Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Advances in the Stroke System of Care

  • Cerebrovascular Disease and Stroke (N Rost, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

The stroke system of care is undergoing significant evolution. There are promising data to suggest that with new technologies and approaches, primary prevention and community education will become easier and more accessible, and will allow people to have greater participation in their own healthcare. The evidence-based primary and comprehensive stroke center concepts have been translated into robust, rapidly growing certification programs. The continued dissemination of improved EMS routing protocols allows for better allocation of patients to stroke centers, even as we confront the challenge of further improving prehospital recognition of stroke. National quality improvement initiatives help to ensure that patients directed to stroke centers receive evidence-based treatment, which has resulted in improved stroke care and better clinical outcomes. In remote areas, the use of technologies such as telemedicine to extend the reach of vascular neurologists has resulted in increased administration of time-sensitive thrombolytic therapy and better patient outcomes, although greater efficiency within the stroke system will likely be needed to realize the potential benefits of endovascular therapy. System-level paradigms for aggressive medical management promise to lessen the burden of recurrent stroke. Finally, further integration of rehabilitation programs into stroke centers and coordination with community-based rehabilitation services is needed to ensure the best possible outcome for stroke patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Go AS et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics–2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2014;129(3):e28–292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Adeoye O et al. Recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator use for ischemic stroke in the United States: a doubling of treatment rates over the course of 5 years. Stroke. 2011;42(7):1952–5.

  3. Fonarow GC et al. Timeliness of tissue-type plasminogen activator therapy in acute ischemic stroke: patient characteristics, hospital factors, and outcomes associated with door-to-needle times within 60 minutes. Circulation. 2011;123(7):750–8.

  4. Kelly-Hayes M et al. The influence of gender and age on disability following ischemic stroke: the Framingham study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2003;12(3):119–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hankey GJ et al. Long-term disability after first-ever stroke and related prognostic factors in the Perth Community Stroke Study, 1989-1990. Stroke. 2002;33(4):1034–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Luengo-Fernandez R et al. Population-based study of disability and institutionalization after transient ischemic attack and stroke: 10-year results of the Oxford Vascular Study. Stroke. 2013;44(10):2854–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schwamm LH et al. Recommendations for the establishment of stroke systems of care: recommendations from the American Stroke Association's Task Force on the Development of Stroke Systems. Stroke. 2005;36(3):690–703.

