Background Reducing prehospital delay plays an important role in increasing the thrombolysis rate in patients with stroke. Several studies have identified predictors for presentation ≤4.5 h, but few compared these predictors in urban and rural communities. We aimed to identify predictors of timely presentation to the hospital and identify possible differences between the urban and rural populations. Methods From January to June 2017, we conducted a prospective survey of patients with stroke admitted to an urban comprehensive stroke centre (CSC) and a rural primary care centre (PCC). Predictors were identified using binary logistical regression. Predictors and patient characteristics were then compared between the CSC and PCC. Results Overall, 459 patients were included in our study. We identified hesitation before seeking help, awareness of the existence of a time-window, type of admission and having talked about stroke symptoms with friends/relatives who had previously had a stroke as the strongest predictors for presentation to the emergency room ≤4.5 h. Patients admitted to the rural PCC were more hesitant to seek help and less likely to contact emergency services, even though patients had comparable knowledge pertaining to stroke care concepts. Conclusions Patients from rural areas were more likely to be hesitant to seek help and contacted the EMS less frequently, despite similar self-awareness of having a stroke. Educational campaigns should focus on addressing these disparities in rural populations. Affected patients should also be encouraged to talk about their symptoms and take part in educational campaigns.

No abstract

Objectives: To examine this association by comparing patient profiles in 2 closely affiliated hospitals and by examining their association with quality metrics. Methods:We performed a retrospective cohort study comparing a university level comprehensive stroke centers )CSC( with its teaching hospital and local Original Article stroke unit )LSU( using routinely collected quality assurance data over a 2 year period. Both hospitals were closely affiliated, shared important resources and medical staff rotated amongst both hospitals. We compared patient profiles as well as internationally recognized quality metrics and examined the association of profiles with quality metrics.Results: A total of 2,462 patients were treated in the CSC and 726 in the LSU. The LSU had a longer door-to-image and door-to-needle times. Rate of systemic thrombolysis was lower in the LSU. Patient profiles differed significantly and were associated with door-to-image and door-to-needle times as well as intravenous thrombolysis rates, even when adjusted for stroke service level. The diagnostic procedures for stroke work-up were similar. Discharge management differed strongly. Conclusion:Although LSUs and CSCs are the primary care providers in their respective regions, differences in patient profiles may contribute to differences in performance parameters. Adjusting for patient profiles may improve the comparability of the quality of stroke care provided by hospitals belonging to different stroke service levels.