Tenecteplase versus standard of care for minor ischaemic stroke with proven occlusion (TEMPO-2): a randomised, open label, phase 3 superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with minor ischaemic stroke and intracranial occlusion are at increased risk of poor outcomes. Intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase might improve outcomes in this population. We aimed to test the superiority of intravenous tenecteplase over non-thrombolytic standard of care in patients with minor ischaemic stroke and intracranial occlusion or focal perfusion abnormality. METHODS: In this multicentre, prospective, parallel group, open label with blinded outcome assessment, randomised controlled trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) were included at 48 hospitals in Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Finland, Ireland, New Zealand, Singapore, Spain, and the UK. Eligible patients with minor acute ischaemic stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 0-5) and intracranial occlusion or focal perfusion abnormality were enrolled within 12 h from stroke onset. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a minimal sufficient balance algorithm to intravenous tenecteplase (0·25 mg/kg) or non-thrombolytic standard of care (control). Primary outcome was a return to baseline functioning on pre-morbid modified Rankin Scale score in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (all patients randomly assigned to a treatment group and who did not withdraw consent to participate) assessed at 90 days. Safety outcomes were reported in the ITT population and included symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02398656, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: The trial was stopped early for futility. Between April 27, 2015, and Jan 19, 2024, 886 patients were enrolled; 369 (42%) were female and 517 (58%) were male. 454 (51%) were assigned to control and 432 (49%) to intravenous tenecteplase. The primary outcome occurred in 338 (75%) of 452 patients in the control group and 309 (72%) of 432 in the tenecteplase group (risk ratio [RR] 0·96, 95% CI 0·88-1·04, p=0·29). More patients died in the tenecteplase group (20 deaths [5%]) than in the control group (five deaths [1%]; adjusted hazard ratio 3·8; 95% CI 1·4-10·2, p=0·0085). There were eight (2%) symptomatic intracranial haemorrhages in the tenecteplase group versus two (<1%) in the control group (RR 4·2; 95% CI 0·9-19·7, p=0·059). INTERPRETATION: There was no benefit and possible harm from treatment with intravenous tenecteplase. Patients with minor stroke and intracranial occlusion should not be routinely treated with intravenous thrombolysis. FUNDING: Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and the British Heart Foundation.

Interhospital Transfer for Endovascular Stroke Treatment in Canada: Results From the OPTIMISE Registry.

BACKGROUND: Interhospital transfer for patients with stroke due to large vessel occlusion for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has been associated with treatment delays. METHODS: We analyzed data from Optimizing Patient Treatment in Major Ischemic Stroke With EVT, a quality improvement registry to support EVT implementation in Canada. We assessed for unadjusted differences in baseline characteristics, time metrics, and procedural outcomes between patients with large vessel occlusion transferred for EVT and those directly admitted to an EVT-capable center. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021, a total of 6803 patients received EVT at 20 participating centers (median age, 73 years; 50% women; and 50% treated with intravenous thrombolysis). Patients transferred for EVT (n=3376) had lower rates of M2 occlusion (22% versus 27%) and higher rates of basilar occlusion (9% versus 5%) compared with those patients presenting directly at an EVT-capable center (n=3373). Door-to-needle times were shorter in patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis before transfer compared with those presenting directly to an EVT center (32 versus 36 minutes). Patients transferred for EVT had shorter door-to-arterial access times (37 versus 87 minutes) but longer last seen normal-to-arterial access times (322 versus 181 minutes) compared with those presenting directly to an EVT-capable center. No differences in arterial access-to-reperfusion times, successful reperfusion rates (85% versus 86%), or adverse periprocedural events were found between the 2 groups. Patients transferred to EVT centers had a similar likelihood for good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-2; 41% versus 43%; risk ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.88-1.01]; adjusted risk ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.91-1.05]) and a higher risk for all-cause mortality at 90 days (29% versus 25%; risk ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.05-1.27]; adjusted risk ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03-1.28]) compared with patients presenting directly to an EVT center. CONCLUSIONS: Patients transferred for EVT experience significant delays from the time they were last seen normal to the initiation of EVT.

Sex-Based Analysis of Workflow and Outcomes in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated With Alteplase Versus Tenecteplase.

