Breast Cancer Month a time of heartache, hope for PhD student
Vo relishes "incredible" experience at RWJF Summer Institute
Dionne-Odom films video for American Society of Clinical Oncology
Dr. Ann Gakumo attends 2016 Butler-Williams Scholars Program
UAB SON awarded $5.15M in Education, Clinical, & Training Grants
Faculty, PhD student represent School at Thailand health care conference
Bowen receives grant for health policy research
 2012 Apr-Jun;23(2):158-72; quiz 173-4.

Controversies in acute stroke treatment.

Source

Carle Hospital Stroke Team, Urbana, Illinois, USA.

Abstract

The evidence base supporting the management of patients with acute stroke is evolving at a rapid rate, as new methods that aim to reduce disability and death from stroke are explored. Intravenous tissue plasminogen activator remains the only treatment shown in numerous studies to reduce disability 3 months after stroke with no increase in the risk of death and a relatively minor rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage complications. Despite these findings, health care providers have been slow to adopt this evidence-based treatment, which results in many patients experiencing disability caused by stroke. Numerous controversies exist related to the management of patients with acute stroke, including the use of tissue plasminogen activator, positioning and early mobility, blood pressure lowering in acute intracerebral hemorrhage, and even the use of innovative advanced practice nurse-led stroke treatment teams, with varying amounts of evidence available to provide direction. This article explores controversies associated with both approved and evolving treatments for ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke and makes recommendations for practice on the basis of the body of existing evidence, with an aim to improve the delivery of acute stroke treatment.

Link to PubMed