RESUMEN
Objective: To evaluate the effects of an outpatient clinic set-up for minor stroke/TIA using subsequent admission of patients at 'high risk' of re-stroke.Methods: A cohort study of all patients with suspected minor stroke/TIA seen in an outpatient clinic at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, between September 2013 and August 2014. Stroke patients were compared to historic (same hospital) and contemporary (another comparable hospital) matched, hospitalized controls on the non-prioritized outcomes: Length-of-stay, re-admissions, care quality (10 process-performance measures) and mortality. TIA patients were compared to contemporary matched, hospitalized controls.Following complete diagnostic work-up, patients with stroke/TIA were classified into 'low'/high risk' of re-stroke ≤7 days. RESULTS: We analyzed 1,076 consecutive patients of whom 253 (23.5%) were subsequently admitted to the stroke ward. Stroke/TIA was diagnosed in 215/171 patients, respectively. Fifty-six percent (121/215) of the stroke patients were subsequently admitted to the stroke ward. Comparison with the historic stroke cohort (n=191) showed a shorter acute hospital stay for the strokes (median 1 vs 3 days); adjusted length-of-stay ratio 0.49 (95% CI 0.33-0.71). Furthermore, 30-day readmission rate was 3.2% vs 11.6%; adjusted hazard ratio 0.23 (0.09-0.59); and care quality was higher with a risk ratio of 1.30 (1.15-1.47). The comparison of stroke and TIAs to contemporary controls showed similar results. Only one patient in the 'low risk' category and not admitted experienced stroke within 7 days (0.6%). CONCLUSIONS: An outpatient clinic set-up for patients with minor stroke/TIA yields shorter acute hospital stay, lower re-admissions rates, and better quality than hospitalization in stroke units. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that a neurovascular specialist driven outpatient clinic for minor stroke/TIA patients with the ability of subsequent admission is safe and yields shorter acute hospital stay, lower re-admissions rates, and better quality than hospitalization in stroke units.
RESUMEN
In spite of recent advances in describing the health outcomes of exposure to nanoparticles (NPs), it still remains unclear how exactly NPs interact with their cellular targets. Size, surface, mass, geometry, and composition may all play a beneficial role as well as causing toxicity. Concerns of scientists, politicians and the public about potential health hazards associated with NPs need to be answered. With the variety of exposure routes available, there is potential for NPs to reach every organ in the body but we know little about the impact this might have. The main objective of the FP7 NanoTEST project ( www.nanotest-fp7.eu ) was a better understanding of mechanisms of interactions of NPs employed in nanomedicine with cells, tissues and organs and to address critical issues relating to toxicity testing especially with respect to alternatives to tests on animals. Here we describe an approach towards alternative testing strategies for hazard and risk assessment of nanomaterials, highlighting the adaptation of standard methods demanded by the special physicochemical features of nanomaterials and bioavailability studies. The work has assessed a broad range of toxicity tests, cell models and NP types and concentrations taking into account the inherent impact of NP properties and the effects of changes in experimental conditions using well-characterized NPs. The results of the studies have been used to generate recommendations for a suitable and robust testing strategy which can be applied to new medical NPs as they are developed.