BACKGROUND: Understanding sex differences in stroke care is important in reducing potential disparities. Our objective was to explore sex differences in workflow efficiency, treatment efficacy, and safety in the AcT trial (Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase). METHODS: AcT was a multicenter, registry-linked randomized noninferiority trial comparing tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) with alteplase (0.9 mg/kg) in acute ischemic stroke within 4.5 hours of onset. In this post hoc analysis, baseline characteristics, workflow times, successful reperfusion (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score ≥2b), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-1), and 90-day mortality were compared by sex. Mixed-effects regression analysis was used adjusting for age, stroke severity, and occlusion site for outcomes. RESULTS: Of 1577 patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis (2019-2022), 755 (47.9%) were women. Women were older (median, 77 [68-86] years in women versus 70 [59-79] years in men) and had a higher proportion of severe strokes (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score >15; 32.4% versus 24.9%) and large vessel occlusions (28.7% versus 21.5%) compared with men. All workflow times were comparable between sexes. Women were less likely to achieve functional independence (31.7% versus 39.8%; unadjusted relative risk, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.70-0.91]) and had higher mortality (17.7% versus 13.3%; unadjusted relative risk, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.06-1.69]). Adjusted analysis showed no difference in outcomes between sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in prognostic factors of age, stroke severity, and occlusion site largely accounted for higher functional dependence and mortality in women. No sex disparities were apparent in workflow quality indicators. Given the integration of the AcT trial into clinical practice, these results provide reassurance that no major sex biases are apparent in acute stroke management throughout participating Canadian centers. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03889249.

Quality of Life After Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Results From the AcT Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence from thrombolysis trials indicates the noninferiority of intravenous tenecteplase to intravenous alteplase with respect to good functional outcomes in patients with acute stroke. We examined whether the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of patients with acute stroke differs by the type of thrombolysis treatment received. In addition, we examined the association between the modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 and HRQOL and patient-reported return to prebaseline stroke functioning at 90 days. METHODS: Data were from all patients included in the AcT trial (Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase), a pragmatic, registry-linked randomized trial comparing tenecteplase with alteplase. HRQOL at 90-day post-randomization was assessed using the 5-item EuroQOL questionnaire (EQ5D), which consists of 5 items and a visual analog scale (VAS). EQ5D index values were estimated from the EQ5D items using the time tradeoff approach based on Canadian norms. Tobit regression and quantile regression models were used to evaluate the adjusted effect of tenecteplase versus alteplase treatment on the EQ5D index values and VAS score, respectively. The association between return to prebaseline stroke functioning and the modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 and HRQOL was quantified using correlation coefficient (r) with 95% CI. RESULTS: Of 1577 included in the intention-to-treat analysis patients, 1503 (95.3%) had complete data on the EQ5D. Of this, 769 (51.2%) were administered tenecteplase and 717 (47.7%) were female. The mean EQ5D VAS score and EQ5D index values were not significantly higher for those who received intravenous tenecteplase compared with those who received intravenous alteplase (P=0.10). Older age (P<0.01), more severe stroke assessed using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (P<0.01), and longer stroke onset-to-needle time (P=0.004) were associated with lower EQ5D index and VAS scores. There was a strong association (r, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.81-0.89]) between patient-reported return to prebaseline functioning and modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 Similarly, there was a moderate association between return to prebaseline functioning and EQ5D index (r, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.40-0.49]) and EQ5D VAS scores (r, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.37-0.46]). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no differential effect of thrombolysis type on patient-reported global HRQOL and EQ 5D-5L index values in patients with acute stroke, sex- and age-related differences in HRQOL were noted in this study. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03889249.