  8. Lackland DT et al. Factors influencing the decline in stroke mortality: a statement from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2014;45(1):315–53. This article examines the significant reduction in stroke mortality and factors related to the decline, primarily interventions related to control of hypertension.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Go AS et al. An effective approach to high blood pressure control: a science advisory from the American Heart Association, the American College of Cardiology, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Hypertension. 2014;63(4):878–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jaffe MG et al. Improved blood pressure control associated with a large-scale hypertension program. JAMA. 2013;310(7):699–705. Improved stroke risk factor control can successfully be achieved with large-scale programs. Multifaceted, system level approaches such as the one utilitzed in this study may be effective over extended periods of time and may be implemented in other systems of care.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McManus RJ et al. Effect of Self-monitoring and Medication Self-titration on Systolic Blood Pressure in Hypertensive Patients at High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: The TASMIN-SR Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2014;312(8):799–808. Highlights the success of a low-tech self-monitoring program for hypertension.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hallberg I et al. Phases in development of an interactive mobile phone-based system to support self-management of hypertension. Integr Blood Press Control. 2014;7:19–28.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lecouturier J et al. Systematic review of mass media interventions designed to improve public recognition of stroke symptoms, emergency response and early treatment. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:784.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rasura M et al. Effectiveness of public stroke educational interventions: a review. Eur J Neurol. 2014;21(1):11–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Teuschl Y, Brainin M. Stroke education: discrepancies among factors influencing prehospital delay and stroke knowledge. Int J Stroke. 2010;5(3):187–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Boden-Albala B, Quarles LW. Education strategies for stroke prevention. Stroke. 2013;44(6 Suppl 1):S48–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morgenstern LB et al. A randomized, controlled trial to teach middle school children to recognize stroke and call 911: the kids identifying and defeating stroke project. Stroke. 2007;38(11):2972–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Williams O et al. Child-Mediated Stroke Communication: findings from Hip Hop Stroke. Stroke. 2012;43(1):163–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mosley I et al. The impact of ambulance practice on acute stroke care. Stroke. 2007;38(10):2765–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Abdullah AR et al. Advance hospital notification by EMS in acute stroke is associated with shorter door-to-computed tomography time and increased likelihood of administration of tissue-plasminogen activator. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008;12(4):426–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Casolla B et al. Intra-hospital delays in stroke patients treated with rt-PA: impact of preadmission notification. J Neurol. 2013;260(2):635–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Song S, Saver J. Growth of regional acute stroke systems of care in the United States in the first decade of the 21st century. Stroke. 2012;43(7):1975–8. Graphically shows the dramatic growth of EMS routing protocols from 2000 to 2010.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gropen TI et al. Quality improvement in acute stroke: the New York State Stroke Center Designation Project. Neurology. 2006;67(1):88–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Alberts MJ et al. Recommendations for the establishment of primary stroke centers. Brain Attack Coalition. JAMA. 2000;283(23):3102–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kothari R et al. Early stroke recognition: developing an out-of-hospital NIH Stroke Scale. Acad Emerg Med. 1997;4(10):986–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kothari RU et al. Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale: reproducibility and validity. Ann Emerg Med. 1999;33(4):373–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ramanujam P et al. Accuracy of stroke recognition by emergency medical dispatchers and paramedics–San Diego experience. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2008;12(3):307–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gropen TI et al. Factors related to the sensitivity of emergency medical service impression of stroke. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2014;18(3):387–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. LaMonte MP et al. TeleBAT: mobile telemedicine for the Brain Attack Team. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2000;9(3):128–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. LaMonte MP et al. Shortening time to stroke treatment using ambulance telemedicine: TeleBAT. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004;13(4):148–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Liman TG et al. Telestroke ambulances in prehospital stroke management: concept and pilot feasibility study. Stroke. 2012;43(8):2086–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Van Hooff RJ et al. Prehospital unassisted assessment of stroke severity using telemedicine: a feasibility study. Stroke. 2013;44(10):2907–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Alberts MJ et al. Recommendations for comprehensive stroke centers: a consensus statement from the Brain Attack Coalition. Stroke. 2005;36(7):1597–616.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. The Joint Commission: Stroke Certification Programs. [cited 2014 8-28-14]; Available from: http://www.qualitycheck.org/StrokeCertificationList.aspx.

  35. Healthcare Facilities Accreditation Program (HFAP) Cerification Programs. 8-30-14]; Available from: http://www.hfap.org/CertificationPrograms/certificationProcess.aspx.

  36. Det Norske Veritas (DNV) Stroke Center Certification Programs. 8-30-14]; Available from: http://dnvglhealthcare.com/certifications/stroke-certifications.

  37. Leira EC et al. The growing shortage of vascular neurologists in the era of health reform: planning is brain! Stroke. 2013;44(3):822–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Silva GS et al. The status of telestroke in the United States: a survey of currently active stroke telemedicine programs. Stroke. 2012;43(8):2078–85. Shows how widespread telestroke has become, how telestroke has impacted small/rural hospitals, and examines barriers to growth of telestroke systems.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Schwamm LH et al. A review of the evidence for the use of telemedicine within stroke systems of care: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2009;40(7):2616–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Capampangan DJ et al. Telemedicine versus telephone for remote emergency stroke consultations: a critically appraised topic. Neurologist. 2009;15(3):163–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bladin CF, Cadilhac DA. Effect of telestroke on emergent stroke care and stroke outcomes. Stroke. 2014;45(6):1876–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sairanen T et al. Two years of Finnish Telestroke: thrombolysis at spokes equal to that at the hub. Neurology. 2011;76(13):1145–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Zaidi SF et al. Telestroke-guided intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator treatment achieves a similar clinical outcome as thrombolysis at a comprehensive stroke center. Stroke. 2011;42(11):3291–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Saver JL et al. Solitaire flow restoration device versus the Merci Retriever in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (SWIFT): a randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2012;380(9849):1241–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Nogueira RG et al. Trevo versus Merci retrievers for thrombectomy revascularisation of large vessel occlusions in acute ischaemic stroke (TREVO 2): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2012;380(9849):1231–40.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ciccone A et al. Endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(10):904–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Broderick JP et al. Endovascular therapy after intravenous t-PA versus t-PA alone for stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(10):893–903.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kidwell CS et al. A trial of imaging selection and endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(10):914–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Broderick JP, Schroth G. What the SWIFT and TREVO II trials tell us about the role of endovascular therapy for acute stroke. Stroke. 2013;44(6):1761–4.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ciccone A, del Zoppo GJ. Evolving role of endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2014;14(1):416.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Qureshi AI et al. Endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke patients: implications and interpretation of IMS III, MR RESCUE, and SYNTHESIS EXPANSION trials: A report from the Working Group of International Congress of Interventional Neurology. J Vasc Interv Neurol. 2014;7(1):56–75.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Goyal M et al. Evaluation of interval times from onset to reperfusion in patients undergoing endovascular therapy in the Interventional Management of Stroke III trial. Circulation. 2014;130(3):265–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Khatri P et al. Good clinical outcome after ischemic stroke with successful revascularization is time-dependent. Neurology. 2009;73(13):1066–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Leifer D et al. Metrics for measuring quality of care in comprehensive stroke centers: detailed follow-up to Brain Attack Coalition comprehensive stroke center recommendations: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2011;42(3):849–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Stroke Unit Trialists, C. Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;9:CD000197.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Govan L et al. Does the prevention of complications explain the survival benefit of organized inpatient (stroke unit) care?: further analysis of a systematic review. Stroke. 2007;38(9):2536–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Audebert HJ et al. Long-term effects of specialized stroke care with telemedicine support in community hospitals on behalf of the Telemedical Project for Integrative Stroke Care (TEMPiS). Stroke. 2009;40(3):902–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Muller-Barna P et al. TeleStroke Units Serving as a Model of Care in Rural Areas: 10-Year Experience of the TeleMedical Project for Integrative Stroke Care. Stroke. 2014;45(9):2739–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Hardie K et al. Ten-year risk of first recurrent stroke and disability after first-ever stroke in the Perth Community Stroke Study. Stroke. 2004;35(3):731–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Osterberg L, Blaschke T. Adherence to medication. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(5):487–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Bushnell CD et al. Secondary preventive medication persistence and adherence 1 year after stroke. Neurology. 2011;77(12):1182–90.

