Family Practice Vol. 19, No. 4, 378-382
© Oxford University Press 2002
Health care follow-up after stroke: opportunities for secondary prevention
Department of Public Health Sciences, Guy's, King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine, King's College and
a Department of Care of the Elderly, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital Trust, London, UK.
Judith Redfern, 5th Floor, Capital House, GKT, 42 Weston Street, London SE1 3QD, UK; E-mail: judith.m.redfern{at}kcl.ac.uk
Background. Stroke patients have a 15-fold increased risk of a recurrence, but management of risk factors following stroke has been found to be unsatisfactory. Little is known about health service follow-up of patients after stroke or, consequently, the opportunities for providing secondary prevention to patients.
Objective. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between health service follow-up and management of risk factors after stroke.
Methods. The study used data from the population-based South London Stroke Register, collected prospectively between 1995 and 1998. Main measures included risk factor change and follow-up by hospital physicians, GPs and district nurses. Logistic regression was used to determine relationships between these measures.
Results. Seven hundred and seventeen stroke survivors were registered with first stroke between 1995 and 1998. Most patients were followed-up on at least one occasion by at least one service within the first 3 months after stroke: 51% saw a hospital specialist; 72% saw a GP; and 14% saw a community nurse. However, 14% of patients did not see a doctor at all. Disabled patients were less likely to see a doctor, only 17% of severely disabled patients seeing a hospital specialist [odds ratio (OR) 0.17; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07–0.41]. Doctor-led follow-up was related to treatment of physiological risk factors (e.g. 73% of hypertensive patients who had seen a GP were treated compared with 59% who had seen only a hospital specialist and 47% who had seen neither). Contact with health services was not associated with behavioural risk factor change.
Conclusions. Opportunities for delivering secondary prevention existed through a range of services, but problems of continuity and effectiveness of care are evident. Further investigation is needed to determine how best to intervene to address these issues. In other words, whether interventions should concentrate on improving access and availability of current services, or whether the focus should be on making current strategies more effective.
Keywords. Prevention, risk factors, stroke.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  D. A. Levine, C. I. Kiefe, T. K. Houston, J. J. Allison, E. P. McCarthy, and J. Z. Ayanian Younger Stroke Survivors Have Reduced Access to Physician Care and Medications: National Health Interview Survey From Years 1998 to 2002 Arch Neurol, January 1, 2007; 64(1): 37 - 42. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. Roca, C. Suarez, A. Ceballos, J.M. Varela, F. Nonell, J. Montes, J. Sobrino, A. de la Pena, and for the CIFARC Group Control of hypertension in patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease QJM, August 1, 2005; 98(8): 581 - 588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|