This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Background and Objectives To explore the regional discrepancy of the adherence to guideline-recommended stroke interventions for the stroke belt division (north vs south), the economic development division (east vs middle vs west), and potential interaction.
Methods We conducted a retrospective observational study using data from the Chinese Stroke Center Alliance from August 2015 to August 2019. The primary outcome was hospital personnel adherence to 11 individual guideline-recommended treatments. The coprimary outcomes included 2 summary measures: a composite score (range, 0 [nonadherence] to 1 [perfect adherence]) and an all-or-none binary outcome for adherence to evidence-based stroke. Regional disparities were assessed according to the stroke belt division and the economic development division and the interaction between these 2 divisions. Multivariate regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to analyze the outcomes.
Results This study included 838,229 patients with acute ischemic stroke from 1,473 hospitals. The overall quality of care in the nonbelt regions (southern China) was higher than in the stroke belt regions (northern China), as reflected by a higher composite score (0.77 vs 0.75; adjusted odds ratio 1.03 [95% CI 1.02–1.04]; p < 0.001) and a higher all-or-none measure (25.5% vs 22.0%; 1.32 [1.17–1.49], p < 0.001). Patients in the East and Central had higher odds of using intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator (East: 1.81 [95% CI 1.51–2.18], p < 0.001; Central: 1.57 [95% CI 1.26–1.95], p < 0.001), early antithrombotic medications (East: 1.77 [1.49–2.11], p < 0.001; Central: 1.37 [1.12–1.66], p < 0.001), lipid-lowering medications (East: 1.29 [1.08–1.53], p < 0.001), and deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (East: 1.28 [1.08–1.50], p = 0.003) compared with those in the West. Patients in the nonbelt regions had higher odds of getting dysphagia screening (1.82 [1.55–2.13], p < 0.001) and rehabilitation assessment (which though varied among different economic development levels). Reflected by significant interaction effects, for patients in the East, those in the nonbelt regions had greater odds of receiving anticoagulation (1.62 [1.34–1.96]; p < 0.001) but lower odds of receiving antithrombotic (0.63 [0.52–0.77]; p < 0.001) and antidiabetic medications (0.87 [0.77–0.99]; p = 0.03); for patients in the West, those in the nonbelt regions were less likely to receive antihypertensive (0.64 [0.46–0.88]; p = 0.004) and antidiabetic (0.66 [0.54–0.81]; p < 0.001) medications.
Discussion Stroke care performance measures differed across regions, along the stroke belt division, and the economic development division. The overall quality of care in the non–stroke belt regions was higher than that in the stroke belt regions. The 2 divisions had interaction effects on several individual measures.
Glossary
- AIS=
- acute ischemic stroke;
- ASD=
- absolute standardized difference;
- CSC=
- comprehensive stroke center;
- CSCA=
- Chinese Stroke Center Alliance;
- DVT=
- deep vein thrombosis;
- IV-rt PA=
- IV recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator;
- LDL=
- low-density lipoprotein;
- MIR=
- mortality-to-incidence ratio;
- NIHSS=
- NIH Stroke Scale;
- NRCMS=
- new rural cooperative medical scheme;
- OR=
- odds ratio;
- PSC=
- primary stroke center;
- URBMI=
- urban resident basic medical insurance
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
↵* These authors contributed equally to this work as co-first authors.
↵† These authors contributed equally to this work.
Submitted and externally peer reviewed. The handling editor was José Merino, MD, MPhil, FAAN.
- Received November 18, 2021.
- Accepted in final form June 13, 2022.
- © 2022 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
You May Also be Interested in
Efficacy of Ubrogepant in the Acute Treatment of Migraine With Mild Pain vs Moderate or Severe Pain
Dr. Kathleen Digre and Dr. Kendra Pham