Search

Background:There is increasing interest in the concept of frailty in stroke, including both physical frailty and imaging-evidence of brain frailty. We aimed to establish the prevalence of brain frailty in stroke survivors as well as the concurrent and predictive validity of various frailty measures against long-term cognitive outcomes.Methods:We included consecutively admitted stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) survivors from participating stroke centres. Baseline CT scans were used to generate an overall brain frailty score for each participant. We measured frailty via the Rockwood frailty index, and a Fried frailty screening tool. Presence of major or minor neurocognitive disorder at 18-months following stroke or TIA was established via a multicomponent assessment. Prevalence of brain frailty was established based upon observed percentages within groups defined by frailty status (robust, pre-frail, frail). We assessed the concurrent validity of brain frailty and frailty scales via Spearman’s rank correlation. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses, controlling for age, sex, baseline education and stroke severity, to evaluate association between each frailty measure and 18-month cognitive impairment.Results:Three-hundred-forty-one stroke survivors participated. Three-quarters of people who were frail had moderate-severe brain frailty and prevalence increased according to frailty status. Brain frailty was weakly correlated with Rockwood frailty (Rho: 0.336; p Conclusions:There appears to be value in the assessment of both physical and brain frailty in patients with ischaemic stroke and TIA. Both are associated with adverse cognitive outcomes and physical frailty remains important when assessing cognitive outcomes.

Recurrent stroke affects 9% to 15% of people within 1 year. This European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on pharmacological management of blood pressure (BP), diabetes mellitus, lipid levels and antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of recurrent stroke and other important outcomes in people with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). It does not cover interventions for specific causes of stroke, including anticoagulation for cardioembolic stroke, which are addressed in other guidelines. This guideline was developed through ESO standard operating procedures and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The working group identified clinical questions, selected outcomes, performed systematic reviews, with meta-analyses where appropriate, and made evidence-based recommendations, with expert consensus statements where evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation. To reduce the long-term risk of recurrent stroke or other important outcomes after ischaemic stroke or TIA, we recommend: BP lowering treatment to a target of

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-eso-10.1177_23969873231186480 for Physical and brain frailty in ischaemic stroke or TIA: Shared occurrence and outcomes. A cohort study by Martin Taylor-Rowan, Melanie Hafdi, Bogna Drozdowska, Emma Elliott, Joanna Wardlaw and Terence J Quinn in European Stroke Journal

Objectives:\ud Various informant-based questionnaires are used in clinical practice to screen for pre-stroke cognitive problems. However, there is no guidance on which tool should be preferred. We compared the validity of the two most commonly used informant-based tools.\ud \ud Methods:\ud We recruited consecutively admitted stroke patients. Patients' informants completed the Informant Questionnaire for Cognitive Decline in the Elderly Short Form (IQCODE-SF, 16-item) and Ascertain Dementia 8 (AD8). We assessed construct validity (accuracy) against a semi-structured clinical interview for dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI), describing test accuracy metrics and comparing area under ROC curves (AUROC). We described criterion validity by evaluating associations between test scores and neuroimaging markers of dementia and overall ‘brain frailty’. Finally, we described prognostic validity comparing ROC curves for 18-month clinical outcomes of dementia, death, stroke, and disability.\ud \ud Results:\ud One-hundred-thirty-seven patient-informant dyads were recruited. At usual clinical cut-points, the IQCODE-SF had comparable sensitivity to the AD8 (both = 92%) for pre-stroke dementia, but superior specificity (IQCODE-SF: 82% vs. AD8: 58%). Youden index suggested that the optimal AD8 threshold for diagnosis of dementia is ≥4. The IQCODE-SF demonstrated stronger associations with markers of generalised and medial-temporal lobe atrophy, neurovascular disease, and overall brain frailty. IQCODE-SF also demonstrated greater accuracy for predicting future dementia (IQCODE-SF AUROC = 0.903, 95% CI = 0.798–1.00; AD8 AUROC = 0.821, 95% CI = 0.664–0.977).\ud \ud Conclusions:\ud Both IQCODE-SF and AD8 are valid measures of pre-stroke dementia. Higher cut points for AD8 may improve performance in the acute stroke setting. Based on consistent superiority across a range of validity analyses, IQCODE-SF may be preferable to AD8 for pre-stroke dementia screening.

