Close
Help
Need Help?



Identification of Stroke Mimics in the Emergency Department Setting

Submit a Paper



Publication Date: 31 Mar 2009

Journal: Journal of Central Nervous System Disease

Citation: Journal of Brain Disease 2009:1 19-22

W. Oliver Tobin1,4, Joseph G. Hentz2, Bentley J. Bobrow3 and Bart M. Demaerschalk4

1Department of Neurology, Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin, incorporating the National Children’s Hospital, Trinity College Dublin, Republic of Ireland. 2Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic Arizona, U.S.A. 3Department of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic Arizona, U.S.A. 4Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, U.S.A.

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Previous studies have shown a stroke mimic rate of 9%–31%. We aimed to establish the proportion of stroke mimics amongst suspected acute strokes, to clarify the aetiology of stroke mimic and to develop a prediction model to identify stroke mimics.

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort observational study. Consecutive “stroke alert” patients were identified over nine months in a primary stroke centre. 31 variables were collected. Final diagnosis was defined as “stroke” or “stroke mimic”. Multivariable regression analysis was used to define clinical predictors of stroke mimic.

Results: 206 patients were reviewed. 22% were classified as stroke mimics. Multivariable scoring did not help in identification of stroke mimics. 99.5% of patients had a neurological diagnosis at final diagnosis.

Discussion: 22% of patients with suspected acute stroke had a stroke mimic. The aetiology of stroke mimics was varied, with seizure, encephalopathy, syncope and migraine being commonest. Multivariable scoring for identification of stroke mimics is not feasible. 99.5% of patients had a neurological diagnosis. This strengthens the case for the involvement of stroke neurologists/stroke physicians in acute stroke care.


Downloads

PDF  (192.34 KB PDF FORMAT)

RIS citation   (ENDNOTE, REFERENCE MANAGER, PROCITE, REFWORKS)

BibTex citation   (BIBDESK, LATEX)


Sharing

Our Service Promise

  • Prompt Processing (3 Weeks to Editorial Decision)
  • Fair, Independent Peer Review
  • High Visibility & Extensive Indexing
What Your Colleagues Say About Journal of Central Nervous System Disease
This is my first experience working with the journal and it has been the easiest publication process that I can imagine. The links sent make login simple. The revisions are made so quickly. The decisions are made rapidly. We will definitely be working with this journal again.
Dr Chris Bushe (Senior Clinical Research Physician, Lilly, Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK)
More Testimonials

Quick Links

Follow Us We make it easy to find new research papers.
Email AlertsRSS Feeds
FacebookGoogle+Twitter
PinterestTumblrYouTube

SUBJECT HUBS
Author Survey Results
author_survey_results
All authors are surveyed after their articles are published. Authors are asked to rate their experience in a variety of areas, and their responses help us to monitor our performance. Presented here are their responses in some key areas. No 'poor' or 'very poor' responses were received; these are represented in the 'other' category.
See Our Results