From the Riksstroke, Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Sweden.
Stroke. 2015 Mar;46(3):806-12. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.007212. Epub 2015 Feb 5.
In many countries, including Sweden, initiatives have been taken to reduce between-hospital differences in the quality of stroke services. We have explored to what extent hospital type (university, specialized nonuniversity, or community hospital) influences hospital performance.
Riksstroke collects clinical data during hospital stay (national coverage 94%). Follow-up data at 3 months were collected using administrative registers and a questionnaire completed by surviving patients (response rate 88%). Structural data were collected from a questionnaire completed by hospital staff (response rate 100%). Multivariate analyses with adjustment for clustering were used to test differences between types of hospitals.
The proportion of patients admitted directly to a stroke unit was highest in community hospitals and lowest in university hospitals. Magnetic resonance, carotid imaging, and thrombectomy were more frequently performed in university hospitals, and the door-to-needle time for thrombolysis was shorter. Secondary prevention with antihypertensive drugs was used less often, and outpatient follow-up was less frequent in university hospitals. Fewer patients in community hospitals were dissatisfied with their rehabilitation. After adjusting for possible confounders, poor outcome (dead or activities of daily living dependency 3 months after stroke) was not significantly different between the 3 types of hospital.
In a setting with national stroke guidelines, stroke units in all hospitals, and measurement of hospital performance and benchmarking, outcome (after case-mix adjustment) is similar in university, specialized nonuniversity, and community hospitals. There seems to be fewer barriers to organizing well-functioning stroke services in community hospitals compared with university hospitals.
在许多国家,包括瑞典,都采取了措施来减少医院间在卒中服务质量方面的差异。我们探讨了医院类型(大学医院、专科非大学医院或社区医院)对医院绩效的影响程度。
Riksstroke 在住院期间收集临床数据(全国覆盖率 94%)。通过行政登记和由幸存患者完成的问卷收集 3 个月的随访数据(应答率为 88%)。通过医院工作人员填写问卷收集结构数据(应答率为 100%)。使用多变量分析,并对聚类进行调整,以检验不同类型医院之间的差异。
直接收治于卒中单元的患者比例在社区医院最高,在大学医院最低。磁共振成像、颈动脉成像和取栓术在大学医院更常进行,溶栓的门到针时间更短。大学医院使用降压药物进行二级预防的比例较低,门诊随访也较少。较少的患者对康复不满意。在调整可能的混杂因素后,3 种类型医院的 3 个月卒中后不良结局(死亡或日常生活活动依赖)没有显著差异。
在有国家卒中指南、所有医院均设立卒中单元以及医院绩效测量和基准测试的环境下,大学医院、专科非大学医院和社区医院的结局(经病例组合调整后)相似。与大学医院相比,在社区医院组织运作良好的卒中服务似乎障碍更少。