Original Contribution

Urgent neUrology consultation from the ED for transient ischemic attack^?,??

Anthony S. Kim MD ^a,?, Stephen Sidney MD, MPH ^d, Allan L. Bernstein MD ^c,

Vanja C. Douglas MD ^a, S. Claiborne Johnston MD, PhD ^a,b

^aDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, Box 0114, San Francisco, CA 94143-0114, USA ^bDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-0114, USA ^cKaiser Permanente Medical Center, Santa Rosa, CA 95403, USA

^dKaiser Permanente Division of Research, Oakland, CA 94612, USA

Received 25 September 2009; revised 17 December 2009; accepted 29 December 2009

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between urgent neurology consultation and outcomes for patients with Transient ischemic attack .

Methods: In a secondary analysis of data from 1707 emergency department patients with transient ischemic attack from March 1997 to May 1998, we compared presentation, management, and outcomes by neurology consultation status using generalized estimating equations to adjust for ABCD² score and clustering by facility and survival analysis for outcomes.

Results: Consultation was obtained f28% of patients. Median ABCD² scores were comparable, but consultation was associated with hospital admission (odds ratio, 1.35 [1.02-1.78], P = .04) and use of antithrombotics (odds ratio, 1.88 [1.20-2.93], P = .005). The cumulative stroke risk was significantly lower within 1 week (5.3% versus 7.5%, P = .02) but not at 90 days (9.9% versus 11.0%, P = .21). Conclusions: Consultation was not targeted to high-risk patients but was associated with some quality of care measures and improved early outcomes; however, improvement in 90-day outcomes was not established.

(C) 2011

Introduction

Transient ischemic attack is common with more than 300 000 emergency department (ED) visits for TIA in the United States each year [1]. The ED management for this

^? Sources of support: This work was supported by the National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (K08NS002042). This work was also supported by an award from the American Heart Association.

^?? Presented at the American Academy of Neurology Annual

Meeting, Boston, Mass, May 2007.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 415 476 3733; fax: +1 415 476 2500.

E-mail address: [email protected] (A.S. Kim).

0735-6757/$ – see front matter (C) 2011 doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2009.12.025

common presentation is particularly challenging because TIA symptoms are by definition evanescent in nature, which makes them difficult for patients to describe, and because TIA symptoms can mimic diverse alternate diagnoses such as migraine or seizure, which makes the diagnosis more complex. Furthermore, the stakes for making an accurate diagnosis are high because there has been a growing appreciation that the early risk of stroke after TIA is high

[2] and that urgent evaluation and intervention may be effective at reducing this risk [3,4]. Therefore, developing efficient and effective Processes of care for ED patients with TIA has been a major goal for emergency medicine and stroke neurology.

Various models of care such as routine inpatient admission [5], ED Observation Units [6], or expedited outpatient follow-up clinics with stroke specialists [3,4] have been proposed to help address this need, but significant practice variation remains [7]. Within this context, the potential role of urgent neurology consultation in the ED has received relatively less attention. Instead, previous studies have focused on the impact of consultation for ED patients generally [8], or a neurologist’s role within a stroke center or stroke network specifically [9], or on the outcomes of inpatients with stroke who are under the care of a neurologist rather than an internist [10-15]. Less is known about the impact of urgent neurology consultation in the ED for patients with TIA. Because the availability of neurologists for urgent consultation is often constrained and because the value added by an urgent neurology consultation is unknown [16,17], better information on the impact of neurology consultation on process measures and outcomes is required for policy makers and clinicians to make rational decisions on how to optimize the care for these patients.

Therefore, we conducted a secondary data analysis of a cohort of ED patients diagnosed with TIA to examine associations between neurology consultation and process and outcome measures. Our goals were (1) to examine the factors that were associated with urgent neurology consul- tation for TIA; (2) to examine the association between neurology consultation and process improvements such as increased use of antithrombotic agents (aspirin, clopidogrel, ticlopidine, heparin, or warfarin), increased use of neuroima- ging, and increased utilization of anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation; and (3) to examine the association of these process improvements on clinical outcomes as measured by the number of strokes and Major adverse events within 90 days of presentation.

Methods

We performed a secondary analysis of data from a cohort of patients diagnosed with TIA in the ED from March 1997 to May 1998 within a large integrated health care program [2]. Briefly, patients were identified from a database of ED encounters at 16 Northern California EDs (Sacramento, Santa Rosa, and San Francisco Bay Area) within the Kaiser- Permanente Medical Care (KPMC) system. The 3 million members of KPMC are widely representative of the population of the Northern California region as a whole [18]. All of the EDs included in this study had 24-hour coverage by an on-call neurologist by telephone and for in-person consultation if necessary. Local institutional review boards approved the data collection, abstraction, and data handling procedures for this study.

Patients were identified by searching a comprehensive ED visit database for the primary diagnosis of TIA. Patients who were not KPMC members, who did not have ED records,

who had miscoded diagnoses, or who had a prior TIA during the study period were excluded [2].

Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from ED charts, medical records, and clinical databases as previously described [2]. Briefly, a trained data abstractor blinded to the present analysis abstracted data from clinical databases and medical records with a standardized chart abstraction form. A neurology consultation was defined as any contact by the ED clinicians with an on-call neurologist whether in-person or by telephone. An electronic system for imaging reports became available in November 1997, so analysis of the use of neuroimaging was limited to the subgroup of all patients who were seen after that date (n = 453).

Patients were followed for 90 days after presentation. Subsequent strokes, TIAs, major cardiovascular events (hospitalization for ventricular arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, or unstable angina), and death were identified using a database search of in-network hospitalizations and claims records for out-of-network hospitalizations that allowed for near-complete ascertain- ment of outcomes and near-complete follow-up. Outcomes were adjudicated by independent confirmation by 2 neurologists who were blinded to the present analysis as previously described [2].

Fisher exact test was used to evaluate Univariate associations. A 2-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the median ABCD² score in the consultation and no-consultation groups. The ABCD² score is a validated Prediction tool that uses 5 factors to estimate the short-term stroke risk after TIA: Age, 60 years or older (1 point); Blood pressure, 140/90 mm Hg or higher (1); Clinical features of unilateral weakness (2) or speech impairment without weakness (1); Duration, 60 minutes or longer (2) or 10 to 59 minutes (1); and Diabetes (1) [19]. Multivariable analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations to account for clustering by facility and using the raw ABCD² score to adjust for the baseline risk of stroke for each patient. The cumulative incidence of stroke and major adverse events was estimated using survival analysis with censoring of patients at death, carotid endarterectomy, or loss to follow- up. The log-rank test was used for comparisons between groups. All data were analyzed using the Stata statistical package (version 9, StataCorp, College Station, Tex).

Results

Frequency of neurology consultation

In this cohort from 1997 to 1998, an in-person or telephone consultation with a neurologist was obtained for 474 (28%) of the 1707 patients. Most (414, or 87%) of these neurology consultations were by telephone only; 60 patients were evaluated by a neurologist in-person while in the ED. Consultation rates varied from 6.2% to 44.9% among the 16

facilities studied. Patients who presented to the ED between 8 AM and 5 PM on nonholiday weekdays were more likely to have a neurology consultation than those who were evaluated after-hours, on weekends, or on holidays (31% versus 26%, P = .03).

Demographic characteristics, risk factors, and clinical presentation

Median age was comparable in the consultation and no- consultation groups (Table 1). Blacks were less likely to have

Table 1 Characteristics of patients with TIA at presentation to the ED by consultation status

Patient variable All patients (n = 1707) n (%)	Consultation (n = 475) n (%)	No consultation (n = 1232) n (%)	P
Demographics
Age N60 y 1325 (78)	354 (75)	971 (79)	0.06
Male sex 899 (53)	226 (48)	673 (55)	b0.01
Ethnicity a
White 1226 (80)	360 (76)	866 (70)	ref.
Black 150 (10)	29 (6)	121 (10)	0.01
Asian 86 (6)	22 (5)	64 (5)	0.56
Hispanic 72 (5)	15 (3)	57 (5)	0.13
Risk factors
Diabetes mellitus 332 (19)	78 (16)	254 (21)	0.06
Hypertension 988 (58)	271 (57)	717 (58)	0.70
Coronary artery disease 414 (24)	115 (24)	299 (24)	0.99
Atrial fibrillation 151 (9)	36 (8)	115 (9)	0.30
Carotid disease 97 (6)	36 (8)	61 (5)	0.05
TIA in last 3 mo 286 (17)	88 (19)	198 (16)	0.25
Prior stroke 385 (23)	99 (21)	286 (23)	0.30
Hypercholesterolemia 250 (15)	87 (18)	163 (13)	0.01
Current cigarette use b 200 (14)	63 (16)	137 (14)	0.45
Congestive heart failure 114 (7)	24 (5)	90 (7)	0.11
Medications
Aspirin 567 (33)	195 (41)	372 (30)	b0.001
Ticlopidine 59 (4)	21 (4)	38 (3)	0.18
Warfarin 153 (9)	35 (7)	118 (10)	0.16
TIA symptoms
Duration N10 min c 1405 (84)	391 (84)	1015 (84)	0.88
Weakness 784 (46)	232 (49)	552 (45)	0.14
Any sensory symptoms 684 (40)	224 (47)	460 (37)	b0.001
Confusion 367 (21)	76 (16)	291 (24)	b0.001
Change in vision 222 (13)	75 (16)	147 (12)	0.04
Change in speech 722 (42)	195 (41)	527 (43)	0.55
Dizziness 349 (20)	95 (20)	254 (21)	0.84
Vertigo 54 (3)	17 (4)	37 (3)	0.54
Gait difficulties 430 (25)	127 (27)	303 (25)	0.38
Symptoms in ED 854 (50)	263 (55)	591 (48)	0.007
TIA examination findings
Heart rate N80 beats/min d 688 (40)	174 (37)	514 (42)	0.06
Systolic BP >=140 mm Hg e 1281 (75)	356 (75)	925 (75)	0.99
Diastolic BP >=90 mm Hg e 516 (30)	149 (31)	367 (30)	0.52
Murmur 117 (7)	29 (6)	88 (7)	0.52
Bruit f 71 (4)	33 (12)	38 (6)	0.003
Weakness 273 (16)	101 (21)	172 (14)	b0.001
Numbness 123 (7)	42 (9)	81 (7)	0.12
gait disturbance 83 (5)	27 (6)	56 (5)	0.32
Speech deficit 168 (10)	54 (11)	114 (9)	0.20
Aphasia 65 (4)	25 (5)	40 (3)	0.07
Dysarthria 100 (6)	29 (6)	71 (6)	0.82
BP indicates blood pressure. a n = 1535; b n = 1385; c n = 1670; d n = 1702; e n = 1704; f n = 904.

Fig. 1 Consultation Rates By ABCD² Score.

a neurology consultation; 20% of black TIA patients had a neurology consultation compared with 29% of white TIA patients (P = .01). There was a significant variation in proportion of TIA patients who were black (range, 2%-37%) and the proportion of TIA patients who had a consultation by site. A quarter (25%) of male TIA patients had a neurology consultation compared with 31% of female TIA patients (P b .01). Vascular risk factors were common overall; hypercholesterolemia was more common in the consultation group (18% versus 13%, P = .01). Consultation patients were more likely to be already taking aspirin at presentation (41% versus 30%, P b .001).

We compared baseline history and examination findings as an exploratory analysis of factors that might predict consultation status. Patients with sensory symptoms and vision changes were more likely to have a consultation, and

Table 2 Utilization of diagnostic studies

patients with a history of confusion were less likely to have a neurology consultation. Consultation patients were more likely to have weakness by examination or symptoms that were still present at presentation to the ED. The presence of a carotid bruit was associated with neurology consultation, although the presence or absence of a bruit was documented for only 53% of patients. However, some factors included in the ABCD² score (such as symptoms lasting more than 10 minutes, changes in speech, report of weakness, vertigo, or gait difficulties) were not associated with consultation (Table 1).

The median ABCD² score was similar for patients who had a neurology consultation (median ABCD² score = 4) and patients who did not (Wilcoxon rank-sum P = .72; Fig. 1).

