| 1. |
- Ahmed, Niaz, et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus statements and recommendations from the ESO-Karolinska Stroke Update Conference, Stockholm 11-13 November 2018.
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Stroke Journal. - : SAGE Publications. - 2396-9873 .- 2396-9881. ; 4:4, s. 307-317
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The purpose of the European Stroke Organisation-Karolinska Stroke Update Conference is to provide updates on recent stroke therapy research and to give an opportunity for the participants to discuss how these results may be implemented into clinical routine. The meeting started 22 years ago as Karolinska Stroke Update, but since 2014 it is a joint conference with European Stroke Organisation. Importantly, it provides a platform for discussion on the European Stroke Organisation guidelines process and on recommendations to the European Stroke Organisation guidelines committee on specific topics. By this, it adds a direct influence from stroke professionals otherwise not involved in committees and work groups on the guideline procedure. The discussions at the conference may also inspire new guidelines when motivated. The topics raised at the meeting are selected by the scientific programme committee mainly based on recent important scientific publications. This year's European Stroke Organisation-Karolinska Stroke Update Meeting was held in Stockholm on 11-13 November 2018. There were 11 scientific sessions discussed in the meeting including two short sessions. Each session except the short sessions produced a consensus statement (Full version with background, issues, conclusions and references are published as web-material and at www.eso-karolinska.org and http://eso-stroke.org) and recommendations which were prepared by a writing committee consisting of session chair(s), scientific secretary and speakers. These statements were presented to the 250 participants of the meeting. In the open meeting, general participants commented on the consensus statement and recommendations and the final document were adjusted based on the discussion from the general participants Recommendations (grade of evidence) were graded according to the 1998 Karolinska Stroke Update meeting with regard to the strength of evidence. Grade A Evidence: Strong support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (at least one randomised controlled trial plus one statistical review). Grade B Evidence: Support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (one randomised controlled trial or one statistical review). Grade C Evidence: No reasonable support from randomised controlled trials, recommendations based on small randomised and/or non-randomised controlled trials evidence.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ahmed, Niaz, et al.
(författare)
-
Recommendations from the ESO-Karolinska Stroke Update Conference, Stockholm 13–15 November 2016
- 2017
-
Ingår i: European Stroke Journal. - : SAGE Publications. - 2396-9873 .- 2396-9881. ; 2:2, s. 95-102
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- About the meeting: The purpose of the European Stroke Organisation (ESO)-Karolinska Stroke Update Conference is to provide updates on recent stroke therapy research and to give an opportunity for the participants to discuss how these results may be implemented into clinical routine. Several scientific sessions discussed in the meeting and each session produced consensus statements. The meeting started 20 years ago as Karolinska Stroke Update, but since 2014, it is a joint conference with ESO. Importantly, it provides a platform for discussion on the ESO guidelines process and on recommendations to the ESO guidelines committee on specific topics. By this, it adds a direct influence from stroke professionals otherwise not involved in committees and work groups on the guidelines procedure. The discussions at the conference may also inspire new guidelines when motivated. The topics raised at the meeting are selected by the scientific programme committee mainly based on recent important scientific publications. The ESO-Karolinska Stroke Update consensus statement and recommendations will be published every 2 years and it will work as implementation of ESO-guidelinesBackground: This year’s ESO-Karolinska Stroke Update Meeting was held in Stockholm on 13–15 November 2016. There were 10 scientific sessions discussed in the meeting and each session produced a consensus statement (Full version with background, issues, conclusions and references are published as web-material and at http://www.eso-karolinska.org/2016 and http://eso-stroke.org) and recommendations which were prepared by a writing committee consisting of session chair(s), secretary and speakers and presented to the 312 participants of the meeting. In the open meeting, general participants commented on the consensus statement and recommendations and the final document were adjusted based on the discussion from the general participants.Recommendations (grade of evidence) were graded according to the 1998 Karolinska Stroke Update meeting with regard to the strength of evidence. Grade A Evidence: Strong support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (at least one randomised controlled trial plus one statistical review). Grade B Evidence: Support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (one randomised controlled trial or one statistical review). Grade C Evidence: No reasonable support from randomised controlled trials, recommendations based on small randomised and/or non-randomised controlled trials evidence.
|
|
| 3. |
- Dennis, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Effects of fluoxetine on functional outcomes after acute stroke (FOCUS) : a pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial
- 2019
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 393:10168, s. 265-274
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Results of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects.Methods FOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762.Findings Between Sept 10,2012, and March 31,2017,3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99.3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0.951 [95% CI 0.839-1.079]; p=0.439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13.43%] patients vs 269 [17.21%]; difference 3.78% [95% CI 1.26-6.30]; p=0.0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2.88%] vs 23 [1.47%]; difference 1.41% [95% CI 0.38-2.43]; p=0.0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months.Interpretation Fluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function.
