Key result
ABCD score ≥5 identifies 100% of 7-day post-TIA strokes in observational cohort.
Why the study?
Identification of patients with TIA at high short-term risk of stroke using the ABCD Score and its dichotomisation needed evaluation in emergency department settings.
Does dichotomising the ABCD Score identify high-risk patients for subsequent stroke at 7 and 90 days among those presenting with TIA to the emergency department?
Population
98 consecutive patients with probable or definite TIA presenting to a metropolitan hospital emergency department
Comparison
ABCD Score ≥ 5 (high risk) vs ABCD Score < 5 (low risk)
Design
Retrospective audit
Follow-up
90 days
Authors
Loading...
Supports dichotomized ABCD score for short-term stroke risk after TIA in ED; leaves open prospective validation before routine adoption.
Observational (n=98)
No
Does dichotomising the ABCD Score identify high-risk patients for subsequent stroke at 7 and 90 days among those presenting with TIA to the emergency department?
Effect estimate: Sensitivity 100% (95% CI 40% to 100%)
Dichotomising the ABCD Score at ≥ 5 provides a highly sensitive, though moderately specific, method to identify TIA patients at high short-term risk of stroke in the emergency department.
Bray et al. (2007) conducted an observational in Transient ischaemic attack (TIA) (n=98). ABCD Score ≥ 5 vs. ABCD Score < 5 was evaluated on Stroke within 7 days (Sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 40% to 100%). Dichotomising the ABCD Score to ≥5 in patients with TIA identified all strokes within 7 days (sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 40-100%) and 6 of 7 strokes within 90 days.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: