PubMed · 6909819
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R Jameson, M Hill. 1981-05-28. Maybury.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6909819/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Using previously published data, the purpose of this study was to identify and discriminate between three different forms of inpatient stroke care based on timing and duration of treatment and to compare the results of clinically important outcomes. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials, including a recent review of inpatient stroke unit/rehabilitation care, were identified and grouped into three models of care as follows: (a) acute stroke unit care (patients admitted within 36 h of stroke onset and remaining for up to 2 weeks; n = 5), (b) units combining acute and rehabilitative care (combined; n = 4), and (c) rehabilitation units where patients were transferred onto the service approximately 2 weeks following stroke (post-acute; n = 5). Pooled analyses for the outcomes of mortality, combined death and dependency and length of hospital stay were calculated for each model of care, compared to conventional care. RESULTS: All three models of care were associated with significant reductions in the odds of combined death and dependency; however, acute stroke units were not associated with significant reductions in mortality when this outcome was analyzed separately (OR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.61-1.03). Post-acute stroke units were associated with the greatest reduction in the odds of mortality (OR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.44-0.81). Significant reductions in length of hospital stay were associated with combined stroke units only (weighted mean difference -14 days; 95% CI: -27 to -2). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, specialized stroke services were associated with significant reductions in mortality, death and dependency and length of hospital stay although not every model of care was associated with equal benefit.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The study of pancreatic diseases requires specific knowledge and experience. There are many reasons for the need of a specific approach: pancreatic diseases are rare, their clinical presentation is often misleading, diagnostic investigations pose many challenges and pancreatic surgery is very complex. Due to these characteristics, it is difficult for a physician who only occasionally deals with a pancreatic disease to correctly manage it. For example, it is not sufficient to make a diagnosis of "pancreatic tumor", because we have to precisely define its extension and its relationship with the surrounding vessels, to recognize rare histological types different from adenocarcinoma, to have a "pancreatic" surgical experience to lessen the risk of serious surgical complications. On the other hand, several reports have shown that pancreatic resections have lower mortality rates and better long-term outcomes if carried out in Centers with a high caseload of patients. These considerations support the creation of Pancreas Units, not mere high-volume Departments specialized in pancreatic diseases, but multidisciplinary teams (composed of surgeons, oncologists, gastroenterologists, pathologists, radiologists, radiotherapists and different types of researchers) devoted to all aspects (etiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment) of pancreatic diseases. We think that the adoption of a Pancreas Unit model could represent the right answer to the recent changes observed in Medicine and could offer a better approach to patients with pancreatic diseases.