Hospital admissions, utilization of diagnostic tests, and medications

After excluding patients who had a stroke in the ED before hospital admission, patients who had a neurology consultation were more likely to be admitted to the hospital (18% versus 14%; odds ratio [OR], 1.36 [1.01-1.81]; P =

.04; Table 3). This association persisted even after adjustment for ABCD² score and for clustering by facility (adjusted OR, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.78; P =

.04). The overall use of diagnostic tests was similar in the 2 groups (Table 2). For example, Electrocardiograms and echocardiograms were obtained in a similar proportion of patients in the 2 groups.

Data on Neuroimaging studies were only available for patients seen after November 1997 when an electronic imaging reports system became available (n = 453). For this subgroup, a similar proportion of patients had head computed tomography or brain magnetic resonance imaging

Study	All patients n (%)	Consultation n (%)	No consultation n (%)	P
Cardiac evaluation	n = 1707	n = 475	n = 1232
ECG done	1364 (80)	388 (82)	977 (79)	0.28
Echocardiogram
within 1 wk	63 (4)	17 (4)	46 (4)	0.99
within 30 d	109 (6)	33 (7)	76 (6)	0.58
Head/neck imaging	n = 453	n = 139	n = 314
Head CT
within 48 h	325 (72)	98 (71)	227 (72)	0.74
within 72 h	325 (72)	98 (71)	227 (72)	0.74
brain MRI
within 48 h	5 (1)	1 (1)	4 (1)	0.99
within 72 h	11 (2)	3 (2)	8 (3)	0.99
carotid ultrasound
within 1 wk	105 (23)	27 (19)	78 (25)	0.23
within 30 d	179 (40)	50 (36)	129 (41)	0.35
CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.

within the first 48 to 72 hours. Finally, the proportion of patients who had carotid ultrasounds within 1 week was also similar in the consult and no-consult groups (Table 2).

Patients with neurology consultation were more likely discharged on antithrombotic therapy (92% versus 87%; OR, 1.91 [1.22-2.98]; P = .004). This association persisted after adjusting for ABCD² score and clustering by facility (adjusted OR, 1.87 [1.22-2.87]; P = .004). Among the subgroup of patients who were not already taking antith- rombotics at the time of presentation (n = 951), consultation patients were still more likely to be placed on antithrombotic therapy than those who were not evaluated by neurologists (89% versus 84%; OR, 1.60 (1.01-2.54); P = .04; adjusted

OR, 1.58 (1.04-2.40); P = .03; Table 3).

For the subgroup of patients with a previous history of atrial fibrillation or with new atrial fibrillation diagnosed on ECG (n = 179), the percentage of patients discharged on anticoagulation (46% versus 48% in the no-consult group, P = 1.00) or on any antithrombotic therapy (88% versus 89% in the no-consult group, P = .78) was comparable (Table 3).

Stroke and major cardiovascular events

At 1 week, the probability of stroke-free survival and of adverse event-free survival (stroke, major cardiovascular events, or death) was lower with neurology consultation (5.3% versus 7.5%, P = .01; and 5.3% versus 7.8%, P = .02, respectively). However, at 90 days, the magnitude of this difference was smaller and was not statistically significant (9.9% versus 11.0% for stroke, P = .41; 11.6% versus 13.6% for adverse events, P = .48; Fig. 2).

Discussion

In this cohort drawn from a large integrated health care program in 1997 to 1998, neurology consultation for TIA was uncommon overall (28%), and in-person consultation was rare (4% overall). Previous studies that captured only in- person consultations rather than telephone consultations

Table 3 Treatment and disposition process measures

have reported rates ranging from 8% in a cohort of TIA and stroke patients in an urban ED [20] to 29% of TIA patients in a rural ED that would otherwise be considered neurologically underserved [21]. Our analysis reflects practice patterns that existed before the risks of stroke after TIA were more widely appreciated, but more recent data reflecting current practice for consultation for TIA have not been widely reported.