Intravenous alteplase versus tenecteplase in patients with acute posterior circulation strokes: a secondary analysis from the AcT randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: There are limited data available demonstrating the safety and efficacy of intravenous tenecteplase versus alteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke in the posterior circulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of the Alteplase compared to Tenecteplase(AcT) pragmatic, phase 3, registry-linked randomized controlled trial. Patients with any posterior circulation vessel occlusion on baseline imaging were included. Study outcomes included 90-day modified Rankin Scale(mRS) 0-1, mRS 0-2, ordinal mRS, death within 90 days, 24h symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage(sICH) and successful reperfusion/recanalization. Mixed effects regression adjusting for age, sex and stroke severity was used to analyze differences in outcomes between patients administered tenecteplase vs. alteplase. Further, sensitivity analysis was conducted for basilar artery occlusion(BAO) alone. RESULTS: Of 1577 patients, 136(8.6%, 77:alteplase, 59:tenecteplase) had posterior circulation stroke. Baseline characteristics were similar[median age 71(IQR 60-81) vs. 72(IQR 65-82) years, 57.1% vs. 67.8% males, median baseline NIHSS 7(IQR 4-12) vs. 7(IQR 4-16) in alteplase vs. tenecteplase arms, respectively]. 28 patients(20.6%, 16:alteplase, 12:tenecteplase arm) underwent EVT. The median 90-120 days mRS was 2(IQR 1-4). There were no differences between alteplase and tenecteplase for 90-d mRS 0-1(adjRR 0.93;95%CI 0.63-1.36), 90-day mRS 0-2(adjRR 0.95; 95%CI 0.72-1.26), sICH(RR 0.65;95%CI 0.06-7.02) and mortality (RR 1.21;95%CI 0.61-2.38). Successful reperfusion eTICI 2b-3 and successful recanalization rAOL 2b-3 was achieved in 23/28(82%, 12:alteplase, 11:tenecteplase) and in 16/28(57%, 14:alteplase, 12:tenecteplase), respectively. Similar results were seen in 31 patients (22.8%) with BAO. CONCLUSION: Intravenous tenecteplase has a similar effect on outcome as alteplase, without increased safety concerns in patients with acute posterior circulation strokes.

Effect of Time to Thrombolysis on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Treated With Tenecteplase Compared to Alteplase: Analysis From the AcT Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The AcT (Alteplase Compared to Tenecteplase) randomized controlled trial showed that tenecteplase is noninferior to alteplase in treating patients with acute ischemic stroke within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. The effect of time to treatment on clinical outcomes with alteplase is well known; however, the nature of this relationship is yet to be described with tenecteplase. We assessed whether the association of time to thrombolysis treatment with clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke differs by whether they receive intravenous tenecteplase versus alteplase. METHODS: Patients included were from AcT, a pragmatic, registry-linked, phase 3 randomized controlled trial comparing intravenous tenecteplase to alteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Eligible patients were >18 years old, with disabling neurological deficits, presenting within 4.5 hours of symptom onset, and eligible for thrombolysis. Primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 at 90 days. Safety outcomes included 24-hour symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage and 90-day mortality rates. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to assess the following: (a) the association of stroke symptom onset to needle time; (b) door (hospital arrival) to needle time with outcomes; and (c) if these associations were modified by type of thrombolytic administered (tenecteplase versus alteplase), after adjusting for age, sex, baseline stroke severity, and site of intracranial occlusion. RESULTS: Of the 1538 patients included in this analysis, 1146 (74.5%; 591 tenecteplase and 555 alteplase) presented within 3 hours versus 392 (25.5%; 196: TNK and 196 alteplase) who presented within 3 to 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Baseline patient characteristics in the 0 to 3 hours versus 3- to 4.5-hour time window were similar, except patients in the 3- to 4.5-hour window had lower median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Severity Scale (10 versus 7, respectively) and lower proportion of patients with large vessel occlusion on baseline CT angiography (26.9% versus 18.7%, respectively). Type of thrombolytic agent (tenecteplase versus alteplase) did not modify the association between continuous onset to needle time (Pinteraction=0.161) or door-to-needle time (Pinteraction=0.972) and primary clinical outcome. Irrespective of the thrombolytic agent used, each 30-minute reduction in onset to needle time was associated with a 1.8% increase while every 10 minutes reduction in door-to-needle time was associated with a 0.2% increase in the probability of achieving 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of time to tenecteplase administration on clinical outcomes is like that of alteplase, with faster administration resulting in better clinical outcomes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03889249.

