Emulating Three Clinical Trials that Compare Stroke Rehabilitation at Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities to Skilled Nursing Facilities

Estimating the Impact of Hospital-Level Variation on the Use of Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities Versus Skilled Nursing Facilities on Individual Patients With Stroke

BACKGROUND

There is substantial hospital-level variation in the use of Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities (IRFs) versus Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs) among patients with stroke, which is poorly understood. Our objective was to quantify the net effect of the admitting hospital on the probability of receiving IRF or SNF care for individual patients with stroke.

METHODS

Using Medicare claims data (2011-2013), a cohort of patients with acute stroke discharged to an IRF or SNF was identified. We generated 2 multivariable logistic regression models. Model 1 predicted IRF admission (versus SNF) using only patient-level factors, whereas model 2 added a hospital random effect term to quantify the hospital effect. The statistical significance and direction of the random effect terms were used to categorize hospitals as being either IRF-favoring, SNF-favoring, or neutral with respect to their discharge patterns. The hospital's impact on individual patient's probability of IRF discharge was estimated by taking the change in individual predicted probabilities (change in individual predicted probability) between the 2 models. Hospital-level effects were categorized as small (<10%), moderate (10%-19%), or large (≥20%) depending on change in individual predicted probability.

RESULTS

The cohort included 135 415 patients (average age, 81.5 [SD=8.0] years, 61% female, 91% ischemic stroke) who were discharged from 1816 acute care hospitals to IRFs (n=66 548) or SNFs (n=68 867). Half of hospitals were classified as being either IRF-favoring (n=461, 25.4%) or SNF-favoring (n=485, 26.7%) with the remainder (n=870, 47.9%) considered neutral. Overall, just over half (n=73 428) of patients were treated at hospitals that had moderate or large independent effects on discharge settings. Hospital effects for neutral hospitals were small (ie, change in individual predicted probability <10%) for most patients (72.5%). However, hospital effects were moderate or large for 78.8% and 84.6% of patients treated at IRF- or SNF-favoring hospitals, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For most patients with stroke, the admitting hospital meaningfully changed the type of rehabilitation care that they received.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Medical Management of Poststroke Complications Among Patients With Acute Stroke

BACKGROUND

To inform clinical practice, we sought to identify racial and ethnic differences in the medical management of common poststroke complications.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A cohort of acutely hospitalized, first-time non-Hispanic White (NHW), non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic patients with stroke was identified from electronic medical records of 51 large health care organizations (January 1, 2003 to December 5, 2022). Matched propensity scores were used to account for baseline differences. Primary outcomes included receipt of medication(s) associated with the management of the following poststroke complications: arousal/fatigue, spasticity, mood, sleep, neurogenic bladder, neurogenic bowel, and seizure. Differences were measured at 14, 90, and 365 days. Subgroup analyses included differences restricted to patients with ischemic stroke, younger age (<65 years), and stratified by decade (2003-2012 and 2013-2022). Before matching, the final cohort consisted of 348 286 patients with first-time stroke. Matching resulted in 63 722 non-Hispanic Black-NHW pairs and 24 009 Hispanic-NHW pairs. Non-Hispanic Black (versus NHW) patients were significantly less likely to be treated for all poststroke complications, with differences largest for arousal/fatigue (relative risk (RR), 0.58 [95% CI, 0.54-0.62]), spasticity (RR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.0.62-0.67]), and mood disorders (RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.70-0.74]) at 14 days. Hispanic-NHW differences were similar, albeit with smaller magnitudes, with the largest differences present for spasticity (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.63-0.72]), arousal/fatigue (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.70-0.85]), and mood disorders (RR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]). Subgroup analyses revealed similar patterns for ischemic stroke and patients aged <65 years. Disparities for the current decade remained significant but with smaller magnitudes compared with the prior decade.

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant racial and ethnic disparities in the treatment of poststroke complications. The differences were greatest at 14 days, outlining the importance of early identification and management.

The effect of post-acute rehabilitation setting on 90-day mobility after stroke: A difference-in-difference analysis

Background

After discharged from the hospital for acute stroke, individuals typically receive rehabilitation in one of three settings: inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), or home with community services (i.e., home health or outpatient clinics). The initial setting of post-acute care (i.e., discharge location) is related to mortality and hospital readmission; however, the impact of this setting on the change in functional mobility at 90-days after discharge is still poorly understood. The purpose of this work was to examine the impact of discharge location on the change in functional mobility between hospital discharge and 90-days post-discharge.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we used the electronic health record to identify individuals admitted to Johns Hopkins Medicine with an acute stroke and who had measurements of mobility [Activity Measure for Post Acute Care Basic Mobility (AM-PAC BM)] at discharge from the acute hospital and 90-days post-discharge. Individuals were grouped by discharge location (IRF=190 [40%], SNF=103 [22%], Home with community services=182 [(38%]). We compared the change in mobility from time of discharge to 90-days post-discharge in each group using a difference-in-differences analysis and controlling for demographics, clinical characteristics, and social determinants of health.

Results

We included 475 individuals (age 64.4 [14.8] years; female: 248 [52.2%]). After adjusting for covariates, individuals who were discharged to an IRF had a significantly greater improvement in AM-PAC BM from time of discharge to 90-days post-discharge compared to individuals discharged to a SNF or home with community services (β=-3.5 (1.4), p=0.01 and β=-8.2 (1.3), p=<0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

These findings suggest that the initial post-acute rehabilitation setting impacts the magnitude of functional recovery at 90-days after discharge from the acute hospital. These findings support the need for high-intensity rehabilitation and for policies that facilitate the delivery of high-intensity rehabilitation after stroke.

Reporting of Observational Studies Explicitly Aiming to Emulate Randomized Trials: A Systematic Review

Importance

Observational (nonexperimental) studies that aim to emulate a randomized trial (ie, the target trial) are increasingly informing medical and policy decision-making, but it is unclear how these studies are reported in the literature. Consistent reporting is essential for quality appraisal, evidence synthesis, and translation of evidence to policy and practice.

Objective

To assess the reporting of observational studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial.

Evidence Review

We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for observational studies published between March 2012 and October 2022 that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial of a health or medical intervention. Two reviewers double-screened and -extracted data on study characteristics, key predefined components of the target trial protocol and its emulation (eligibility criteria, treatment strategies, treatment assignment, outcome[s], follow-up, causal contrast[s], and analysis plan), and other items related to the target trial emulation.

Findings

A total of 200 studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial were included. These studies included 26 subfields of medicine, and 168 (84%) were published from January 2020 to October 2022. The aim to emulate a target trial was explicit in 70 study titles (35%). Forty-three studies (22%) reported use of a published reporting guideline (eg, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology). Eighty-five studies (43%) did not describe all key items of how the target trial was emulated and 113 (57%) did not describe the protocol of the target trial and its emulation.

Conclusion and Relevance

In this systematic review of 200 studies that explicitly aimed to emulate a target trial, reporting of how the target trial was emulated was inconsistent. A reporting guideline for studies explicitly aiming to emulate a target trial may improve the reporting of the target trial protocols and other aspects of these emulation attempts.