The decision to consult a neurologist from the ED is a complex one. We did find that patients who were at higher risk for stroke were not the ones who were targeted for urgent neurologic evaluation; indeed, there was no relationship between a higher risk of stroke as predicted by the ABCD² score and more frequent urgent neurology consultation. This finding underscores the potential value of this Prognostic tool to help guide clinical decision making in current practice because reliable and validated methods for identifying high- risk TIA patients were not available during the study period. Instead, the decision about whether to obtain a neurology consultation from the ED seemed to rely on other factors that were independent of risk. Such factors may include institutional norms and local practice patterns, the availabil- ity of an on-call neurologist, and the perceived value added by a consultation in the acute setting. Other factors might include clinical uncertainty rather than acuity because patients who were perceived to be low risk but where the diagnosis was uncertain may have targeted for consultation (e.g., patients with migraine on the differential diagnosis). However, our cohort was limited to only those patients who had a final ED diagnosis of TIA. Alternatively, certain higher risk patients may have been targeted for consultation only if management was uncertain. For instance, patients who were already taking aspirin were more likely to have consultations (eg, patients having possible vascular events while on Antiplatelet therapy [“aspirin-failures”]). Emergency depart- ment clinicians could have been seeking advice on alternative antithrombotic therapy for these patients. The racial and Sex disparities in consultation requests that we observed were more difficult to explain, though they parallel previously described disparities in referral patterns and inpatient treatment of TIA [22] and for stroke [23,24] and merit further study. These comparisons of baseline

Treatment	All	patients, n (%)	Consultation, n (%)	No	consultation, n (%)	P
Patients not on antithrombotics	n =	952	n = 231	n =	721
Started on antiplatelet agent	788	(83)	196 (85)	592	(82)	.37
Started on anticoagulation	33	(3)	19 (8)	14	(2)	b.001
Started on any antithrombotic	809	(85)	206 (89)	603	(84)	.04
Patients with atrial fibrillation	n =	179	n = 41	n =	138
On anticoagulation at discharge	85	(47)	19 (46)	66	(48)	.99
On any antithrombotic at discharge	159	(89)	36 (88)	123	(89)	.78
Patient disposition	n =	1644	n = 461	n =	1183
Admitted to hospital	242	(15)	81 (18)	161	(14)	.04

Fig. 2 Stroke and Adverse Event-Free Survival by Consultation Status.

characteristics by consultation status are exploratory in nature and may highlight hypotheses for future study.

Given the lack of a clear association between patient acuity and consultation, it is not unexpected that we found only weak associations between consultation and improved process of care measures for TIA. The main areas of associated improvements were in more frequent use of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy and in higher rates of hospital admission, both of which have the potential to impact patient outcomes. Our study is unable to distinguish

between whether the decision to prescribe antithrombotics or to admit the patient was made before consultation or as a consequence of consultation. However, these associations did not seem to be simply a marker for more intensive management for consultation patients generally. Although utilization of diagnostic testing for patients with TIA overall may be different today, we found no clear association between consultation and the use of brain imaging, ECGs, and carotid ultrasound, or on the use of anticoagulation for cases of atrial fibrillation, which was comparable to

nationally reported rates [25]. To the extent that utilization of diagnostic testing is a process measure that may be important for improvement in outcomes, this finding would be expected to attenuate any observed differences in outcomes by consultation status.

Previous studies examining the impact of neurologists have largely focused on stroke rather than TIA. Here the evidence has been conflicting. Some studies have suggested that timely neurologic attention is associated with better outcomes [11-15] and shorter hospitalizations [26]. However, a more recent analysis that accounted for differences in the initial prognosis for patients treated by neurologists versus internists has brought some of these conclusions into question [10]. These studies highlight the difficulty of identifying an independent effect of neurologists on clinical outcomes within the milieu of heterogeneous practice patterns.

Given that the ABCD² score was similar in the 2 groups, one would expect that the observed incidence of subsequent stroke would also be similar. In fact, we found that during the first week, when the risk for stroke after TIA is highest, the probability of stroke and of adverse outcomes was lower for consultation patients. However, by 90 days, although we observed a 1.1% lower absolute incidence of stroke and a 2% lower absolute incidence of adverse events with consultation, the overall magnitude of this difference was smaller as compared with the initial period and did not meet statistical significance. The heterogeneous nature of neurology con- sultation, particularly during the study period when there was less consensus on optimal management, as well as the additional impacts of subsequent inpatient and outpatient management decisions would both serve to dilute the potential impact of consultation on longer term outcomes.

