Background: Lower socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with an increased risk of stroke but the mechanisms are unclear. We aimed to determine whether low-SES stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA) patients have a greater burden of vascular risk factors/co-morbidity and reduced health care access. Methods: We prospectively studied 467 consecutive stroke and TIA patients from 3 Scottish hospitals (outpatients and inpatients) during 2007/2008. We recorded vascular risk factors, stroke severity, co-morbidity measures, investigations and health service utilisation. SES was derived from postcodes using Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics and analysed in quartiles. Results: TIA/stroke patients in the lowest SES quartile were younger (64 years, SD 14.1) than those in the highest quartile (72 years, SD 12.9; p < 0.0001). They were more likely to be current smokers (42 vs. 22%; p = 0.001) but there was no association with other vascular risk factors/co-morbidity. There was a trend for those with lower SES to have a more severe stroke [modified National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score and interquartile range: 4 (2–6) vs. 3 (1–5); multivariate p = 0.05]. Lower SES groups were less likely to have neuro-imaging (82 vs. 90%; p = 0.036) or an electrocardiogram (72 vs. 87%; p = 0.003), but differences were no longer significant on multivariate analysis. However, there was equal access to stroke unit care. Conclusions: Low-SES TIA and stroke patients are younger and have a more severe deficit; an increased prevalence of smoking is likely to be a major contributor. We found equal access to stroke unit care for low-SES patients.

Keywords:
Stroke, Transient ischaemic attack, Socioeconomic status, Vascular risk factors, Health care access, Co-morbidity, Cigarette smoking
1.
Avendano M, Glymour MM: Stroke disparities in older Americans: is wealth a more powerful indicator of risk than income and education? Stroke 2008;39:1533–1540.
2.
Hart CL, Hole DJ, Smith GD: Influence of socioeconomic circumstances in early and later life on stroke risk among men in a Scottish cohort study. Stroke 2000;31:2093–2097.
3.
Kuper H, Adami HO, Theorell T, Weiderpass E: The socioeconomic gradient in the incidence of stroke: a prospective study in middle-aged women in Sweden. Stroke 2007;38:27–33.
4.
McCarron P, Greenwood R, Elwood P, Shlomo YB, Bayer A, Baker I, Frankel S, Ebrahim S, Murray L, Smith GD: The incidence and aetiology of stroke in the Caerphilly and Speedwell Collaborative Studies II: risk factors for ischaemic stroke. Public Health 2001;115:12–20.
5.
Power C, Hypponen E, Smith GD: Socioeconomic position in childhood and early adult life and risk of mortality: a prospective study of the mothers of the 1958 British birth cohort. Am J Public Health 2005;95:1396–1402.
6.
Xu F, Ah TL, Yin X, Yu IT, Griffiths S: Impact of socio-economic factors on stroke prevalence among urban and rural residents in Mainland China. BMC Public Health 2008;8:170.
7.
Thrift AG, Dewey HM, Sturm JW, Paul SL, Gilligan AK, Srikanth VK, Macdonell RA, McNeil JJ, Macleod MR, Donnan GA: Greater incidence of both fatal and nonfatal strokes in disadvantaged areas: the Northeast Melbourne Stroke Incidence Study. Stroke 2006;37:877–882.
8.
Aslanyan S, Weir CJ, Lees KR, Reid JL, McInnes GT: Effect of area-based deprivation on the severity, subtype, and outcome of ischemic stroke. Stroke 2003;34:2623–2628.
9.
Weir NU, Gunkel A, McDowall M, Dennis MS: Study of the relationship between social deprivation and outcome after stroke. Stroke 2005;36:815–819.
10.
van Rossum CT, van de MH, Breteler MM, Grobbee DE, Mackenbach JP: Socioeconomic differences in stroke among Dutch elderly women: the Rotterdam Study. Stroke 1999;30:357–362.
11.
Jakovljevic D, Sarti C, Sivenius J, Torppa J, Mahonen M, Immonen-Raiha P, Kaarsalo E, Alhainen K, Kuulasmaa K, Tuomilehto J, Puska P, Salomaa V: Socioeconomic status and ischemic stroke: the FINMONICA Stroke Register. Stroke 2001;32:1492–1498.
12.
World Health Organisation: Cerebrovascular Disorders. Geneva, World Health Organisation, 1978.
13.
Scottish Government: Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics. http://www.sns.gov.uk.
14.
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, Mackenzie CR: A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373–383.
15.
Goldstein LB, Samsa GP, Matchar DB, Horner RD: Charlson Index comorbidity adjustment for ischemic stroke outcome studies. Stroke 2004;35:1941–1945.
16.
Meyer BC, Hemmen TM, Jackson CM, Lyden PD: Modified National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale for use in stroke clinical trials: prospective reliability and validity. Stroke 2002;33:1261–1266.
17.
Kasner SE, Cucchiara BL, McGarvey ML, Luciano JM, Liebeskind DS, Chalela JA: Modified National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale can be estimated from medical records. Stroke 2003;34:568–570.
18.
Bamford J, Sandercock P, Dennis M, Burn J, Warlow C: Classification and natural history of clinically identifiable subtypes of cerebral infarction. Lancet 1991;337:1521–1526.
19.
Hart CL, Hole DJ, Smith GD: The contribution of risk factors to stroke differentials, by socioeconomic position in adulthood: the Renfrew/Paisley Study. Am J Public Health 2000;90:1788–1791.
20.
Avendano M, Kawachi I, Van Lenthe F, Boshuizen HC, Mackenbach JP, Van den Bos GAM, Fay ME, Berkman LF: Socioeconomic status and stroke incidence in the US elderly: the role of risk factors in the EPESE study. Stroke 2006;37:1368–1373.
21.
McFadden E, Luben R, Wareham N, Bingham S, Khaw KT: Social class, risk factors, and stroke incidence in men and women: a prospective study in the European prospective investigation into cancer in Norfolk cohort. Stroke 2009;40:1070–1077.
22.
Davey Smith G, Lynch J: Life course approaches to socioeconomic differentials in health; in Kuh D, Ben-Shlomo Y (eds): A Life Course Approach to Chronic Disease Epidemiology. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004, pp 77–115.
23.
Arrich J, Lalouschek W, Mullner M: Influence of socioeconomic status on mortality after stroke: retrospective cohort study. Stroke 2005;36:310–314.
24.
NHS National Services Scotland: Scottish Stroke Care Audit 2009 National Report – Stroke Services in Scottish Hospitals Data relating to 2007–2008. Edinburgh, ISD Scotland Publications, 2009.
25.
McKevitt C, Coshall C, Tilling K, Wolfe C: Are there inequalities in the provision of stroke care? Analysis of an inner-city stroke register. Stroke 2005;36:315–320.
26.
Cesaroni G, Agabiti N, Forastiere F, Perucci CA: Socioeconomic differences in stroke incidence and prognosis under a universal healthcare system. Stroke 2009;40:2812–2819.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
2010
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.