Follow-up of Patients With Stroke, Based on Opt-Out Choice Potential Approach for Acute Care Quality Registries or Observational Studies

The Effect of Mobile Stroke Unit Care on Functional Outcomes: An Application of the Front-door Formula

BACKGROUND

The Berlin-based B_PROUD study was designed to assess the effect of mobile stroke unit (MSU) dispatch among ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) patients without contraindications to reperfusion treatments. However, a large proportion of patients for whom the MSU was dispatched did not ultimately receive MSU care. We estimated the causal effect of additional MSU care on 3-month functional outcomes among B_PROUD patients for whom an MSU was dispatched.

METHODS

We used data from the B_PROUD study (1 February 2017-8 May 2019). Given the presence of exposure-outcome unmeasured confounding, we used the front-door formula to identify the distribution of modified Rankin scale (mRS) outcomes under two hypothetical interventions: (1) receiving additional MSU care and (2) only receiving conventional care. We considered the time from dispatch to thrombolysis as the full mediator and adjusted for exposure-mediator and mediator-outcome confounding. We used a parametric estimator to estimate the common odds ratio (cOR) and 95% bootstrapped confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

We included in total 768 ischemic stroke/TIA patients with MSU dispatch. The MSU was canceled for 180 (23%) patients, whereas 588 (77%) received MSU care. The unadjusted association between the care group and mRS favored conventional care (cOR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.2, 2.3); however, after applying the front-door formula, the mRS distribution favored MSU care (cOR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.81, 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Receiving MSU care was associated with better functional outcomes than conventional care only, compatible with the hypothesized beneficial effect of MSU care on poststroke outcomes, among stroke and TIA patients without contraindications to reperfusion treatments.

Adjusted horizontal stacked bar graphs (“Grotta bars”) for consistent presentation of observational stroke study results

Background:

Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores are used to measure functional outcomes after stroke. Researchers create horizontal stacked bar graphs (nicknamed “Grotta bars”) to illustrate distributional differences in scores between groups. In well-conducted randomized controlled trials, Grotta bars have a causal interpretation. However, the common practice of exclusively presenting unadjusted Grotta bars in observational studies can be misleading in the presence of confounding. We demonstrated this problem and a possible solution using an empirical comparison of 3-month mRS scores among stroke/TIA patients discharged home versus elsewhere after hospitalization.

Patients and methods:

Using data from the Berlin-based B-SPATIAL registry, we estimated the probability of being discharged home conditional on prespecified measured confounding factors and generated stabilized inverse probability of treatment (IPT) weights for each patient. We visualized mRS distributions by group with Grotta bars for the IPT-weighted population in which measured confounding was removed. We then used ordinal logistic regression to quantify unadjusted and adjusted associations between being discharged home and the 3-month mRS score.

Results:

Of 3184 eligible patients, 2537 (79.7%) were discharged home. In the unadjusted analyses, those discharged home had considerably lower mRS compared with patients discharged elsewhere (common odds ratio, cOR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.11–0.15). After removing measured confounding, we obtained substantially different mRS distributions, visually apparent in the adjusted Grotta bars. No statistically significant association was found after confounding adjustment (cOR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.60–1.12).

Discussion and conclusion:

The practice of presenting only unadjusted stacked bar graphs for mRS scores together with adjusted effect estimates in observational studies can be misleading. IPT weighting can be implemented to create Grotta bars that account for measured confounding, which are more consistent with the presentation of adjusted results in observational studies.

Effect of Mobile Stroke Unit Dispatch in all Patients with Acute Stroke or TIA

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of additional mobile stroke unit (MSU) dispatch on functional outcomes among the full spectrum of stroke patients, regardless of subtype or potential contraindications to reperfusion therapies.

METHODS

We used data from the nonrandomized Berlin-based B_PROUD study (02/2017 to 05/2019), in which MSUs were dispatched based solely on availability, and the linked B-SPATIAL stroke registry. All patients with final stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) diagnoses were eligible. The intervention under study was the additional dispatch of an MSU, an emergency physician-staffed ambulance equipped to provide prehospital imaging and thrombolytic treatment, compared to conventional ambulance alone. The primary outcome was the 3-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, and the co-primary outcome was a 3-tiered disability scale. We identified confounders using directed acyclic graphs and obtained adjusted effect estimates using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

MSUs were dispatched to 1,125 patients (mean age: 74 years, 46.5% female), while for 1,141 patients only conventional ambulances were dispatched (75 years, 49.9% female). After confounding adjustment, MSU dispatch was associated with more favorable 3-month mRS scores (common odds ratio [cOR] = 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-0.94). No statistically significant association was found with the co-primary outcome (cOR = 0.86; 9% CI: 0.72-1.01) or 7-day mortality (OR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.59-1.48).

INTERPRETATION

When considering the entire population of stroke/TIA patients, MSU dispatch improved 3-month functional outcomes without evidence of compromised safety. Our results are relevant for decision-makers since stroke subtype and treatment eligibility are unknown at time of dispatch. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:50-63.