Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17943737›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007

Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke.

Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03335787 (The Long Term Effects Of Kinesio Taping On Balance In Patients With Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 162 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
162citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03335787 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2013, after this paper: background citation

The Long Term Effects Of Kinesio Taping On Balance In Patients With Stroke: A Single Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAbant Izzet Baysal UniversityRan2013 to 2018Enrolled61ConditionsStrokeArmsIntervention, Control
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

162 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke: network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation after primary brain tumour treatment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  6. Continuous versus intermittent physiological monitoring for acute stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  7. Defining and measuring patient-centred care: an example from a mixed-methods systematic review of the stroke literature.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2012
    Pooled it
  8. External counterpulsation for acute ischaemic stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Guideline
  13. Very early versus delayed mobilisation after stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  14. Guideline
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

102 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOrganised stroke unit care is provided by multidisciplinary teams that exclusively manage stroke patients in a dedicated ward (stroke, acute, rehabilitation, comprehensive), with a mobile stroke team or within a generic disability service (mixed rehabilitation ward).

objectivesTo assess the effect of stroke unit care compared with alternative forms of care for patients following a stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched April 2006), the reference lists of relevant articles, and contacted researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and prospective controlled clinical trials comparing organised inpatient stroke unit care with an alternative service. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors initially assessed eligibility and trial quality. Descriptive details and trial data were then checked with the co-ordinators of the original trials. MAIN

resultsThirty-one trials, involving 6936 participants, compared stroke unit care with an alternative service; more organised care was consistently associated with improved outcomes. Twenty-six trials (5592 participants) compared stroke unit care with general wards. Stroke unit care showed reductions in the odds of death recorded at final (median one year) follow up (odds ratio (OR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.98; P = 0.02), the odds of death or institutionalised care (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92; P = 0.0006) and death or dependency (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.92; P = 0.001). Sensitivity analyses indicated that the observed benefits remained when the analysis was restricted to trials that used formal randomisation procedures with blinded outcome assessment. Outcomes were independent of patient age, sex or stroke severity, but appeared to be better in stroke units based in a discrete ward. There was no indication that organised stroke unit care resulted in a longer hospital stay. AUTHORS'

conclusionsStroke patients who receive organised inpatient care in a stroke unit are more likely to be alive, independent, and living at home one year after the stroke. The benefits were most apparent in units based in a discrete ward. No systematic increase was observed in the length of inpatient stay.

Indexed as

Hospital UnitsPatient Care TeamHumansPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStrokeTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.