STUDY OBJECTIVE: We evaluate, in admitted patients with transient ischemic attack, the accuracy of the ABCD(2) (age [A], blood pressure [B], clinical features [weakness/speech disturbance] [C], transient ischemic attack duration [D], and diabetes history [D]) score in predicting ischemic stroke within 7 days. METHODS: At 16 North Carolina hospitals, we enrolled a prospective, nonconsecutive sample of admitted patients with transient ischemic attack and with no stroke history, presenting within 24 hours of transient ischemic attack symptom onset. We conducted a medical record review to determine ischemic stroke outcomes within 7 days. According to a modified Rankin Scale Score, strokes were classified as disabling (>2) or nondisabling (< or =2). RESULTS: During a 35-month period, we enrolled 1,667 patients, of whom 373 (23%) received a diagnosis of an ischemic stroke within 7 days. Eighteen percent (69/373) of all strokes were disabling. We were unable to calculate an ABCD(2) score in 613 patients (37%); however, our imputed analysis indicated this did not significantly alter results. The discriminatory power of the ABCD(2) score was modest for ischemic stroke in 7 days (c statistic 0.59), and fair for disabling ischemic stroke within 7 days (c statistic 0.71). Patients characterized as low risk according to ABCD(2) score (< or =3) were at low risk for experiencing a disabling stroke within 7 days, with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04 to 0.64) with missing values excluded and 0.34 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.76) when missing values were imputed. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests the best application of the ABCD(2) score may be to identify patients at low risk for an early disabling ischemic stroke. Further study of the ability to determine an ABCD(2) score in all patients is needed, along with validation in a large, consecutive population of patients with transient ischemic attack. Copyright (c) 2009 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We evaluate, in admitted patients with transient ischemic attack, the accuracy of the ABCD(2) (age [A], blood pressure [B], clinical features [weakness/speech disturbance] [C], transient ischemic attack duration [D], and diabetes history [D]) score in predicting ischemic stroke within 7 days. METHODS: At 16 North Carolina hospitals, we enrolled a prospective, nonconsecutive sample of admitted patients with transient ischemic attack and with no stroke history, presenting within 24 hours of transient ischemic attack symptom onset. We conducted a medical record review to determine ischemic stroke outcomes within 7 days. According to a modified Rankin Scale Score, strokes were classified as disabling (>2) or nondisabling (< or =2). RESULTS: During a 35-month period, we enrolled 1,667 patients, of whom 373 (23%) received a diagnosis of an ischemic stroke within 7 days. Eighteen percent (69/373) of all strokes were disabling. We were unable to calculate an ABCD(2) score in 613 patients (37%); however, our imputed analysis indicated this did not significantly alter results. The discriminatory power of the ABCD(2) score was modest for ischemic stroke in 7 days (c statistic 0.59), and fair for disabling ischemic stroke within 7 days (c statistic 0.71). Patients characterized as low risk according to ABCD(2) score (< or =3) were at low risk for experiencing a disabling stroke within 7 days, with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04 to 0.64) with missing values excluded and 0.34 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.76) when missing values were imputed. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests the best application of the ABCD(2) score may be to identify patients at low risk for an early disabling ischemic stroke. Further study of the ability to determine an ABCD(2) score in all patients is needed, along with validation in a large, consecutive population of patients with transient ischemic attack. Copyright (c) 2009 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: M F Giles; G W Albers; P Amarenco; E M Arsava; A W Asimos; H Ay; D Calvet; S B Coutts; B L Cucchiara; A M Demchuk; S C Johnston; P J Kelly; A S Kim; J Labreuche; P C Lavallee; J-L Mas; A Merwick; J M Olivot; F Purroy; W D Rosamond; R Sciolla; P M Rothwell Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-08-24 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jeffrey J Perry; Mukul Sharma; Marco L A Sivilotti; Jane Sutherland; Cheryl Symington; Andrew Worster; Marcel Émond; Grant Stotts; Albert Y Jin; Weislaw J Oczkowski; Demetrios J Sahlas; Heather E Murray; Ariane MacKey; Steve Verreault; George A Wells; Ian G Stiell Journal: CMAJ Date: 2011-06-06 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Joanna M Wardlaw; Miriam Brazzelli; Francesca M Chappell; Hector Miranda; Kirsten Shuler; Peter A G Sandercock; Martin S Dennis Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-07-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Barbara J Homoya; Teresa M Damush; Jason J Sico; Edward J Miech; Gregory W Arling; Laura J Myers; Jared B Ferguson; Michael S Phipps; Eric M Cheng; Dawn M Bravata Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Sean P Collins; Cathy A Jenkins; Frank E Harrell; Dandan Liu; Karen F Miller; Christopher J Lindsell; Allen J Naftilan; John A McPherson; David J Maron; Douglas B Sawyer; Neal L Weintraub; Gregory J Fermann; Susan K Roll; Matthew Sperling; Alan B Storrow Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 12.035