Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32324916›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020

Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke: network meta-analysis.

Peter Langhorne, Samantha Ramachandra, Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 187 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
187citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
23.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT05901909 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of the Education Program Based on the Precede-Proceed Model to the Caregivers of Stroke Home Care Patients on Care Giving Response, Perceived Social Support Level, and Patient Outcomes.

TypeinterventionalSponsorMustafa Kemal UniversityRan2023 to 2023Enrolled70ConditionsStrokeArmsEducational intervention based on the Precede-Proceed Model for individuals caring for stroke home care patients
NCT07627399 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of Implementing Best Care Practices in the Management of Patients With Acute Stroke in Conventional Hospitalization: A Cluster-Randomized, Open, Stepped-Wedge Controlled Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of MalagaRan2026 to 2028Enrolled700ConditionsStroke, Acute Stroke, Ischemic Stroke, Hemorrhagic StrokeArmsBEST CARE ICTUS_HC BUNDLE
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

187 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 346 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Surgery for spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Integrated care management for patients following acute stroke: a systematic review.QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Admission avoidance hospital at home.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Discharge planning from hospital.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pleiotropic Effects of Exosomes as a Therapy for Stroke Recovery.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Variability in Stroke Journeys: A Qualitative Study of Experiences of Persons With Stroke.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter LanghorneAcademic Section of Geriatric Medicine, ICAMS, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Samantha RamachandraSabaragamuwa Provincial Director of Health Services Office, Kalutara, Sri Lanka.
Stroke Unit Trialists' CollaborationAcademic Section of Geriatric Medicine, ICAMS, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Sabaragamuwa University of Sri Lanka · LKUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office ETM/417
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOrganised inpatient (stroke unit) care is provided by multi-disciplinary teams that manage stroke patients. This can been provided in a ward dedicated to stroke patients (stroke ward), with a peripatetic stroke team (mobile stroke team), or within a generic disability service (mixed rehabilitation ward). Team members aim to provide co-ordinated multi-disciplinary care using standard approaches to manage common post-stroke problems.

objectives• To assess the effects of organised inpatient (stroke unit) care compared with an alternative service. • To use a network meta-analysis (NMA) approach to assess different types of organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for people admitted to hospital after a stroke (the standard comparator was care in a general ward). Originally, we conducted this systematic review to clarify: • The characteristic features of organised inpatient (stroke unit) care? • Whether organised inpatient (stroke unit) care provide better patient outcomes than alternative forms of care? • If benefits are apparent across a range of patient groups and across different approaches to delivering organised stroke unit care? Within the current version, we wished to establish whether previous conclusions were altered by the inclusion of new outcome data from recent trials and further analysis via NMA. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (2 April 2019); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 4), in the Cochrane Library (searched 2 April 2019); MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 1 April 2019); Embase Ovid (1974 to 1 April 2019); and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to 2 April 2019). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched seven trial registries (2 April 2019). We also performed citation tracking of included studies, checked reference lists of relevant articles, and contacted trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled clinical trials comparing organised inpatient stroke unit care with an alternative service (typically contemporary conventional care), including comparing different types of organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for people with stroke who are admitted to hospital. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed eligibility and trial quality. We checked descriptive details and trial data with co-ordinators of the original trials, assessed risk of bias, and applied GRADE. The primary outcome was poor outcome (death or dependency (Rankin score 3 to 5) or requiring institutional care) at the end of scheduled follow-up. Secondary outcomes included death, institutional care, dependency, subjective health status, satisfaction, and length of stay. We used direct (pairwise) comparisons to compare organised inpatient (stroke unit) care with an alternative service. We used an NMA to confirm the relative effects of different approaches. MAIN

resultsWe included 29 trials (5902 participants) that compared organised inpatient (stroke unit) care with an alternative service: 20 trials (4127 participants) compared organised (stroke unit) care with a general ward, six trials (982 participants) compared different forms of organised (stroke unit) care, and three trials (793 participants) incorporated more than one comparison. Compared with the alternative service, organised inpatient (stroke unit) care was associated with improved outcomes at the end of scheduled follow-up (median one year): poor outcome (odds ratio (OR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.87; moderate-quality evidence), death (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.88; moderate-quality evidence), death or institutional care (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.85; moderate-quality evidence), and death or dependency (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.85; moderate-quality evidence). Evidence was of very low quality for subjective health status and was not available for patient satisfaction. Analysis of length of stay was complicated by variations in definition and measurement plus substantial statistical heterogeneity (I² = 85%). There was no indication that organised stroke unit care resulted in a longer hospital stay. Sensitivity analyses indicated that observed benefits remained when the analysis was restricted to securely randomised trials that used unequivocally blinded outcome assessment with a fixed period of follow-up. Outcomes appeared to be independent of patient age, sex, initial stroke severity, stroke type, and duration of follow-up. When calculated as the absolute risk difference for every 100 participants receiving stroke unit care, this equates to two extra survivors, six more living at home, and six more living independently. The analysis of different types of organised (stroke unit) care used both direct pairwise comparisons and NMA. Direct comparison of stroke ward versus general ward: 15 trials (3523 participants) compared care in a stroke ward with care in general wards. Stroke ward care showed a reduction in the odds of a poor outcome at the end of follow-up (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.91; moderate-quality evidence). Direct comparison of mobile stroke team versus general ward: two trials (438 participants) compared care from a mobile stroke team with care in general wards. Stroke team care may result in little difference in the odds of a poor outcome at the end of follow-up (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.22; low-quality evidence). Direct comparison of mixed rehabilitation ward versus general ward: six trials (630 participants) compared care in a mixed rehabilitation ward with care in general wards. Mixed rehabilitation ward care showed a reduction in the odds of a poor outcome at the end of follow-up (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.90; moderate-quality evidence). In a NMA using care in a general ward as the comparator, the odds of a poor outcome were as follows: stroke ward - OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.89, moderate-quality evidence; mobile stroke team - OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.34, low-quality evidence; mixed rehabilitation ward - OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95, low-quality evidence. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe found moderate-quality evidence that stroke patients who receive organised inpatient (stroke unit) care are more likely to be alive, independent, and living at home one year after the stroke. The apparent benefits were independent of patient age, sex, initial stroke severity, or stroke type, and were most obvious in units based in a discrete stroke ward. We observed no systematic increase in the length of inpatient stay, but these findings had considerable uncertainty.

Indexed as

HospitalizationHospital UnitsPatient Care TeamStrokeHumansLength of StayOutcome Assessment, Health CarePrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStroke RehabilitationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID32324916
PMCPMC7197653
OpenAlexW3019102144

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.