Literature DB >> 24119620

Socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke.

Waleed Brinjikji1, Alejandro A Rabinstein2, Harry J Cloft3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that socioeconomic disparities in access to treatment of cerebrovascular diseases exist. We studied the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to determine if disparities exist in utilization of mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke.
METHODS: Using the NIS for the years 2006-2010, we selected all discharges with a primary diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke. Patients who received mechanical thrombectomy for stroke were identified by using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, procedure code 39.74. We examined the utilization rates of mechanical thrombectomy by race/ethnicity (white, black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander), income quartile (first, second to third, and fourth), and insurance status (Medicare, Medicaid, self-pay, and private). We also studied thrombectomy utilization rates at hospitals that performed thrombectomy.
RESULTS: From 2006 to 2010, 2,087,017 patients were hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke; 8946 patients (.4%) received mechanical thrombectomy. Compared with white patients, black patients had significantly lower rates of overall mechanical thrombectomy utilization (odds ratio [OR] = .59, 95% confidence interval [CI] = .55-.64, P < .0001) and at centers that offered mechanical thrombectomy (OR = .44, 95% CI = .41-.47, P < .0001). Compared with patients in the highest income quartile, patients in the lowest income quartile had significantly lower rates of mechanical thrombectomy utilization both overall (OR = .66, 95% CI = .62-.70, P < .0001) and at centers that offered mechanical thrombectomy (OR = .80, 95% CI = .75-.84, P < .0001). Compared with patients with private insurance, self-pay patients had significantly lower mechanical thrombectomy utilization both overall (OR = .71, 95% CI = .64-.78, P < .0001) and at centers that offered mechanical thrombectomy (OR = .81, 95% CI = .74-.90, P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Significant socioeconomic disparities exist in the utilization of mechanical thrombectomy in the United States.
Copyright © 2014 National Stroke Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Mechanical thrombectomy; acute ischemic stroke; epidemiology; socioeconomics

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24119620     DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.08.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis        ISSN: 1052-3057            Impact factor:   2.136


  11 in total

1.  Patient Age and the Outcomes after Decompressive Hemicraniectomy for Stroke: A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis.

Authors:  Hormuzdiyar H Dasenbrock; Faith C Robertson; M Ali Aziz-Sultan; Donovan Guittieres; Rose Du; Ian F Dunn; William B Gormley
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.210

2.  Are There Disparities in Thrombolytic Treatment and Mortality in Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Hispanic Population Living in Border States versus Nonborder States?

Authors:  Ameer E Hassan; David H Kassel; Malik M Adil; Wondwossen G Tekle; Adnan I Qureshi
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Neurol       Date:  2016-10

3.  Progressive rural-urban disparity in acute stroke care.

Authors:  Sergio Gonzales; Michael T Mullen; Lesli Skolarus; Dylan P Thibault; Uduak Udoeyo; Allison W Willis
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 9.910

4.  Disparities in the Use of Mechanical Thrombectomy Alone Compared with Adjunctive Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke in the United States.

Authors:  W Wahood; A A Rizvi; Y Alexander; M A Alvi; K R Rajjoub; H Cloft; A A Rabinstein; W Brinjikji
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Effects of intranasal guanosine administration on brain function in a rat model of ischemic stroke.

Authors:  Gabriel C Müller; Samanta O Loureiro; Letícia F Pettenuzzo; Roberto F Almeida; Evandro Y Ynumaru; Pedro A Guazzelli; Fabíola S Meyer; Mayara V Pasquetti; Marcelo Ganzella; Maria Elisa Calcagnotto; Diogo O Souza
Journal:  Purinergic Signal       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 3.765

6.  Educational Intervention in the Emergency Department to Address Disparities in Stroke Knowledge.

Authors:  Erin F Shufflebarger; Lauren A Walter; Toby I Gropen; Tracy E Madsen; Mark R Harrigan; Ronald M Lazar; Jamie Bice; Cassidy S Baldwin; Michael J Lyerly
Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 2.677

7.  Outcomes after acute ischemic stroke in the United States: does residential ZIP code matter?

Authors:  Shikhar Agarwal; Venu Menon; Wael A Jaber
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2015-03-15       Impact factor: 5.501

8.  Relationship Between Language Preference and Intravenous Thrombolysis Among Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients.

Authors:  Betty Luan Erfe; Khawja Ahmeruddin Siddiqui; Lee H Schwamm; Nicte I Mejia
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  Professional Medical Interpreters Influence the Quality of Acute Ischemic Stroke Care for Patients Who Speak Languages Other than English.

Authors:  Betty M Luan Erfe; Khawja A Siddiqui; Lee H Schwamm; Chris Kirwan; Anabela Nunes; Nicte I Mejia
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 5.501

10.  Strategy for reliable identification of ischaemic stroke, thrombolytics and thrombectomy in large administrative databases.

Authors:  Kori S Zachrison; Sijia Li; Mathew J Reeves; Opeolu Adeoye; Carlos A Camargo; Lee H Schwamm; Renee Y Hsia
Journal:  Stroke Vasc Neurol       Date:  2020-11-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.