Several limitations of our study are important to consider in interpreting these findings. First, consultations were obtained in the period before the urgent risks of TIA were widely appreciated and before there was a greater consensus on optimal management of TIA. Also, practice patterns in a large integrated health care program may not reflect current practice in other clinical settings. Both of these factors limit generalizability to current practice. Second, because our analysis was focused only on urgent neurology consultations from the ED, inpatient neurology consultations that took place after hospital admission or in follow-up were not captured. This effective “crossover” of patients from the no- consultation to the consultation group could lead to an underestimation of the impact of consultation and could explain the discrepancy between the 1-week and the 90-day outcomes that was observed. Third, important prognostic differences between the 2 groups that influenced the decision on consultation may not have been captured, particularly because patients who had a neurology consultation and were not given the final diagnosis of TIA would not be captured in our cohort. The important potential role of neurologists in helping to identify patients who did not have a TIA cannot be addressed with the current study. Potential for confounding by indication akin to that encountered in similar studies of

stroke patients is possible as well [10], though we attempted to mitigate the effects of prognostic differences in the groups by using the validated ABCD² score. Nonetheless, other unmeasured confounders may limit the validity of inferences drawn from our analysis. Fourth, the specific content of the consultation and the Changes in management that are directly attributable to the neurology consultation was not available. Finally, as a secondary analysis and an observational study, multiple comparisons and subgroup analysis may limit interpretation of our findings beyond hypothesis-generating exploratory analysis.

In summary, we found that during a period before the widespread appreciation of the risks of stroke after TIA, urgent neurology consultation was not targeted to patients who were at highest risk for stroke. Although we found that urgent neurology consultation was associated with modest improvements on early-patient outcomes, these associations did not persist at 90 days. Here we present a snapshot and exploratory analysis of previous practice patterns that may form the basis for comparisons to current practice and may serve to highlight the importance of determining the particular processes of care that have the most impact on clinical outcomes. Current practice in terms of diagnostic testing, neurology consultation, and use of antithrombotic medications is likely to have changed, and it is possible that neurology consultation may be more valuable today with a greater consensus on the optimal acute management of TIA [27-29], a greater recognition of the impact of aggressive early interventions [3,4], and an emphasis on developing specific quality measures by health care funding agencies, accreditation organizations, and professional groups [30].

