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.

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS).

RATIONALE: To address unmet needs, electronic messages to support person-centered goal attainment and secondary prevention may avoid hospital presentations/readmissions after stroke, but evidence is limited. HYPOTHESIS: Compared to control participants, there will be a 10% lower proportion of intervention participants who represent to hospital (emergency/admission) within 90 days of randomization. METHODS AND DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis. The intervention group receives 12 weeks of personalized, goal-centered, and administrative electronic messages, while the control group only receive administrative messages. The trial includes a process evaluation, assessment of treatment fidelity, and an economic evaluation. Participants: Confirmed stroke (modified Rankin Score: 0-4), aged ≥18 years with internet/mobile phone access, discharged directly home from hospital. Randomization: 1:1 computer-generated, stratified by age and baseline disability. Outcomes assessments: Collected at 90 days and 12 months following randomization. OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes include hospital emergency presentations/admissions within 90 days of randomization. Secondary outcomes include goal attainment, self-efficacy, mood, unmet needs, disability, quality-of-life, recurrent stroke/cardiovascular events/deaths at 90 days and 12 months, and death and cost-effectiveness at 12 months. Sample size: To test our primary hypothesis, we estimated a sample size of 890 participants (445 per group) with 80% power and two-tailed significance threshold of α = 0.05. Given uncertainty for the effect size of this novel intervention, the sample size will be adaptively re-estimated when outcomes for n = 668 are obtained, with maximum sample capped at 1100. DISCUSSION: We will provide new evidence on the potential effectiveness, implementation, and cost-effectiveness of a tailored eHealth intervention for survivors of stroke.

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.