with missing data from derivation studies, and basing the selection of model variable on significance in univariable analysis (in both cases noted for six studies). We identified separate external validation studies for all primary scales but one, with a total of 60 validation studies. Conclusions: Most acute stroke prognosis scales use similar variables to predict long-term outcomes and most have reasonable prognostic accuracy. While not all published scales followed best practice in development, most have been subsequently validated. Lack of clinical uptake may relate more to practical application of scales rather than validity. Impact studies are now necessary to investigate clinical usefulness of existing scales.

Who Is Classified as Untestable on Brief Cognitive Screens in an Acute Stroke Setting?

Full completion of cognitive screening tests can be problematic in the context of a stroke. Our aim was to examine the completion of various brief cognitive screens and explore reasons for untestability. Data were collected from consecutive stroke admissions (May 2016-August 2018). The cognitive assessment was attempted during the first week of admission. Patients were classified as partially untestable (≥1 test item was incomplete) and fully untestable (where assessment was not attempted, and/or no questions answered). We assessed univariate and multivariate associations of test completion with: age (years), sex, stroke severity (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS)), stroke classification, pre-morbid disability (modified Rankin Scale (mRS)), previous stroke and previous dementia diagnosis. Of 703 patients admitted (mean age: 69.4), 119 (17%) were classified as fully untestable and 58 (8%) were partially untestable. The 4A-test had 100% completion and the clock-draw task had the lowest completion (533/703, 76%). Independent associations with fully untestable status had a higher NIHSS score (odds ratio (OR): 1.18, 95% CI: 1.11-1.26), higher pre-morbid mRS (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.02-1.60) and pre-stroke dementia (OR: 3.35, 95% CI: 1.53-7.32). Overall, a quarter of patients were classified as untestable on the cognitive assessment, with test incompletion related to stroke and non-stroke factors. Clinicians and researchers would benefit from guidance on how to make the best use of incomplete test data.

Are methodological quality and completeness of reporting associated with citation-based measures of publication impact? A secondary analysis of a systematic review of dementia biomarker studies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether methodological and reporting quality are associated with surrogate measures of publication impact in the field of dementia biomarker studies. METHODS: We assessed dementia biomarker studies included in a previous systematic review in terms of methodological and reporting quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) and Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD), respectively. We extracted additional study and journal-related data from each publication to account for factors shown to be associated with impact in previous research. We explored associations between potential determinants and measures of publication impact in univariable and stepwise multivariable linear regression analyses. OUTCOME MEASURES: We aimed to collect data on four measures of publication impact: two traditional measures-average number of citations per year and 5-year impact factor of the publishing journal and two alternative measures-the Altmetric Attention Score and counts of electronic downloads. RESULTS: The systematic review included 142 studies. Due to limited data, Altmetric Attention Scores and electronic downloads were excluded from the analysis, leaving traditional metrics as the only analysed outcome measures. We found no relationship between QUADAS and traditional metrics. Citation rates were independently associated with 5-year journal impact factor (ß=0.42; p<0.001), journal subject area (ß=0.39; p<0.001), number of years since publication (ß=-0.29; p<0.001) and STARD (ß=0.13; p<0.05). Independent determinants of 5-year journal impact factor were citation rates (ß=0.45; p<0.001), statement on conflict of interest (ß=0.22; p<0.01) and baseline sample size (ß=0.15; p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Citation rates and 5-year journal impact factor appear to measure different dimensions of impact. Citation rates were weakly associated with completeness of reporting, while neither traditional metric was related to methodological rigour. Our results suggest that high publication usage and journal outlet is not a guarantee of quality and readers should critically appraise all papers regardless of presumed impact.