Cochrane · systematic review · CD000197

Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke: network meta‐analysis

Langhorne, P, Ramachandra, S · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library

StrokeAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
28
current version
GRADE rated
22
No studies
6
Included studies
NR
No studies 6 · 21.4%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 4 · 14.3%Low 10 · 35.7%Moderate 8 · 28.6%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care versus alternative service

Population: adults with acute stroke
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Poor outcome by the end of scheduled
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care vs alternative service
OR 0.77 [0.69, 0.87]26 studies · 5336 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death by the end of scheduled
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care vs alternative service
OR 0.76 [0.66, 0.88]29 studies · 5902 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or institutional care by the end of scheduled
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care vs alternative service
OR 0.76 [0.67, 0.85]25 studies · 4887 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or dependency by the end of scheduled
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care vs alternative service
OR 0.75 [0.66, 0.85]24 studies · 4854 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Subjective health status score Participant quality of life (Nottingham Health Profile; Quality of Life Scale)
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care vs alternative service
no estimate extracted3 studies · 843 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias
Patient satisfaction or preference
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care vs alternative service
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Length of stay (days) in a hospital or institution (Analysis 1.5)
Organised inpatient (stroke unit) care vs alternative service
SMD 0.1619 studies · 4162 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias

Stroke ward versus general medical ward

Population: adults with acute stroke
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Poor outcome by the end of scheduled
Stroke ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.78 [0.68, 0.91]14 studies · 3321 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death by the end of scheduled
Stroke ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.75 [0.63, 0.9]15 studies · 3523 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or institutional care by the end of scheduled
Stroke ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.74 [0.63, 0.87]13 studies · 2924 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or dependency by the end of scheduled
Stroke ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.75 [0.64, 0.88]12 studies · 2839 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Subjective health status score Participant quality of life (Nottingham Health Profile; Quality of Life Scale)
Stroke ward vs general medical ward
no estimate extracted2 studies · 535 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias
Patient satisfaction or preference
Stroke ward vs general medical ward
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Length of stay (days) in a hospital or institution (Analysis 2.5)
Stroke ward vs general medical ward
SMD 0.1310 studies · 2547 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias

Mobile stroke team versus general medical ward

Population: adults with acute stroke
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Poor outcome by the end of scheduled
Mobile stroke team vs general medical ward
OR 0.8 [0.52, 1.22]2 studies · 438 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death by the end of scheduled
Mobile stroke team vs general medical ward
OR 1.08 [0.71, 1.65]2 studies · 438 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or institutional care by the end of scheduled
Mobile stroke team vs general medical ward
OR 1.27 [0.84, 1.93]2 studies · 438 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or dependency by the end of scheduled
Mobile stroke team vs general medical ward
OR 0.8 [0.52, 1.22]2 studies · 438 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Subjective health status score Participant quality of life (EuroQol)
Mobile stroke team vs general medical ward
no estimate extracted1 study · 308 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias
Patient satisfaction or preference
Mobile stroke team vs general medical ward
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Length of stay (days) in a hospital or institution (Analysis 3.5)
Mobile stroke team vs general medical ward
no estimate extractedNRNo studies

Mixed rehabilitation ward versus general medical ward

Population: adults with acute stroke
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Poor outcome by the end of scheduled
Mixed rehabilitation ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.65 [0.47, 0.9]6 studies · 630 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death by the end of scheduled
Mixed rehabilitation ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.91 [0.58, 1.42]6 studies · 630 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or institutional care by the end of scheduled
Mixed rehabilitation ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.71 [0.51, 0.99]5 studies · 578 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Death or dependency by the end of scheduled
Mixed rehabilitation ward vs general medical ward
OR 0.65 [0.47, 0.9]6 studies · 630 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Subjective health Status score
Mixed rehabilitation ward vs general medical ward
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Patient satisfaction or preference
Mixed rehabilitation ward vs general medical ward
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Length of stay (days) in a hospital or institution (Analysis 4.5)
Mixed rehabilitation ward vs general medical ward
MD 0.083 studies · 387 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias