Management of acute stroke. Specific nursing care and treatments in the stroke unit

OBJECTIVE

This study provides a series of updated, evidence-based recommendations for the management of acute stroke. We aim to lay a foundation for the development of individual centres' internal protocols, serving as a reference for nursing care.

METHODS

We review the available evidence on acute stroke care. The most recent national and international guidelines were consulted. Levels of evidence and degrees of recommendation are based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification.

RESULTS

The study describes prehospital acute stroke care, the operation of the code stroke protocol, care provided by the stroke team upon the patient's arrival at hospital, reperfusion treatments and their limitations, admission to the stroke unit, nursing care in the stroke unit, and discharge from hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines provide general, evidence-based recommendations to guide professionals who care for patients with acute stroke. However, limited data are available on some aspects, showing the need for continued research on acute stroke management.

Management of acute stroke. Specific nursing care and treatments in the stroke unit

OBJECTIVE

This study provides a series of updated, evidence-based recommendations for the management of acute stroke. We aim to lay a foundation for the development of individual centres' internal protocols, serving as a reference for nursing care.

METHODS

We review the available evidence on acute stroke care. The most recent national and international guidelines were consulted. Levels of evidence and degrees of recommendation are based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification.

RESULTS

The study describes prehospital acute stroke care, the operation of the code stroke protocol, care provided by the stroke team upon the patient's arrival at hospital, reperfusion treatments and their limitations, admission to the stroke unit, nursing care in the stroke unit, and discharge from hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines provide general, evidence-based recommendations to guide professionals who care for patients with acute stroke. However, limited data are available on some aspects, showing the need for continued research on acute stroke management.

THU0196 TOFACITINIB IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS AND INDICATIVE OF DEPRESSION AND/OR ANXIETY: A POST HOC ANALYSIS OF PHASE 3 AND PHASE 3B/4 CLINICAL TRIALS

Background:

Depression/anxiety are common in RA pts. SF-36 MCS ≤38 can identify probable major depressive disorder and/or probable generalised anxiety disorder (pMDD/pGAD) in RA pts. Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of RA.

Objectives:

To assess pMDD/pGAD prevalence in the tofacitinib RA program and efficacy by baseline (BL) pMDD/pGAD status.

Methods:

Data from pts receiving tofacitinib, ADA, or PBO were pooled from 5 Phase (P)3 and 1 P3b/4 trials. Demographics/BL characteristics were reported by BL pMDD/pGAD (SF-36 MCS ≤38, presence; >38, absence). Month (M)3/6/9/12 SF-36 MCS change from BL (Δ) was estimated, and % with pMDD/pGAD reported. M3/6/12 efficacy outcomes compared tofacitinib-treated pts by BL pMDD/pGAD.

Results:

BL pMDD/pGAD was seen in 44.5% (tofacitinib 5 mg BID), 39.8% (tofacitinib 10 mg BID), 45.4% (ADA 40 mg Q2W) and 39.1% (PBO) of pts. pMDD/pGAD pts had higher BL CRP and worse disability, fatigue, pain and sleep vs pts without. SF-36 MCS increases were greater for tofacitinib vs PBO/ADA (Fig 1a). The % of pts with BL pMDD/pGAD who continued to have pMDD/pGAD reduced over time, and was generally lower for tofacitinib vs PBO/ADA (Fig 1b). Regardless of BL pMDD/pGAD, efficacy was generally similar for tofacitinib 5 mg BID (Table) and 10 mg BID.

Conclusion:

~40% of RA pts had BL pMDD/pGAD. SF-36 MCS improvements were greater for tofacitinib vs PBO/ADA. With tofacitinib, % of pts with SF-36 MCS ≤38 reduced by ~60% at M12. Tofacitinib efficacy was similar in pts with/without BL pMDD/pGAD. Limitations include using SF-36 MCS to identify probable rather than confirmed MDD or GAD. Future research using gold standard psychiatric interviews to validate use of SF-36 MCS ≤38 is needed.

Table.

M3/6/12 efficacy with tofacitinib 5 mg BID, by BL pMDD/pGADa

SF-36 MCS ≤38SF-36 MCS >38OR (95% CI)P valueACR20 (%)b,cM355.157.90.89 (0.74, 1.08)0.2330M661.762.80.96 (0.79, 1.16)0.6511M1258.458.60.99 (0.80, 1.22)0.9279ACR50 (%)b,cM325.929.20.85 (0.70, 1.03)0.1022M636.038.00.92 (0.76, 1.11)0.3724M1233.834.30.98 (0.80, 1.20)0.8366ACR70 (%)b,cM310.111.00.91 (0.69, 1.18)0.4704M616.516.51.00 (0.79, 1.26)0.9901M1218.317.51.06 (0.83, 1.34)0.6560DAS28-4(ESR)<2.6 (%)b,cM35.47.40.72 (0.49, 1.05)0.0872M65.98.50.68 (0.49, 0.94)0.0199*M128.011.90.64 (0.47, 0.89)0.0073**ΔHAQ-DI, LS meanc,dSF-36 MCS ≤38SF-36 MCS >38Difference (95% CI)P valueM3-0.41-0.430.01 (-0.04, 0.06)0.6008M6-0.49-0.48-0.01 (-0.06, 0.04)0.6617M12-0.52-0.52-0.01 (-0.06, 0.05)0.8475

*p<0.05; **p<0.01 Data pooled from 5 P3 and 1 P3b/4 tofacitinib trialsaBL pMDD/pGAD = SF-36 MCS ≤38;bLogistic regression fit;cFor PBO pts advancing to tofacitinib post-M3, only PBO data were included;dMixed-effects linear model fit

Δ, change from baseline; ACR, American College of Rheumatology; BID, twice daily; BL, baseline; CI, confidence interval; DAS28-4(ESR), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; HAQ-DI, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index; LS, least squares; M, month; MCS, Mental Component Summary score; OR, odds ratio; P, Phase; pGAD, probable generalised anxiety disorder; PBO, placebo; pMDD, probable major depressive disorder; pt, patient; RA, rheumatoid arthritis; SF-36, Short Form-36 health survey

Acknowledgments:

Study sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Medical writing support was provided by Sarah Piggott of CMC Connect and funded by Pfizer Inc.

Disclosure of Interests:

Gustavo Citera Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis and Pfizer Inc, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Gema, Genzyme, Novartis and Pfizer Inc, Rakesh Jain Grant/research support from: Allergan, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Pfizer Inc, Shire and Takeda, Consultant of: Acadia, Alfasigma, Allergan, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Evidera, Impel, Janssen, Lundbeck, Merck, Neos Therapeutics, Neurocrine Biosciences, Osmotica, Otsuka, Pamlab, Pfizer Inc, Shire, Sunovion, Supernus, Takeda and Teva, Speakers bureau: Alkermes, Allergan, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Lundbeck, Merck, Neos Therapeutics, Neurocrine, Otsuka, Pamlab, Pfizer Inc, Shire, Sunovion, Takeda, Teva and Tris Pharmaceuticals, Fedra Irazoque-Palazuelos Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Pfizer Inc, Roche and UCB, Renato Guzman: None declared, Hugo Madariaga: None declared, David C Gruben Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Lisy Wang Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Lori Stockert Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Ming-Ann Hsu Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Karina Santana Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Abbas Ebrahim Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc, Dario Ponce de Leon Shareholder of: Pfizer Inc, Employee of: Pfizer Inc