|
|
| 4. |
- Dennis, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Fluoxetine and Fractures After Stroke : Exploratory Analyses From the FOCUS Trial
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Stroke. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0039-2499 .- 1524-4628. ; 50:11, s. 3280-3282
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and Purpose- The FOCUS trial (Fluoxetine or Control Under Supervision) showed that fluoxetine did not improve modified Rankin Scale scores (mRS) but increased the risk of fractures. We aimed to describe the fractures, their impact on mRS and factors associated with fracture risk. Methods- A United Kingdom, multicenter, parallel-group, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Patients ≥18 years with a clinical stroke and persisting deficit assessed 2 to 15 days after onset were eligible. Consenting patients were allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo for 6 months. The primary outcome was the mRS at 6 months and secondary outcomes included fractures. Results- Sixty-five of 3127 (2.1%) patients had 67 fractures within 6 months of randomization; 43 assigned fluoxetine and 22 placebo. Fifty-nine (90.8%) had fallen and 26 (40%) had fractured their neck of femur. The effect of fluoxetine on mRS (common odds ratio =0.951) was not significantly altered by excluding fracture patients (common odds ratio =0.961). Cox proportional hazards modeling showed that only age >70 year (hazard ratio =1.97; 95% CI, 1.13-3.45; P=0.017), female sex (hazard ratio =2.13; 95% CI, 1.29-3.51; P=0.003), and fluoxetine (hazard ratio =2.00; 95% CI, 1.20-3.34; P=0.008) were independently associated with fractures. Conclusions- Most fractures resulted from falls. Although many fractures were serious, and likely to impair patients' function, the increased fracture risk did not explain the lack of observed effect of fluoxetine on mRS. Only increasing age, female sex, and fluoxetine were independent predictors of fractures. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN83290762.
|
|
| 5. |
- Isaksson, Eva, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying important barriers to recruitment of patients in randomised clinical studies using a questionnaire for study personnel
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Trials. - : BMC. - 1745-6215. ; 20:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Many randomised controlled trials (RCT) fail to meet their recruitment goals. Study personnel play a key role in recruitment. The aim of this study was to identify successful strategies that study personnel consider to be important in patient recruitment to RCT. Methods: We constructed a questionnaire based on the literature, discussions with colleagues and our own experience as trialists. The survey was named "What is Important for Making a Study Successful questionnaire" (WIMSS-q). Our target group was the study personnel in the ongoing EFFECTS study. The questionnaire was sent out electronically to all physicians and nurses (n = 148). Success factors and barriers were divided according to patient, centre and study level, respectively. Results: Responses were received from 94% of the study personnel (139/148). The five most important factors at centre level for enhancing recruitment were that the research question was important (97%), a simple procedure for providing information and gaining consent (92%), a highly engaged local principal investigator and research nurse (both 87%), and that study-related follow-ups are practically feasible and possible to coordinate with the clinical follow-up (87%). The most significant barrier at the local centre was lack of time and resources devoted to research (72%). Important patient-related barriers were fear of side effects (35%) and language problems (30%). Conclusions: For recruitment in an RCT to be successful, the research question must be relevant, and the protocol must be simple and easy to implement in the daily routine.
|
|
| 6. |
- Isaksson, Eva, et al.
(författare)
-
Validation of the Simplified Modified Rankin Scale Questionnaire
- 2020
-
Ingår i: European Neurology. - : S. Karger. - 0014-3022 .- 1421-9913. ; 83:5, s. 493-499
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: The modified Rankin scale (mRS) is the most common assessment tool for measuring overall functional outcome in stroke studies. The traditional way of using mRS face-to-face is time- and cost-consuming. The aim of this study was to test the validity of the Swedish translation of the simplified modified Rankin scale questionnaire (smRSq) as compared with the mRS assessed face-to-face 6 months after a stroke.Methods: Within the ongoing EFFECTS trial, smRSq was sent out to 108 consecutive stroke patients 6 months after a stroke. The majority, 90% (97/108), of the patients answered the questionnaire; for the remaining 10%, it was answered by the next of kin. The patients were assessed by face-to-face mRS by 7 certified healthcare professionals at 4 Swedish stroke centres. The primary outcome was assessed by Cohen's kappa and weighted kappa.Results: There was good agreement between postal smRSq, answered by the patients, and the mRS face-to-face; Cohen's kappa was 0.43 (CI 95% 0.31-0.55), weighted kappa was 0.64 (CI 95% 0.55-0.73), and Spearman rank correlation was 0.82 (p < 0.0001). In 55% (59/108), there was full agreement, and of the 49 patients not showing exact agreement, 44 patients differed by 1 grade and 5 patients had a difference of 2 grades.Discussion/Conclusion: Our results show good validity of the postal smRSq, answered by the patients, compared with the mRS carried out face-to-face at 6 months after a stroke. This result could help trialists in the future simplify study design and make multicentre trials and quality registers with a large number of patients more feasible and time-saving.
|
|
| 7. |
- Kong, Wan-Yee, et al.
