Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 4 June 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b2083
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;338:b2083
Cathie Sudlow, clinical senior lecturer, Charles Warlow, emeritus professor of medical neurology
1 Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU
Correspondence to: C Sudlow cathie.sudlow@ed.ac.uk
Cathie Sudlow and Charles Warlow question whether the current emphasis on hyperacute stroke care to improve access to thrombolysis may distract attention and resources from a truly comprehensive stroke service
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Stroke services in the UK are currently being overhauled in response to the UK governments 2007 national stroke strategy.1 The strategy was developed after the National Audit Office (NAO) report on stroke services laid out the features of a first rate service and how improvements in the service could reduce death, disability, and recurrent stroke along with costs.2 The strategy highlights markers of a quality service (box) that are entirely appropriate. However, possibly inaccurate estimates of clinical benefits and cost savings in the NAO report may have influenced subsequent plans for stroke services.3 4 These have a strong emphasis on hyperacute stroke care (the first 72 hours) and on greatly increasing the proportion of patients being given intravenous thrombolysis, but with the risk that the many other effective components of a comprehensive stroke service might not receive as much attention. The stroke strategy for London is a good example.5
|
Read all Rapid Responses