[Retracted] Potential Factors for Psychological Symptoms at Three Months in Patients with Young Ischemic Stroke

Abstract

Objective. Psychological status plays a vital role in the recovery in young ischemic stroke patients. However, few reports on the psychological symptoms in Chinese young ischemic stroke patients have been published. In the present study, we aimed to outline the psychological status of young ischemic stroke patients and its risk factors at three months after their stroke. Methods. 364 patients with young ischemic stroke and 384 age-matched healthy controls were consecutively recruited from our study hospitals of the mainland of China between June 2018 and November 2020. Social demographic and clinical data were collected from all enrolled participants in the acute stage of their stroke, and their psychological variables were assessed via the Symptom Checklist 90 Revised (SCL-90-R) at three-month timepoint after their stroke. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were run to identify the independent factors for psychological variables in patients. Results. Compared with healthy controls, patients with young ischemic stroke had significantly higher total score of SCL-90-R and all subscale total scores ( p < 0.01 or 0.05). 22.3% (81/364 cases) in young ischemic stroke patients had psychological abnormalities. Compared with young ischemic stroke patients without psychological symptoms ( n = 283 ), patients with psychological symptoms ( n = 81 ) had higher rate of married status ( p = 0.03 ), rate of hypertension ( p = 0.01 ), infarct size ( p = 0.01 ), and the family dysfunction ( p < 0.01 ). Multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that the family dysfunction (odds ratio [OR], 2.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.71 to 3.54, p < 0.01 ), having hypertension (OR, 3.27, 95% CI: 1.92 to 4.27, p = 0.02 ), and ≥20mm3 infarct size (OR, 2.39, 95% CI: 1.53 to 3.45, p < 0.01 ) were independent factors for having psychological abnormalities in patients with young ischemic stroke at three months after their stroke. Single (OR, 1.23, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.54, p = 0.01 ), poor family function (OR, 1.21, 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.45, p = 0.03 ), and ≥20mm3 infarct size (OR, 1.74, 95% CI: 1.14 to 3.13, p = 0.02 ) were independent factors for having depression in patents with psychological symptoms. The family dysfunction (OR, 2.32, 95% CI: 1.51 to 2.80, p < 0.01 ) and hypertension (OR, 2.41, 95% CI: 1.54 to 3.46, p = 0.03 ) were independent factors for emerging somatization and anxiety in patients with psychological symptoms, respectively. Conclusions. At three months after their stroke, young ischemic stroke patients had psychological problems and risk factors for developing them.

Psychiatric Disorders in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke

“…Xu et al [5] found that people who had a stroke at a young age had higher scores on a test measuring emotional distress compared to healthy people. The difference was significant [which means it was important] and it cost either a little or a lot [because "p < 0.…”

“…The Chinese version of the tool has been proven to be a good test. If someone gets a higher score, it means they have more serious mental health symptoms [5] .…”

The Impact of Sociodemographic Variables on Risk Factors Associated with Ischaemic Stroke Patients by Age Group

“…According to a Chinese study, young IS patients with psychological symptoms had a greater proportion of married status, hypertension, infarct size, and family dysfunction when compared to those without psychological symptoms. (46) Young people's mental health may be unaffected, if not negatively affected, by early marriage, which is non-normative both statistically and culturally. (47) Lastly, our study showed that married IS patients have up to four RFs with increasing age.…”

Retracted: Potential Factors for Psychological Symptoms at Three Months in Patients with Young Ischemic Stroke

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process: Discrepancies in scope Discrepancies in the description of the research reported Discrepancies between the availability of data and the research described Inappropriate citations Incoherent, meaningless and/or irrelevant content included in the article Manipulated or compromised peer review …”