Intravenous tenecteplase compared with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in Canada (AcT): a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, registry-linked, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase bolus followed by infusion is a global standard of care for patients with acute ischaemic stroke. We aimed to determine whether tenecteplase given as a single bolus might increase reperfusion compared with this standard of care. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, registry-linked, randomised, controlled trial (AcT), patients were enrolled from 22 primary and comprehensive stroke centres across Canada. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 18 years or older, with a diagnosis of ischaemic stroke causing disabling neurological deficit, presenting within 4·5 h of symptom onset, and eligible for thrombolysis per Canadian guidelines. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using a previously validated minimal sufficient balance algorithm to balance allocation by site and a secure real-time web-based server, to either intravenous tenecteplase (0·25 mg/kg to a maximum of 25 mg) or alteplase (0·9 mg/kg to a maximum of 90mg; 0·09 mg/kg as a bolus and then a 60 min infusion of the remaining 0·81 mg/kg). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-1 at 90-120 days after treatment, assessed via blinded review in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all patients randomly assigned to treatment who did not withdraw consent). Non-inferiority was met if the lower 95% CI of the difference in the proportion of patients who met the primary outcome between the tenecteplase and alteplase groups was more than -5%. Safety was assessed in all patients who received any of either thrombolytic agent and who were reported as treated. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03889249, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2019, and Jan 25, 2022, 1600 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to tenecteplase (n=816) or alteplase (n=784), of whom 1577 were included in the ITT population (n=806 tenecteplase; n=771 alteplase). The median age was 74 years (IQR 63-83), 755 (47·9%) of 1577 patients were female and 822 (52·1%) were male. As of data cutoff (Jan 21, 2022), 296 (36·9%) of 802 patients in the tenecteplase group and 266 (34·8%) of 765 in the alteplase group had an mRS score of 0-1 at 90-120 days (unadjusted risk difference 2·1% [95% CI - 2·6 to 6·9], meeting the prespecified non-inferiority threshold). In safety analyses, 27 (3·4%) of 800 patients in the tenecteplase group and 24 (3·2%) of 763 in the alteplase group had 24 h symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage and 122 (15·3%) of 796 and 117 (15·4%) of 763 died within 90 days of starting treatment INTERPRETATION: Intravenous tenecteplase (0·25 mg/kg) is a reasonable alternative to alteplase for all patients presenting with acute ischaemic stroke who meet standard criteria for thrombolysis. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Alberta Strategy for Patient Oriented Research Support Unit.

The virtual family conference in stroke rehabilitation: Education, preparation, and transition planning.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the virtual family conference as an educational, preparatory, and transition planning intervention in stroke rehabilitation. DESIGN: Observational-cross-sectional study. SETTING: Inpatient stroke rehabilitation. SUBJECTS: Eighty-seven carers, participating in 48 conferences, were evaluated. INTERVENTIONS: The virtual family conference, involving the patient, carer(s), and interdisciplinary rehabilitation team, completed prior to community transition. The conference protocol and framework, consisting of nine primary themes and additional sub-themes, are outlined. Teleconferencing was the utilized virtual modality. MAIN MEASURES: Carers were assessed via questionnaires regarding pre- and post-conference rated: (1) stroke-related knowledge, (2) satisfaction with information provision, and (3) confidence, preparedness, and stress associated with community transition; by use of the Stroke Knowledge and Community Transition Preparedness Questionnaire, Mant et al. Information Satisfaction Questionnaire, and Kingston Caregiver Stress Scale. RESULTS: Significant improvement in post-conference carer-rating was noted for knowledge, pertaining to stroke nature/impairments, stroke management/prevention, functional status, and community services. Significant gains were demonstrated in post-conference satisfaction with information provided regarding stroke and discharge planning, across all assessed topics. There was also a significant increase in carer-reported confidence and preparedness for the community transition as well as a significant reduction in self-perceived stress for elements of the caregiving role. Organization of community follow-up care was consistently enabled within the proposed framework. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual family conference intervention demonstrated efficacy in facilitating carer education and preparation, along with discharge planning prior to community transition from stroke rehabilitation. Thus, illustrating potential benefits of family conferences and feasibility of their virtual application in stroke rehabilitative care.

Exploring Patient Advisors' Perceptions of Virtual Care Across Canada: Qualitative Phenomenological Study.

BACKGROUND: While virtual care services existed prior to the emergence of COVID-19, the pandemic catalyzed a rapid transition from in-person to virtual care service delivery across the Canadian health care system. Virtual care includes synchronous or asynchronous delivery of health care services through video visits, telephone visits, or secure messaging. Patient advisors are people with patient and caregiving experiences who collaborate within the health care system to share insights and experiences in order to improve health care. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand patient advisors' perceptions related to virtual care and potential impacts on health care quality. METHODS: We adopted a phenomenological approach, whereby we interviewed 20 participants who were patient advisors across Canada using a semistructured interview protocol. The protocol was developed by content experts and medical education researchers. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically. Data collection stopped once thematic saturation was reached. The study was conducted at Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario. We recruited 20 participants from 5 Canadian provinces (17 female participants and 3 male participants). RESULTS: Six themes were identified: (1) characteristics of effective health care, (2) experiences with virtual care, (3) modality preferences, (4) involvement of others, (5) risks associated with virtual care encounters, and (6) vulnerable populations. Participants reported that high-quality health care included building relationships and treating patients holistically. In general, participants described positive experiences with virtual care during the pandemic, including greater efficiency, increased accessibility, and that virtual care was less stressful and more patient centered. Participants comparing virtual care with in-person care reported that time, scheduling, and content of interactions were similar across modalities. However, participants also shared the perception that certain modalities were more appropriate for specific clinical encounters (eg, prescription renewals and follow-up appointments). Perspectives related to the involvement of family members and medical trainees were positive. Potential risks included miscommunication, privacy concerns, and inaccurate patient assessments. All participants agreed that stakeholders should be proactive in applying strategies to support vulnerable patients. Participants also recommended education for patients and providers to improve virtual care delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Participant-reported experiences of virtual care encounters were relatively positive. Future work could focus on delivering training and resources for providers and patients. While initial experiences are positive, there is a need for ongoing stakeholder engagement and evaluation to improve patient and caregiver experiences with virtual care.

Exploring the Determinants and Experiences of Senior Stroke Patients with Virtual Care.

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to explore the experiences of participants affected by stroke with home video visit (HVV) for follow-up visits in order to understand the determinants, barriers, and benefits associated with HVVs. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with (n = 23) participants to gather insight and descriptive information about patients' experiences with HVV. Specifically, we sought to collect descriptions about the (1) costs and time associated with in-person visits, (2) facilitators and barriers to in-person and virtual visits, and (3) their values attached to traditional and virtual forms of patient care. RESULTS: HVVs were perceived to be a mode of healthcare that is time-saving and convenient for both participants and physicians. However, our study also found some participants felt uncomfortable using technology to conduct medical visits while others still supported a positive view of traditional forms of in-person visits because they valued the in-person interactions and safe environment of the hospital. CONCLUSION: While HVVs were considered to be useful in addressing geographical barriers to health care, technological and digital health literacy may serve to impede seniors from using the service, with some of them opting to go to the hospital despite geographical barriers. Resultantly, HVVs may serve both to alleviate and exacerbate certain determinants to health care.

Patient perceptions of the benefits and barriers of virtual postnatal care: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to understand the perceptions of new mothers using virtual care via video conferencing to gain insight into the benefits and barriers of virtual care for obstetric patients. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 patients attending the Kingston Health Sciences Centre. The interviews were 20-25 min in length and recorded through an audio recorder. Thematic analysis was conducted in order to derive the major themes explored in this study. RESULTS: New mothers must often adopt new routines to balance their needs and their child's needs. These routines could impact compliance and motivation to attend follow-up care. In our study, participants expressed high satisfaction with virtual care, emphasizing benefits related to comfort, convenience, communication, socioeconomic factors, and the ease of technology use. Participants also perceived that they could receive emotional support and build trust with their health care providers despite the remote nature of their care. Due to its ease of use and increased accessibility, we argue that virtual care shows promise to facilitate long-term compliance to care in obstetric patients. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual care is a useful modality that could improve compliance to obstetric care. Further research and clinical endeavours should examine how social factors and determinants intersect to determine how they underpin patient perceptions of virtual and in-person care.

Patient Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Use of Virtual Care.

Virtual care, the use of videoconferencing technology to connect with patients, has become critical in providing continuing care for patients during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Virtual care has now been adopted by health care providers across the spectrum, including physicians, residents, nurse practitioners, nurses, and allied health care professionals. Virtual care is novel and nuanced compared to in-person care. Most of the health care providers who are delivering or expected to deliver virtual care have little to no prior experience with it. The nuances of virtual care involve regulatory standards, platforms, technology and troubleshooting, patient selection, etiquette, and workflow, all of which comprise critical points in the provision of health care. It is important to consistently deliver high-quality, equitable, and professional virtual care to inspire patients with the trust they need to continue follow-up of their care in these difficult times. We have been adopting virtual care in our clinical practice for over two years. In partnership with Canada Health Infoway, we have assembled a primer for virtual care that can serve as a guide for any health care provider in Canada and globally, with the goal of providing seamless transitions between in-person and virtual care.