(författare)
-
Validation of Serial Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score as an Outcome Predictor in Thrombolyzed Stroke Patients.
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases. - : Elsevier BV. - 1052-3057 .- 1532-8511. ; 26:10, s. 2264-2271
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) on baseline imaging is an established predictor of functional outcome in anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We studied ASPECTS before intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and at 24 hours to assess its prognostic value.METHODS: Data for consecutive anterior circulation AIS patients treated with IVT from 2006 to 2013 were extracted from a prospectively managed registry at our tertiary center. Pre-thrombolysis and 24-hour ASPECTS were evaluated by 2 independent neuroradiologists. Outcome measures included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH), modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days, and mortality. Unfavorable functional outcome was defined by mRS >1. Dramatic ASPECTS progression (DAP) was defined as deterioration in ASPECTS by 6 points or more.RESULTS: Of 554 AIS patients thrombolyzed during the study period, 400 suffered from anterior circulation infarction. The median age was 65 years (interquartile range (IQR): 59-70) and the median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 18 points (IQR: 12-22). Compared with the pre-IVT ASPECTS (area under the curve [AUC] = .64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: .54-.65, P = .001), ASPECTS on the 24-hour CT scan (AUC = .78, 95% CI: .73-.82, P < .001), and change in ASPECTS (AUC = .69, 95% CI: .64-.74, P < .001) were better predictors of unfavorable functional outcome at 3 months. DAP, noted in 34 (14.4%) patients with good baseline ASPECTS (8-10 points), was significantly associated with unfavorable functional outcome (odds ratio [OR]: 9.91, 95% CI: 3.37-29.19, P ≤ .001), mortality (OR: 21.99, 95% CI: 7.98-60.58, P < .001), and SICH (OR: 8.57, 95% CI: 2.87-25.59, P < .001).CONCLUSION: Compared with the pre-thrombolysis score, ASPECTS measured at 24 hours as well as serial change in ASPECTS is a better predictor of 3-month functional outcome.
|
|
| 8. |
- Legg, Lynn A, et al.
(författare)
-
Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for stroke recovery
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1469-493X. ; 2019:11
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Stroke is a major cause of adult disability. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been used for many years to manage depression and other mood disorders after stroke. The 2012 Cochrane Review of SSRIs for stroke recovery demonstrated positive effects on recovery, even in people who were not depressed at randomisation. A large trial of fluoxetine for stroke recovery (fluoxetine versus placebo under supervision) has recently been published, and it is now appropriate to update the evidence.OBJECTIVES: To determine if SSRIs are more effective than placebo or usual care at improving outcomes in people less than 12 months post-stroke, and to determine whether treatment with SSRIs is associated with adverse effects.SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 16 July 2018), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, July 2018), MEDLINE (1946 to July 2018), Embase (1974 to July 2018), CINAHL (1982 July 2018), PsycINFO (1985 to July 2018), AMED (1985 to July 2018), and PsycBITE March 2012 to July 2018). We also searched grey literature and clinical trials registers.SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke survivors at any time within the first year. The intervention was any SSRI, given at any dose, for any period, and for any indication. We excluded drugs with mixed pharmacological effects. The comparator was usual care or placebo. To be included, trials had to collect data on at least one of our primary (disability score or independence) or secondary outcomes (impairments, depression, anxiety, quality of life, fatigue, healthcare cost, death, adverse events and leaving the trial early).DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on demographics, type of stroke, time since stroke, our primary and secondary outcomes, and sources of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data from each trial. We used standardised mean differences (SMDs) to estimate treatment effects for continuous variables, and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous effects, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risks of bias and applied GRADE criteria.MAIN RESULTS: We identified a total of 63 eligible trials recruiting 9168 participants, most of which provided data only at end of treatment and not at follow-up. There was a wide age range. About half the trials required participants to have depression to enter the trial. The duration, drug, and dose varied between trials. Only three of the included trials were at low risk of bias across the key 'Risk of bias' domains. A meta-analysis of these three trials found little or no effect of SSRI on either disability score: SMD -0.01 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.06; P = 0.75; 2 studies, 2829 participants; moderate-quality evidence) or independence: RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; P = 0.99; 3 studies, 3249 participants; moderate-quality evidence). We downgraded both these outcomes for imprecision. SSRIs reduced the average depression score (SMD 0.11 lower, 0.19 lower to 0.04 lower; 2 trials, 2861 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but there was a higher observed number of gastrointestinal side effects among participants treated with SSRIs compared to placebo (RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.00 to 4.76; P = 0.05; 2 studies, 148 participants; moderate-quality evidence), with no evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). For seizures there was no evidence of a substantial difference. When we included all trials in a sensitivity analysis, irrespective of risk of bias, SSRIs appeared to reduce disability scores but not dependence. One large trial (FOCUS) dominated the results. We identified several ongoing trials, including two large trials that together will recruit more than 3000 participants.AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no reliable evidence that SSRIs should be used routinely to promote recovery after stroke. Meta-analysis of the trials at low risk of bias indicate that SSRIs do not improve recovery from stroke. We identified potential improvements in disability only in the analyses which included trials at high risk of bias. A further meta-analysis of large ongoing trials will be required to determine the generalisability of these findings.
|
|
| 9. |
- Lundström, Erik, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
Effects of Fluoxetine on Outcomes at 12 Months After Acute Stroke Results From EFFECTS, a Randomized Controlled Trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Stroke. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0039-2499 .- 1524-4628. ; 52:10, s. 3082-3087
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The EFFECTS (Efficacy of Fluoxetine-a Randomised Controlled Trial in Stroke) recently reported that 20 mg fluoxetine once daily for 6 months after acute stroke did not improve functional outcome but reduced depression and increased fractures and hyponatremia at 6 months. The purpose of this predefined secondary analysis was to identify if any effects of fluoxetine were maintained or delayed over 12 months. METHODS: EFFECTS was an investigator-led, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial in Sweden that enrolled adult patients with stroke. Patients were randomized to 20 mg oral fluoxetine or matching placebo for 6 months and followed for another 6 months. The primary outcome was functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale), at 6 months. Predefined secondary outcomes for these analyses included the modified Rankin Scale, health status, quality of life, fatigue, mood, and depression at 12 months. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred patients were recruited from 35 centers in Sweden between 2014 and 2019; 750 were allocated fluoxetine and 750 placebo. At 12 months, modified Rankin Scale data were available in 715 (95%) patients allocated fluoxetine and 712 (95%) placebo. The distribution of modified Rankin Scale categories was similar in the 2 groups (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.76-1.10]). Patients allocated fluoxetine scored worse on memory with a median value of 89 (interquartile range, 75-100) versus 93 (interquartile range, 82-100); P=0.0021 and communication 93 (interquartile range, 82-100) versus 96 (interquartile range, 86-100); P=0.024 domains of the Stroke Impact Scale compared with placebo. There were no other differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Fluoxetine after acute stroke had no effect on functional outcome at 12 months. Patients allocated fluoxetine scored worse on memory and communication on the Stroke Impact Scale compared with placebo, but this is likely to be due to chance.
|
|
| 10. |
- Lundström, Erik, Docent, 1964-, et al.
(författare)
-
The Effects Of Fluoxetine On Fracture Risk After Stroke : Further Analyses From The Focus Trial
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Stroke Journal. - : SAGE Publications. - 2396-9873 .- 2396-9881.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background and Aims: The FOCUS trial showed that 20mg of fluoxetine daily, for six months, started 2–15 days post stroke had no effect on the modified Rankin scale (mRS), reduced the risk of new depression (Risk difference 3.8%) but increased the risk of bone fractures (Risk difference 1.4%). Further analyses aimed to explore the factors associated with bone fractures.Methods: Sixty five of the 3127 (2.1%) patients enrolled had a fracture within six months of randomisation. Of these 59 (90.8%) resulted from a fall and 26 (40%) affected the neck of femur. Cox proportional hazards modelling of the risk of fracture showed that only age ≤70yr (Hazard Ratio = 0.51 (95%CI 0.29-0.89; p = 0.017), female sex (HR = 2.13 (1.29-3.51; p = 0.003) and fluoxetine treatment (HR = 2.00 (1.20-3.34; p = 0.008) were independent predictors. Stroke pathology, severity, type of deficit, prior fractures, other medication affecting blood pressure, bone density and balance had no significant effect. Furthermore, removing patients with a fracture from the primary analysis did not significantly alter the effect on mRS (Common odds ratio 0.951 with fractures, 0.961 without).Results: Only increasing age, female sex and fluoxetine were independent predictors of fracture risk. Most fractures resulted from falls. Although many of the fractures were serious, and are likely to have impaired patients’ function, the increased fracture risk did not explain the lack of observed effect of fluoxetine on mRS.Conclusions: A future individual patient data meta-analysis including the patients from the ongoing AFFINITY and EFFECTS trials may clarify the mechanism of fractures due to fluoxetine.Trial registration number: ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762.
|
|
