J Kalita1, U K Misra, P Ranjan. 1. Department of Neurology, Sanjay Gandhi PGIMS, Lucknow, India. jkalita@sgpgi.ac.in
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In acute stroke, a number of drugs are used to reduce the raised intracranial pressure (ICP) although their scientific basis has not been established or shown in randomized controlled trials. AIMS: In this communication, we report the pattern of use of antiedema therapy in acute stroke by general physicians (GPs) and neurophysicians (NPs) in India. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was developed regarding the use of various antiedema measures in stroke and responses were collected either through post or when the responders were attending a national conference. The use of antiedema therapy by NPs and GPs was analyzed employing the Chi-square test. RESULTS: We could collect responses from 102 physicians, of whom 48 were NPs and 54 GPs. More than two-thirds of the physicians managed more than three strokes per week and all used antiedema therapy at some time or the other. Thirteen used it in all the patients and the remaining used it in patients with large and moderate strokes or in patients with herniation. Twelve used only one drug, while the remaining physicians used various combinations in different doses and frequency. The prescribing pattern was significantly different between GPs and NPs with respect to the frequency of the antiedema drugs used, type of stroke where these were used, combination of drugs, timing and dose of mannitol. CONCLUSION: This study highlights that antiedema therapy in acute stroke is practiced without any uniformity.
BACKGROUND: In acute stroke, a number of drugs are used to reduce the raised intracranial pressure (ICP) although their scientific basis has not been established or shown in randomized controlled trials. AIMS: In this communication, we report the pattern of use of antiedema therapy in acute stroke by general physicians (GPs) and neurophysicians (NPs) in India. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was developed regarding the use of various antiedema measures in stroke and responses were collected either through post or when the responders were attending a national conference. The use of antiedema therapy by NPs and GPs was analyzed employing the Chi-square test. RESULTS: We could collect responses from 102 physicians, of whom 48 were NPs and 54 GPs. More than two-thirds of the physicians managed more than three strokes per week and all used antiedema therapy at some time or the other. Thirteen used it in all the patients and the remaining used it in patients with large and moderate strokes or in patients with herniation. Twelve used only one drug, while the remaining physicians used various combinations in different doses and frequency. The prescribing pattern was significantly different between GPs and NPs with respect to the frequency of the antiedema drugs used, type of stroke where these were used, combination of drugs, timing and dose of mannitol. CONCLUSION: This study highlights that antiedema therapy in acute stroke is practiced without any uniformity.