Stroke is the second largest cause of disability-adjusted life-years lost worldwide. The prevalence of stroke in women is predicted to rise rapidly, owing to the increasing average age of the global female population. Vascular risk factors differ between women and men in terms of prevalence, and evidence increasingly supports the clinical importance of sex differences in stroke. The influence of some risk factors for stroke — including diabetes mellitus and atrial fibrillation — are stronger in women, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy also affect the risk of stroke decades after pregnancy. However, in an era of evidence-based medicine, women are notably under-represented in clinical trials — despite governmental actions highlighting the need to include both men and women in clinical trials — resulting in a reduced generalizability of study results to women. The aim of this Review is to highlight new insights into specificities of stroke in women, to plan future research priorities, and to influence public health policies to decrease the worldwide burden of stroke in women.
International audience ; BACKGROUND:The provision of informed consent is a prerequisite for inclusion of a patient in a clinical research project. In some countries, the legislation on clinical research authorizes a third person to provide informed consent if the patient is unable to do so directly (i.e. surrogate consent). This is the case during acute stroke, when the symptoms may prevent the patient from providing informed consent and thus require a third party to be approached. Identification of factors associated with the medical team's decision to resort to surrogate consent may (i) help the care team during the inclusion process and (ii) enable the patient's family circle to be better informed (and thus feel less guilty) about providing surrogate consent.METHODS:Patients included in the BIOSTROKE cohort (initially dedicated to the analysis of factors influencing stroke severity) were divided into two groups: those having provided informed consent directly and those for whom a third party (such as a family member) had provided surrogate consent. We compared the groups in terms of the initial clinical characteristics (age, gender, type of stroke, severity on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), pre-stroke cognitive status according to the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, and the stroke's aetiology) and the functional and cognitive impairments (according to the NIHSS, the modified Rankin score (mRS) and the Mini Mental State Examination) on post-stroke days 8 and 90.RESULTS:Three hundred and ninety five patients were included (mean ± SD age: 67 ± 15 years; 53% males). Surrogate consent had been obtained in 228 cases, and 167 patients had provided consent themselves. The patients included with surrogate consent were likely to be older and more aphasic, with a pre-existing cognitive disorder and more severe stroke (relative to the patients having provided consent). In terms of recovery, the patients included with surrogate consent had a worse functional prognosis (day 90 mRS ≥3: 57.6%, compared with 16.8% in patients having provided consent themselves; p < 0.0001) and a worse cognitive prognosis (day 90 MMS < 24: 15.4% and 4.8%, respectively; p < 0.002). The mortality rate was significantly higher in the surrogate consent group.CONCLUSIONS:We found that in addition to age, aphasia and stroke severity, pre-stroke cognitive status is a factor that should prompt the care team to consider requesting surrogate consent for participation in a clinical study. Given that the unfavourable outcome in patients with surrogate consent is often due to their initial clinical state (rather than inclusion in a trial per se), the issue of the family's feelings of guilt (and how to avoid these feelings) should be further addressed.
International audience ; BACKGROUND:The provision of informed consent is a prerequisite for inclusion of a patient in a clinical research project. In some countries, the legislation on clinical research authorizes a third person to provide informed consent if the patient is unable to do so directly (i.e. surrogate consent). This is the case during acute stroke, when the symptoms may prevent the patient from providing informed consent and thus require a third party to be approached. Identification of factors associated with the medical team's decision to resort to surrogate consent may (i) help the care team during the inclusion process and (ii) enable the patient's family circle to be better informed (and thus feel less guilty) about providing surrogate consent.METHODS:Patients included in the BIOSTROKE cohort (initially dedicated to the analysis of factors influencing stroke severity) were divided into two groups: those having provided informed consent directly and those for whom a third party (such as a family member) had provided surrogate consent. We compared the groups in terms of the initial clinical characteristics (age, gender, type of stroke, severity on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), pre-stroke cognitive status according to the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, and the stroke's aetiology) and the functional and cognitive impairments (according to the NIHSS, the modified Rankin score (mRS) and the Mini Mental State Examination) on post-stroke days 8 and 90.RESULTS:Three hundred and ninety five patients were included (mean ± SD age: 67 ± 15 years; 53% males). Surrogate consent had been obtained in 228 cases, and 167 patients had provided consent themselves. The patients included with surrogate consent were likely to be older and more aphasic, with a pre-existing cognitive disorder and more severe stroke (relative to the patients having provided consent). In terms of recovery, the patients included with surrogate consent had a worse functional prognosis ...