References

1. Edlow JA, Kim S, Pelletier AJ, Camargo CA. National study on emergency department visits for transient ischemic attack, 1992-2001. Acad Emerg Med 2006;13:666-72.
2. Johnston SC, Gress DR, Browner WS, Sidney S. short-term prognosis after emergency department diagnosis of TIA. JAMA 2000;284:2901-6.
3. Rothwell PM, Giles MF, Chandratheva A, et al. Effect of Urgent treatment of transient ischaemic attack and minor stroke on early recurrent stroke (EXPRESS study): a prospective population-based sequential comparison. Lancet 2007;370:1432-42.
4. Lavallee PC, Meseguer E, Abboud H, et al. A transient ischaemic attack clinic with round-the-clock access (SOS-TIA): feasibility and effects. Lancet Neurol 2007;6:953-60.
5. Nguyen-Huynh MN, Johnston SC. Is hospitalization after TIA cost- effective on the basis of treatment with tPA? Neurology 2005;65: 1799-801.
6. Stead LG, Bellolio MF, Suravaram S, et al. Evaluation of transient ischemic attack in an emergency department observation unit. Neurocrit Care 2009;10:204-8.
7. Chang E, Holroyd BR, Kochanski P, Kelly KD, Shuaib A, Rowe BH. Adherence to practice guidelines for transient ischemic attacks in an emergency department. Can J Neurol Sci 2002;29:358-63.
8. Moulin T, Sablot D, Vidry E, et al. Impact of emergency room neurologists on patient management and outcome. Eur Neurol 2003; 50:207-14.
9. Alberts MJ, Latchaw RE, Selman WR, et al. Recommendations for comprehensive stroke centers: a consensus statement from the Brain Attack Coalition. Stroke 2005;36:1597-616.
10. Gillum LA, Johnston SC. Influence of physician specialty on outcomes after acute ischemic stroke. J Hosp Med 2008;3:184-92.
11. Smith MA, Liou JI, Frytak JR, Finch MD. 30-day survival and rehospitalization for stroke patients according to physician specialty. Cerebrovasc Dis 2006;22:21-6.
12. Kaste M, Palomaki H, Sarna S. Where and how should elderly stroke patients be treated? A randomized trial. Stroke 1995;26:249-53.
13. Petty GW, Brown RD, Whisnant JP, Sicks JD, O’Fallon WM, Wiebers DO. Ischemic stroke: outcomes, patient mix, and practice variation for neurologists and generalists in a community. Neurology 1998;50: 1669-78.
14. Mitchell JB, Ballard DJ, Whisnant JP, Ammering CJ, Samsa GP, Matchar DB. What role do neurologists play in determining the costs and outcomes of stroke patients? Stroke 1996;27:1937-43.
15. Goldstein LB, Matchar DB, Hoff-Lindquist J, Samsa GP, Horner RD. VA Stroke Study: neurologist care is associated with increased testing but improved outcomes. Neurology 2003;61:792-6.
16. Josephson SA, Engstrom JW, Wachter RM. Neurohospitalists: an emerging model for inpatient neurological care. Ann Neurol 2008;63: 135-40.
17. Carroll C, Zajicek J. Provision of 24 hour acute neurology care by neurologists: manpower requirements in the UK. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004;75:406-9.
18. Selby JV, Fireman BH, Swain BE. Effect of a copayment on use of the emergency department in a health maintenance organization. N Engl J Med 1996;334:635-41.
19. Johnston SC, Rothwell PM, Nguyen-Huynh MN, et al. Validation and refinement of scores to predict very early stroke risk after transient ischaemic attack. Lancet 2007;369:283-92.
20. Brown DL, Lisabeth LD, Garcia NM, Smith MA, Morgenstern LB. Emergency department evaluation of ischemic stroke and TIA: the BASIC Project. Neurology 2004;63:2250-4.
21. Burgin WS, Staub L, Chan W, et al. acute stroke care in non-urban emergency departments. Neurology 2001;57:2006-12.
22. Mitchell JB, Ballard DJ, Matchar DB, Whisnant JP, Samsa GP. Racial variation in treatment for transient ischemic attacks: impact of participation by neurologists. Health Serv Res 2000;34: 1413-28.
23. Stansbury JP, Jia H, Williams LS, Vogel WB, Duncan PW. Ethnic disparities in stroke: epidemiology, acute care, and postacute out- comes. Stroke 2005;36:374-86.
24. Johnston SC, Fung LH, Gillum LA, et al. Utilization of intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator for ischemic stroke at academic medical centers: the influence of ethnicity. Stroke 2001;32:1061-8.
25. Scott PA, Pancioli AM, Davis LA, Frederiksen SM, Eckman J. Prevalence of atrial fibrillation and antithrombotic prophylaxis in emergency department patients. Stroke 2002;33:2664-9.
26. Davalos A, Castillo J, Martinez-Vila E. Delay in neurological attention and stroke outcome. cerebrovascular diseases Study Group of the Spanish Society of Neurology. Stroke 1995;26:2233-7.
27. Sacco RL, Adams R, Albers G, et al. Guidelines for prevention of stroke in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Council on Stroke: co- sponsored by the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention: the American Academy of Neurology affirms the value of this guideline. Stroke 2006;37:577-617.
28. Adams RJ, Albers G, Alberts MJ, et al. Update to the AHA/ASA recommendations for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack. Stroke; 2008.
29. Johnston SC, Nguyen-Huynh MN, Schwarz ME, et al. National Stroke Association guidelines for the management of transient ischemic attacks. Ann Neurol 2006;60:301-13.
30. Alberts MJ, Hademenos G, Latchaw RE, et al. Recommendations for the establishment of primary stroke centers. Brain Attack Coalition. JAMA 2000;283:3102-9.