The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale is comparable to the ICH score in predicting outcomes in spontaneous acute intracerebral hemorrhage.

Background: Validating the National Institutes of Health NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) as a tool to assess deficit severity and prognosis in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage would harmonize the assessment of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients, enable clinical use of a readily implementable and non-imaging dependent prognostic tool, and improve monitoring of ICH care quality in administrative datasets. Methods: Among randomized trial ICH patients, the relation between NIHSS scores early after Emergency Department arrival and 3-month outcomes of dependency or death (modified Rankin Scale, mRS 3-6) and case fatality was examined. NIHSS predictive performance was compared to a current standard prognostic scale, the intracerebral hemorrhage score (ICH score). Results: Among the 384 patients, the mean age was 65 (±13), with 66% being male. The median NIHSS score was 16 (interquartile range (IQR) 9-25), the mean initial hematoma volume was 29 mL (±38), and the ICH score median was 1 (IQR 0-2). At 3 months, the mRS had a median of 4 (IQR 2-6), with dependency or death occurring in 70% and case fatality in 26%. The NIHSS and ICH scores were strongly correlated (r = 0.73), and each was strongly correlated with the 90-day mRS (NIHSS, r = 0.61; ICH score, r = 0.62). The NIHSS performed comparably to the ICH score in predicting both dependency or death (c = 0.80 vs. 0.80, p = 0.83) and case fatality (c = 0.78 vs. 0.80, p = 0.29). At threshold values, the NIHSS predicted dependency or death with 74.1% accuracy (NIHSS 17.5) and case fatality with 75.0% accuracy (NIHSS 18.5). Conclusion: The NIHSS forecasts 3-month functional and case fatality outcomes with accuracy comparable to the ICH Score. Widely documented in routine clinical care and administrative data, the NIHSS can serve as a valuable measure for clinical prognostication, therapy development, and case-mix risk adjustment in ICH patients.Clinical trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT00059332.

Surgical Outcomes of Phacoemulsification Followed by iStent Implantation Versus Goniotomy With the Kahook Dual Blade in Patients With Mild Primary Open-angle Glaucoma With a Minimum of 12-Month Follow-up.

PURPOSE: To study surgical outcomes after combined phacoemulsification with either iStent implantation or goniotomy using the Kahook Dual Blade (KDB) with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mild primary open-angle glaucoma who underwent phacoemulsification in combination with either iStent implantation or goniotomy using the KDB from 2011 to 2017 were included. RESULTS: In total, 48 eyes in the iStent group and 29 eyes in the KDB group were included with at least 12 months of follow-up. There was no difference in patient age, sex, previous surgery, preoperative or postoperative visual acuity or intraocular pressure (IOP) between the 2 groups. Mean preoperative IOP in the iStent group decreased from 17.6±4.8 to 15.9±2.9 mm Hg (P=0.01); mean preoperative IOP in the KDB group decreased from 17.4± 4.3 to 15.0±4.0 mm Hg (P=0.01). The overall percentage of IOP reduction was 14.3% in the iStent group and 12.6% in the KDB group at 12 months of follow-up. Mean topical glaucoma medication use decreased from 2.0±0.9 to 0.7±1.1 in the iStent group and from 2.2±1.0 to 1.6±1.3 in the KDB group. Multivariable linear regression accounting for age, sex, race, baseline IOP, and number of eyes treated as covariates indicated a significant reduction in IOP from baseline with both iStent (Wald χ=3.97, P=0.046) and KDB (Wald χ=4.65, P=0.031). Multivariable logistic regression accounting for age, sex, race, baseline IOP, and number of eyes treated as covariates indicated no significant difference in overall success between iStent and KDB (Z-test=0.92, P=0.359). CONCLUSIONS: Phacoemulsification in combination with either iStent implantation or goniotomy using the KDB both achieved statistical significant reduction in IOP and number of glaucoma medications at 12 months of follow-up in patients with mild primary open-angle glaucoma with no complications.

Vascular Neurologists as Directors of Stroke Centers in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hospital certification as primary and comprehensive stroke center is associated with improvement in care. We aimed to characterize the leadership at stroke centers nationwide to determine the proportion led by vascular neurologists, a board-recognized subspecialty focusing on stroke care. METHODS: We identified hospitals in the United States holding primary and comprehensive stroke center designation as of September 2013. We contacted each hospital to identify the medical director and used data from relevant medical boards to determine specialization. Sex and date of medical school graduation were obtained from an online physician database. RESULTS: Of the 1167 primary and 50 comprehensive stroke center hospitals certified by the Joint Commission (n=1114), Det Norske Veritas (n=68), and Healthcare Facilities Accreditation Program (n=35), we identified the director in 940 (77%). Leadership was most often by a neurologist (n=745; 79%) followed by physicians in emergency medicine (n=58; 6%) and internal medicine (n=17; 2%). Vascular neurologists (n=319) led about one-third of stroke centers. Directors were mostly men (n=764; 81%), with a median number of years after medical school graduation of 25 (interquartile range, 18-34). Comprehensive stroke centers were more likely than primary stroke centers to have leadership by vascular neurologist (77%, n=37 versus 32%, n=282; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Vascular neurologist led about one-third of stroke centers. There is opportunity for vascular neurologists to increase their role in stroke center directorship.