BMJ  2004;329:1404-1405 (11 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7479.1404-b

Letter

The PROGRESS trial three years later

All aspects of secondary prevention after stroke need to be improved

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—A strong evidence base exists for many aspects of stroke care particularly secondary prevention. Stroke units reduce death and disability regardless of severity, but only half of UK patients receive this care. The risk of stroke is greatest within the first few days after a transient ischaemic attack, yet waiting times for neurovascular clinics may be weeks or months even if a local service is available.

Hypertension is the most important risk factor for the primary prevention of stroke but before the perindopril protection against recurrent stroke study (PROGRESS) was published in 2001, uncertainty prevailed about the benefits of blood pressure lowering for secondary prevention.1 Since then the debate has changed to whether the substantial reduction in stroke risk seen in this trial (relative risk reduction 43%, 95% confidence interval 30 to 54) is due to specific effects of the combination of perinodopril and indapamide, indapamide alone, a . . . [Full text of this article]

Helen Rodgers, reader in stroke medicine

University of Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH Helen.rodgers@newcastle.ac.uk


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

The PROGRESS trial three years later: time for a balanced report of effectiveness
Richard Wennberg and Camilla Zimmermann
BMJ 2004 329: 968-970. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Mickan, S., Askew, D. (2006). What sort of evidence do we need in primary care?. BMJ 332: 619-620 [Full text]  
Access jobs at BMJ Careers
Whats new online at Student BMJ