Home Virtual Visits for Outpatient Follow-Up Stroke Care: Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Timely, in-person access to health care is a challenge for people living with conditions such as stroke that result in frailty, loss of independence, restrictions in driving and mobility, and physical and cognitive decline. In Southeastern Ontario, access is further complicated by rurality and the long travel distances to visit physician clinics. There is a need to make health care more accessible and convenient. Home virtual visits (electronic visits, eVisits) can conveniently connect physicians to patients. Physicians use a secure personal videoconferencing tool to connect to patients in their homes. Patients use their device of choice (smartphone, tablet, laptop, or desktop) for the visit. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and logistics of implementing eVisits in a stroke prevention clinic for seniors. METHODS: A 6-month eVisit pilot study was initiated in the Kingston Health Sciences Centre stroke prevention clinic in August 2018. eVisits were used only for follow-up patient encounters. An integrated evaluation was used to test the impact of the program on clinic workflow and patient satisfaction. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by telephone interviews, using a brief questionnaire. Access and patient satisfaction metrics were compared with concurrent standard of care (patients' prior personal experience with in-person visits). Values are presented as median (interquartile range). RESULTS: There were 75 subjects in the pilot. The patients were aged 65 (56-73.5) years, and 39% (29/75) resided in rural areas. There was a shorter wait for an appointment by eVisit versus in-person (mean 59.98 [SD 48.36] days vs mean 78.36 [SD 50.54] days; P<.001). The eVisit was also shorter, taking on an average of only 10 min to deliver follow-up care with a high degree of patient satisfaction versus 90 (60-112) min for in-person care. The total time saved by patients per eVisit was 80 (50-102) min, 44 (21-69) min of which was travel time. Travel distance avoided by the patients was 30.1 km (11.2-82.2). The estimated total out-of-pocket cost savings for patients per eVisit was Can $52.83 (31.26-94.53). The estimated savings (opportunity cost for in-person outpatient care) for our eVisit pilot project was Can $23,832-$28,584. The patient satisfaction with eVisits was very good compared with their prior personal experience with in-person outpatient care. CONCLUSIONS: The eVisit program was well received by patients, deemed to be safe by physicians, and avoided unnecessary patient travel and expense. It also has the potential to reduce health care costs. We plan to scale the project within the department and the institution.

Anesthetic Neuroprotection in Experimental Stroke in Rodents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke may require general anesthesia to undergo the procedure. At present, there is little clinical evidence to guide the choice of anesthetic in this acute setting. The clinical implications of experimental studies demonstrating anesthetic neuroprotection are poorly understood. Here, the authors evaluated the impact of anesthetic treatment on neurologic outcome in experimental stroke. METHODS: Controlled studies of anesthetics in stroke using the filament occlusion model were identified in electronic databases up to December 15, 2015. The primary outcome measures, infarct volume, and neurologic deficit score were used to calculate the normalized mean difference for each comparison. Meta-analysis of normalized mean difference values provided estimates of neuroprotection and contributions of predefined factors: study quality, the timing of treatment, and the duration of ischemia. RESULTS: In 80 retrieved publications anesthetic treatment reduced neurologic injury by 28% (95% CI, 24 to 32%; P < 0.0001). Internal validity was high: publication bias enhanced the effect size by 4% or less, effect size increased with study quality (P = 0.0004), and approximately 70% of studies were adequately powered. Apart from study quality, no predefined factor influenced neuroprotection. Neuroprotection failed in animals with comorbidities. Neuroprotection by anesthetics was associated with prosurvival mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthetic neuroprotection is a robust finding in studies using the filament occlusion model of ischemic stroke and should be assumed to influence outcomes in studies using this model. Neuroprotection failed in female animals and animals with comorbidities, suggesting that the results in young male animals may not reflect human stroke.

Endovascular Interventions in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Recent Evidence, Current Challenges, and Future Prospects.

After many years of clinical research, endovascular thrombectomy has been conclusively proven to be an effective treatment in acute ischemic stroke. The evidence is compelling; however, it is generated in high volume stroke centers with stroke expertise. Challenges remain ahead on translating and implementing this evidence in routine clinical care across the world. The current evidence has opened up avenues for further research and innovation in this field. In this review, we will discuss the evolution of evidence on endovascular thrombectomy followed by a discussion of challenges and future prospects in this exciting field of stroke care.