Key result
High-risk ABCD2 scores (≥4) ascertained by referring clinicians did not significantly predict subsequent stroke compared to low-risk scores (adjusted HR 1.2; 95% CI 0.69-2.08).
Why the study?
Does a high ABCD2 score (≥4) ascertained by referring clinicians predict subsequent stroke in patients referred to a TIA clinic?
Population
1067 patients referred to a TIA clinic in Gloucester, UK. 49.6% classified by clinic stroke physicians as…
Comparison
High risk ABCD2 score ascertained by referring… vs Low risk ABCD2 score ascertained by referring…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
median 34.9 (IQR 27.7-41.6) months
Authors
Loading...
High-risk ABCD2 scores by referrers were not associated with stroke; leaves open their utility for TIA clinic triage.
Cohort (n=1,067)
No
Does a high ABCD2 score (≥4) ascertained by referring clinicians predict subsequent stroke in patients referred to a TIA clinic?
Hazard Ratio: 1.2 (95% CI 0.69–2.08)
Absolute Event Rate: 7.04% vs 4.6%
p-value: p=0.21
ABCD2 scores recorded by referring clinicians do not reliably identify patients at high risk of subsequent stroke and should not be used for TIA clinic triage.
Dutta et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in Transient ischaemic attack (TIA) (n=1,067). High-risk ABCD2 score (≥4) ascertained by referring clinicians vs. Low-risk ABCD2 score (<4) was evaluated on Subsequent stroke (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.69-2.08, p=0.21). High-risk ABCD2 scores (≥4) ascertained by referring clinicians did not significantly predict subsequent stroke compared to low-risk scores (adjusted HR 1.2; 95% CI 0.69-2.08).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: