4.6 Article

Outcome in patients admitted outside regular hospital working hours: Does time until regular working hours matter?

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STROKE
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 79-84

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/ijs.12351

关键词

acute stroke therapy; ischemic stroke; outcome; rehabilitation; stroke facilities; stroke teams

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims The aim of this study was to investigate whether stratifying patients according to the time period from admission to the start of regular working hours would help detect a weekend effect in acute stroke patients. Methods Ischemic stroke patients admitted between October 2002 and March 2012 were analyzed. Working hours were defined as 9:00-17:00 on weekdays. Patients were divided into those admitted during working hours (no-wait group) and three other groups according to the time from admission to working hours: <= 24 h (short-wait group), 24-48 h (medium-wait group), and >48 h (long-wait group). The modified Rankin Scale score and mortality at three-months were compared among the groups. Results Of 5625 patients, 3323 (59%) were admitted outside working hours. The proportion of patients with an mRS score 0-1 at three-months showed a decreasing trend with the time period before working hours: 47% (no-wait group), 42% (short-wait group), 42% (medium-wait group), and 38% (long-wait group), respectively (P < 0.001). When the no-wait group was used as a reference, the odds ratio for modified Rankin Scale score 0-1 was 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.04) in the short-wait group, 0.86 (0.69-1.07) in the medium-wait group, and 0.67 (0.53-0.85) in the long-wait group after adjusting for sex, age, premorbid mRS score, previous morbidity, stroke severity, and vascular risk factors. Mortality at three-months was not different between the no-wait group and the other groups. Conclusion A weekend effect might be evident if patients were stratified according to the time period from admission until working hours.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据