  62. Chimowitz MI et al. Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(13):1305–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Chimowitz MI et al. Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(11):993–1003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Derdeyn CP et al. Aggressive medical treatment with or without stenting in high-risk patients with intracranial artery stenosis (SAMMPRIS): the final results of a randomised trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9914):333–4. This 3-year trial highlights the powerful effect of aggressive medical management (multimodal and protocol driven, including antiplatelet therapy, intensive management of vascular risk factors, and a lifestyle-modification program) in a very high-risk population.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. DeJong G et al. Opening the black box of post-stroke rehabilitation: stroke rehabilitation patients, processes, and outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(12 Suppl 2):S1–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Horn SD et al. Stroke rehabilitation patients, practice, and outcomes: is earlier and more aggressive therapy better? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(12 Suppl 2):S101–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Joint Commission Comprehensive Stroke Center Certification. 9-7-14]; Available from: http://www.jointcommission.org/certification/advanced_certification_comprehensive_stroke_centers.aspx.

  68. Bagherpour R et al. A Comprehensive Neurorehabilitation Program Should be an Integral Part of a Comprehensive Stroke Center. Front Neurol. 2014;5:57.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Walker MF, Sunnerhagen KS, Fisher RJ. Evidence-based community stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 2013;44(1):293–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Hillier S, Inglis-Jassiem G. Rehabilitation for community-dwelling people with stroke: home or centre based? A systematic review. Int J Stroke. 2010;5(3):178–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Langhorne P, Holmqvist LW. Early Supported Discharge, Early supported discharge after stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39(2):103–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Fonarow GC et al. Improving door-to-needle times in acute ischemic stroke: the design and rationale for the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association's Target: Stroke initiative. Stroke. 2011;42(10):2983–9.

  73. Fonarow GC et al. Door-to-needle times for tissue plasminogen activator administration and clinical outcomes in acute ischemic stroke before and after a quality improvement initiative. JAMA. 2014;311(16):1632. This article highlights the success of the implementation of the national CQI project Target: Stoke that began in 2010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Xian Y et al. Strategies used by hospitals to improve speed of tissue-type plasminogen activator treatment in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2014;45(5):1387–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Fonarow GC et al. Comparison of performance achievement award recognition with primary stroke center certification for acute ischemic stroke care. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2(5):e000451.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Matthew Clark and Dr. Toby Gropen each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Toby Gropen MD.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Cerebrovascular Disease and Stroke

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clark, M.L., Gropen, T. Advances in the Stroke System of Care. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 17, 355 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-014-0355-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-014-0355-9

Keywords

Navigation