Stroke units in the Philippines: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: In high-income countries, the management of stroke has changed substantially over the years with the advent of thrombolysis and endovascular treatment. However, in low-income countries, such interventions may not be available, or patients may come to the hospital outside the time window no longer qualified for this therapy. Most studies on stroke units were conducted in high-income countries. Unfortunately, there has been no local multicenter data with large patient numbers showing the effectiveness of stroke units in the Southeast Asian region. AIM: To compare the outcomes of patients allocated to stroke units (based on accepted criteria) to those allocated to general neurology wards in the Philippines. METHODS: This is an open, prospective, parallel, observational comparative study of patients from 11 institutions in the Philippines. Patients were allocated either to the stroke unit or to the general neurology ward by the admitting physician based on the criteria suggested by the Stroke Trialist Collaboration Group. The primary outcome was to determine in-hospital mortality at three- and six months in both stroke units and general neurology wards. The secondary outcomes were determined by a dichotomized modified Rankin scale: (0-2) independent and (3-5) dependent. RESULTS: A total of 1025 patients were included in the study. In the primary outcome, a higher mortality rate (8.4% vs 1.0%) in the general neurology ward (p = 0.000) was seen. The six-month mortality rate was statistically significant and higher among patients admitted to the general neurology ward (3.1% vs 0.8%) (p = 0.009). Patients admitted to the stroke unit attained an independent functional outcome (mRS 0-2) as compared to the general neurology ward (73% vs 61.5%) (p = 0.000). Analysis of functionality at six months favored patients admitted in the stroke unit (88.5% vs 81.4%) as compared to the general neurology ward. CONCLUSION: Patients specifically admitted to stroke units in the Philippines based on established criteria have better outcomes than those admitted to general neurology wards.

Baseline characteristics and treatment response of patients from the Philippines in the CHIMES study.

BACKGROUND: The CHIMES Study compared MLC601 with placebo in patients with ischemic stroke of intermediate severity in the preceding 72 h. Sites from the Philippines randomized 504 of 1099 (46%) patients in the study. We aimed to define the patient characteristics and treatment responses in this subgroup to better plan future trials. METHODS: The CHIMES dataset was used to compare the baseline characteristics, time from stroke onset to study treatment initiation, and treatment responses to MLC601 between patients recruited from Philippines and the rest of the cohort. Treatment effect was analyzed using end-points at month 3 as described in the primary publication, that is, modified Rankin Score, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and Barthel Index. RESULTS: The Philippine cohort was younger, had more women, worse baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and longer time delay from stroke onset to study treatment compared with the rest of the cohort. Age (P = 0·003), baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (P < 0·001), and stroke onset to study treatment initiation (P = 0·016) were predictors of modified Rankin Score at three-months. Primary analysis of modified Rankin Score shift was in favor of MLC601 (adjusted odds ratio 1·41, 95% confidence interval 1·01-1·96). Secondary analyses were likewise in favor of MLC601 for modified Rankin Score dichotomy 0-1, improvement in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (total and motor scores), and Barthel Index. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment effects in the Philippine cohort were in favor of MLC601. This may be due to inclusion of more patients with predictors of poorer outcome.