Statistical Analysis Plan for the INTEnsive Care Bundle with Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage Trial: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

The third INTEnsive care bundle with blood pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral hemorrhage Trial (INTERACT3) is an international, multicenter, stepped-wedge (4 phases/3 steps) cluster randomized trial involving 110 hospitals in mainly low- and middle-income countries during 2017-2022. The aim is to determine the effectiveness of a goal-directed care bundle of intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering, glycemic control, antipyrexia, and anticoagulation reversal treatment versus usual standard of care, in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). After a "usual care" period, hospitals were randomly allocated to implementing care-bundle protocols for control targets (systolic BP <140 mm Hg; glucose 6.1-7.8/7.8-10.0 mmol/L according to diabetes mellitus status; temperature ≤37.5°C; normalization of anticoagulation). A sample size of 8,360 patients (mean 19 per phase per site) provides 90% power (α = 0.05) for a 5.6% absolute improvement in the primary outcome of scores on the modified Rankin scale at 6 months, analyzed by ordinal logistic regression. A detailed statistical analysis plan (SAP) was developed to prespecify the method of analysis for all outcomes and key variables collected in the trial. The primary analysis will use ordinal logistic regression adjusted for the stepped-wedge design. The SAP also includes planned sensitivity analyses, including covariate adjustments, missing data imputations, and subgroup analysis. This SAP allows transparent, verifiable, and prespecified analyses in consideration of the challenges in conducting the study during the COVID pandemic. It also avoids analysis bias arising from prior knowledge of the findings in determining the benefits and harms of a care bundle in acute ICH.

Effect of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on the Quality of Stroke Care in Stroke Units and Alternative Wards: A National Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Changes to hospital systems were implemented from March 2020 in Australia in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, including decreased resources allocated to stroke units. We investigate changes in the quality of acute care for patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack during the pandemic according to patients' treatment setting (stroke unit or alternate ward). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted with stroke or transient ischemic attack between January 2019 and June 2020 in the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (AuSCR). The AuSCR monitors patients' treatment setting, provision of allied health and nursing interventions, prescription of secondary prevention medications, and discharge destination. Weekly trends in the quality of care before and during the pandemic period were assessed using interrupted time series analyses. RESULTS: In total, 18,662 patients in 2019 and 8,850 patients in 2020 were included. Overall, 75% were treated in stroke units. Before the pandemic, treatment in a stroke unit was superior to alternate wards for the provision of all evidence-based therapies assessed. During the pandemic period, the proportion of patients receiving a swallow screen or assessment, being discharged to rehabilitation, and being prescribed secondary prevention medications decreased by 0.58% to 1.08% per week in patients treated in other ward settings relative to patients treated in stroke units. This change represented a 9% to 17% increase in the care gap between these treatment settings during the period of the pandemic that was evaluated (16 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: During the first 6 months of the pandemic, widening care disparities between stroke units and alternate wards have occurred.

COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Care for Stroke in Australia: Emerging Evidence From the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry.

We present information on acute stroke care for the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia using data from the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (AuSCR). The first case of COVID-19 in Australia was recorded in late January 2020 and national restrictions to control the virus commenced in March. To account for seasonal effects of stroke admissions, patient-level data from the registry from January to June 2020 were compared to the same period in 2019 (historical-control) from 61 public hospitals. We compared periods using descriptive statistics and performed interrupted time series analyses. Perceptions of stroke clinicians were obtained from 53/72 (74%) hospitals participating in the AuSCR (80% nurses) via a voluntary, electronic feedback survey. Survey data were summarized to provide contextual information for the registry-based analysis. Data from the registry covered locations that had 91% of Australian COVID-19 cases to the end of June 2020. For the historical-control period, 9,308 episodes of care were compared with the pandemic period (8,992 episodes). Patient characteristics were similar for each cohort (median age: 75 years; 56% male; ischemic stroke 69%). Treatment in stroke units decreased progressively during the pandemic period (control: 76% pandemic: 70%, p < 0.001). Clinical staff reported fewer resources available for stroke including 10% reporting reduced stroke unit beds. Several time-based metrics were unchanged whereas door-to-needle times were longer during the peak pandemic period (March-April, 2020; 82 min, control: 74 min, p = 0.012). Our data emphasize the need to maintain appropriate acute stroke care during times of national emergency such as pandemic management.

The impact of 2019 novel coronavirus on heart injury: A Systematic review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence about COVID-19 on cardiac injury is inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to summarize available data on severity differences in acute cardiac injury and acute cardiac injury with mortality during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search across Pubmed, Embase and pre-print from December 1, 2019 to March 27, 2020, to identify all observational studies that reported cardiac specific biomarkers (troponin, creatine kinase-MB fraction, myoglobin, or NT-proBNP) during COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on patient demographics, infection severity, comorbidity history, and biomarkers during COVID-19 infection. Where possible, data were pooled for meta-analysis with standard (SMD) or weighted (WMD) mean difference and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We included 4189 confirmed COVID-19 infected patients from 28 studies. More severe COVID-19 infection is associated with higher mean troponin (SMD 0.53, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.75, p < 0.001), with a similar trend for creatine kinase-MB, myoglobin, and NT-proBNP. Acute cardiac injury was more frequent in those with severe, compared to milder, disease (risk ratio 5.99, 3.04 to 11.80; p < 0.001). Meta regression suggested that cardiac injury biomarker differences of severity are related to history of hypertension (p = 0.030). Also COVID19-related cardiac injury is associated with higher mortality (summary risk ratio 3.85, 2.13 to 6.96; p < 0.001). hsTnI and NT-proBNP levels increased during the course of hospitalization only in non-survivors. CONCLUSION: The severity of COVID-19 is associated with acute cardiac injury, and acute cardiac injury is associated with death. Cardiac injury biomarkers mainly increase in non-survivors. This highlights the need to effectively monitor heart health to prevent myocarditis in patients infected with COVID-19.