Background frailty is common in older adults and associated with poor outcomes following illness. Although stroke is predominantly a disease of older people, our knowledge of frailty in stroke is limited. We aimed to collate the literature on acute stroke and frailty to estimate the prevalence of pre-stroke frailty and its associations with outcomes. Methods paired researchers searched multidisciplinary electronic databases for papers describing frailty and acute stroke. We assessed risk of bias using Newcastle-Ottawa tools appropriate to study design. We created summary estimates of pre-stroke frailty using random effects models. We collated whether studies reported significant positive associations between frailty and clinical outcomes in adjusted models. Results we included 14 studies (n = 27,210 participants). Seven studies (n = 8,840) used a frailty index approach, four studies (n = 14,924) used Hospital Frailty Risk Scores. Pooled prevalence of pre-stroke frailty was 24.6% (95% confidence interval, CI: 16.2–33.1%; low quality evidence, downgraded due to heterogeneity, bias). Combining frailty and pre-frailty (nine studies, n = 23,827), prevalence of any frailty syndrome was 66.8% (95%CI: 49.9–83.7%). Seven studies were at risk of bias, from participant selection or method of frailty assessment. Pre-stroke frailty was associated with all adverse outcomes assessed, including longer-term mortality (positive association in 6 of 6 studies reporting this outcome; odds ratio: 3.75 [95%CI: 2.41–5.70]), length of admission (3 of 4 studies) and disability (4 of 6 studies). Conclusions despite substantial heterogeneity, whichever way it is measured, frailty is common in patients presenting with acute stroke and associated with poor outcomes. This has implications for the design of stroke services and pathways.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-eso-10.1177_23969873221100032 for European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guideline on pharmacological interventions for long-term secondary prevention after ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack by Jesse Dawson, Yannick Béjot, Louisa M Christensen, Gian Marco De Marchis, Martin Dichgans, Guri Hagberg, Mirjam R Heldner, Haralampos Milionis, Linxin Li, Francesca Romana Pezzella, Martin Taylor Rowan, Cristina Tiu and Alastair Webb in European Stroke Journal

ObjectiveTo update a previous individual participant data meta-analysis and determine the accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), the most commonly used depression screening tool in general practice, for detecting major depression overall and by study or participant subgroups.DesignSystematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.Data sourcesMedline, Medline In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations via Ovid, PsycINFO, Web of Science searched through 9 May 2018.Review methodsEligible studies administered the PHQ-9 and classified current major depression status using a validated semistructured diagnostic interview (designed for clinician administration), fully structured interview (designed for lay administration), or the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI; a brief interview designed for lay administration). A bivariate random effects meta-analytic model was used to obtain point and interval estimates of pooled PHQ-9 sensitivity and specificity at cut-off values 5-15, separately, among studies that used semistructured diagnostic interviews (eg, Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual), fully structured interviews (eg, Composite International Diagnostic Interview), and the MINI. Meta-regression was used to investigate whether PHQ-9 accuracy correlated with reference standard categories and participant characteristics.ResultsData from 44 503 total participants (27 146 additional from the update) were obtained from 100 of 127 eligible studies (42 additional studies; 79% eligible studies; 86% eligible participants). Among studies with a semistructured interview reference standard, pooled PHQ-9 sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) at the standard cut-off value of ≥10, which maximised combined sensitivity and specificity, were 0.85 (0.79 to 0.89) and 0.85 (0.82 to 0.87), respectively. Specificity was similar across reference standards, but sensitivity in studies with semistructured interviews was 7-24% (median 21%) higher than with fully structured reference standards and 2-14% (median 11%) higher than with the MINI across cut-off values. Across reference standards and cut-off values, specificity was 0-10% (median 3%) higher for men and 0-12 (median 5%) higher for people aged 60 or older.ConclusionsResearchers and clinicians could use results to determine outcomes, such as total number of positive screens and false positive screens, at different PHQ-9 cut-off values for different clinical settings using the knowledge translation tool atwww.depressionscreening100.com/phq.Study registrationPROSPERO CRD42014010673.