Abstract Background The provision of informed consent is a prerequisite for inclusion of a patient in a clinical research project. In some countries, the legislation on clinical research authorizes a third person to provide informed consent if the patient is unable to do so directly (i.e. surrogate consent). This is the case during acute stroke, when the symptoms may prevent the patient from providing informed consent and thus require a third party to be approached. Identification of factors associated with the medical team's decision to resort to surrogate consent may (i) help the care team during the inclusion process and (ii) enable the patient's family circle to be better informed (and thus feel less guilty) about providing surrogate consent. Methods Patients included in the BIOSTROKE cohort (initially dedicated to the analysis of factors influencing stroke severity) were divided into two groups: those having provided informed consent directly and those for whom a third party (such as a family member) had provided surrogate consent. We compared the groups in terms of the initial clinical characteristics (age, gender, type of stroke, severity on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), pre-stroke cognitive status according to the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, and the stroke's aetiology) and the functional and cognitive impairments (according to the NIHSS, the modified Rankin score (mRS) and the Mini Mental State Examination) on post-stroke days 8 and 90. Results Three hundred and ninety five patients were included (mean ± SD age: 67 ± 15 years; 53% males). Surrogate consent had been obtained in 228 cases, and 167 patients had provided consent themselves. The patients included with surrogate consent were likely to be older and more aphasic, with a pre-existing cognitive disorder and more severe stroke (relative to the patients having provided consent). In terms of recovery, the patients included with surrogate consent had a worse functional prognosis (day 90 mRS ≥3: 57.6%, compared with 16.8% in patients having provided consent themselves; p < 0.0001) and a worse cognitive prognosis (day 90 MMS < 24: 15.4% and 4.8%, respectively; p < 0.002). The mortality rate was significantly higher in the surrogate consent group. Conclusions We found that in addition to age, aphasia and stroke severity, pre-stroke cognitive status is a factor that should prompt the care team to consider .
International audience ; BACKGROUND:The provision of informed consent is a prerequisite for inclusion of a patient in a clinical research project. In some countries, the legislation on clinical research authorizes a third person to provide informed consent if the patient is unable to do so directly (i.e. surrogate consent). This is the case during acute stroke, when the symptoms may prevent the patient from providing informed consent and thus require a third party to be approached. Identification of factors associated with the medical team's decision to resort to surrogate consent may (i) help the care team during the inclusion process and (ii) enable the patient's family circle to be better informed (and thus feel less guilty) about providing surrogate consent.METHODS:Patients included in the BIOSTROKE cohort (initially dedicated to the analysis of factors influencing stroke severity) were divided into two groups: those having provided informed consent directly and those for whom a third party (such as a family member) had provided surrogate consent. We compared the groups in terms of the initial clinical characteristics (age, gender, type of stroke, severity on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), pre-stroke cognitive status according to the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, and the stroke's aetiology) and the functional and cognitive impairments (according to the NIHSS, the modified Rankin score (mRS) and the Mini Mental State Examination) on post-stroke days 8 and 90.RESULTS:Three hundred and ninety five patients were included (mean ± SD age: 67 ± 15 years; 53% males). Surrogate consent had been obtained in 228 cases, and 167 patients had provided consent themselves. The patients included with surrogate consent were likely to be older and more aphasic, with a pre-existing cognitive disorder and more severe stroke (relative to the patients having provided consent). In terms of recovery, the patients included with surrogate consent had a worse functional prognosis ...
Abstract: We have provided an overview on the profound impact of COVID-19 upon older people with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias and the challenges encountered in our management for dementia in different health care settings, including hospital, out-patient, care homes, and the community during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have also proposed a conceptual framework and practical suggestions for health care providers in tackling these challenges, which can also apply to the care of older people in general, with or without other neurological diseases, such as stroke or parkinsonism. We believe this review will provide strategic directions and set standards for health care leaders in dementia, including governmental bodies around the world in coordinating emergency response plans for protecting and caring for older people with dementia amid COIVD-19 outbreak, which is likely to continue at varying severity at different regions around the world in the medium term.
We have provided an overview on the profound impact of COVID‐19 upon older people with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias and the challenges encountered in our management of dementia in different health‐care settings, including hospital, out‐patient, care homes, and the community during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We have also proposed a conceptual framework and practical suggestions for health‐care providers in tackling these challenges, which can also apply to the care of older people in general, with or without other neurological diseases, such as stroke or parkinsonism. We believe this review will provide strategic directions and set standards for health‐care leaders in dementia, including governmental bodies around the world in coordinating emergency response plans for protecting and caring for older people with dementia amid the COIVD‐19 outbreak, which is likely to continue at varying severity in different regions around the world in the medium term.
In: Mok , V C T , Pendlebury , S , Wong , A , Alladi , S , Au , L , Bath , P M , Biessels , G J , Chen , C , Cordonnier , C , Dichgans , M , Dominguez , J , Gorelick , P B , Kim , S Y , Kwok , T , Greenberg , S M , Jia , J , Kalaria , R , Kivipelto , M , Naegandran , K , Lam , L C W , Lam , B Y K , Lee , A T C , Markus , H S , O'Brien , J , Pai , M C , Pantoni , L , Sachdev , P , Skoog , I , Smith , E E , Srikanth , V , Suh , G H , Wardlaw , J , Ko , H , Black , S E & Scheltens , P 2020 , ' Tackling challenges in care of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias amid the COVID-19 pandemic, now and in the future ' , Alzheimer's and Dementia , vol. 16 , no. 11 , pp. 1571-1581 . https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12143
We have provided an overview on the profound impact of COVID-19 upon older people with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias and the challenges encountered in our management of dementia in different health-care settings, including hospital, out-patient, care homes, and the community during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have also proposed a conceptual framework and practical suggestions for health-care providers in tackling these challenges, which can also apply to the care of older people in general, with or without other neurological diseases, such as stroke or parkinsonism. We believe this review will provide strategic directions and set standards for health-care leaders in dementia, including governmental bodies around the world in coordinating emergency response plans for protecting and caring for older people with dementia amid the COIVD-19 outbreak, which is likely to continue at varying severity in different regions around the world in the medium term.