Introduction Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) can improve outcomes following ischaemic stroke. Patient selection for MT is predominantly based on physiological and imaging parameters. We assessed whether people living with pre-stroke frailty had differing outcomes following MT. Methods We included consecutive patients undergoing MT at a UK comprehensive stroke centre. We calculated a cumulative deficits frailty index to identify pre-stroke frailty in those patients presenting directly to the centre. Frailty was defined as an index score ≥ 0.24. We assessed univariable and multivariable association between pre-stroke frailty and stroke outcomes. Our primary outcomes were modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and mortality at 90 days. Results Of 175 patients who underwent MT (2014–2018), we identified frailty in 49 (28%). Frail and non-frail patients had similar rates of thrombolysis administration, successful recanalization and onset to recanalization times. Those with pre-stroke frailty had higher 24 hour National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (12(IQR: 8–17) versus 3(IQR: 2–13); P = 0.001); were less likely to be independent (mRS 0–2: 18% versus 61%; P Conclusion Pre-stroke frailty is prevalent in real-world patients eligible for MT and is an important predictor of poor outcomes. Routine assessment of pre-stroke frailty could help decision-making around patient selection for MT.

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-taw-10.1177_20420986211016645 for Anticholinergic burden measures and older people’s falls risk: a systematic prognostic review by Carrie Stewart, Martin Taylor-Rowan, Roy L. Soiza, Terence J. Quinn, Yoon K. Loke and Phyo Kyaw Myint in Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Prognosis). The objectives are as follows:\ud \ud Primary objective: to assess whether ACB in older adults is a prognostic factor for future cognitive decline or dementia.\ud \ud Secondary objective(s): to assess whether ACB is a prognostic factor for older adults recruited in primary care, secondary care, or community settings (with setting used as the basis for subgroup analyses); whether ACB is associated with mortality; to compare the prognostic validity of respective ACB scales; and to examine the effect of duration of exposure and duration of follow‐up on the ACB‐dementia risk association.

Additional file 1. Supplementary materials. Search terms.

Additional file 1: Table S1. Correlations between variables included in the model for prediction of acute post-stroke cognitive performance. Table S2. Direct associations between predictors and stroke severity, dementia and cognitive performance. Table S3. Indirect associations between predictors and cognitive performance.

Supplemental material, Clinical_rehab_frailty_prevalence_supplementary_material for The prevalence of frailty among acute stroke patients, and evaluation of method of assessment by Martin Taylor-Rowan, Gillian Cuthbertson, Ruth Keir, Robert Shaw, Bogna Drozdowska, Emma Elliott, David Stott and Terence J Quinn in Clinical Rehabilitation

Objective:\ud \ud We aimed to determine prevalence of pre-stroke frailty in acute stroke and describe validity of a Frailty Index–based assessment.\ud Design:\ud \ud Cross-sectional.\ud Setting:\ud \ud Single UK urban teaching hospital.\ud Subjects:\ud \ud Consecutive acute stroke unit admissions, recruited in four waves (May 2016–August 2018). We performed the assessments within first week and attempted to include all admissions.\ud Main measures:\ud \ud Our primary measure was a Frailty Index, based on cumulative disorders. A proportion of participants were also assessed with the ‘Frail non-disabled’ questionnaire. We evaluated concurrent validity of Frailty Index against variables associated with frailty in non-stroke populations. We described predictive validity of Frailty Index for stroke severity and delirium. We described convergent validity, quantifying agreement between frailty assessments and a measure of pre-stroke disability (modified Rankin Scale) using kappa statistics and correlations.\ud Results:\ud \ud We included 546 patients. A Frailty Index–defined frailty syndrome was observed in 427 of 545 patients (78%), of whom, 151 (28%) had frank frailty and 276 (51%) were pre-frail. Phenotypic frailty was observed in 72 of 258 patients (28%). We demonstrated concurrent validity via significant associations with all variables (all p