Background: Given the potential differences in etiology and impact, the treatment and outcome of younger patients (aged 18–64 years) require examination separately to older adults (aged ≥65 years) who experience acute stroke. Methods: Data from the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (2010–2015) including demographic and clinical characteristics, provision of evidence-based therapies and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) post-stroke was used. Descriptive statistics and multilevel regression models were used for group comparisons. Results: Compared to older patients (age ≥65 years) among 26,220 registrants, 6,526 (25%) younger patients (age 18–64 years) were more often male (63 vs. 51%; p < 0.001), born in Australia (70 vs. 63%; p < 0.001), more often discharged home from acute care (56 vs. 38%; p < 0.001), and less likely to receive antihypertensive medication (61 vs. 73%; p < 0.001). Younger patients had a 74% greater odds of having lower HRQoL compared to an equivalent aged-matched general population (adjusted OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.56–1.93, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Younger stroke patients exhibited distinct differences from their older counterparts with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics, prescription of antihypertensive medications and residual health status.

Keywords:
Stroke, Young adult, Registries, Stroke registries
1.
Putaala J: Ischemic stroke in the young: current perspectives on incidence, risk factors, and cardiovascular prognosis. Eur Stroke J 2016; 1: 28–40.
2.
Smajlović D: Strokes in young adults: epidemiology and prevention. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2015; 11: 157–164.
3.
Cadilhac DA, et al: Multicenter comparison of processes of care between stroke units and conventional care wards in Australia. Stroke 2004; 35: 1035–1040.
4.
Hoffmann TC, Lindley RI: Stroke care in -Australia: why is it still the poor cousin of health care? Med J Aust 2013; 198: 246–247.
5.
Cadilhac DA, et al: Estimating the long-term costs of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke for Australia: new evidence derived from the North East Melbourne Stroke Incidence Study (NEMESIS). Stroke 2009; 40: 915–921.
6.
Synhaeve NE et al: Poor long-term functional outcome after stroke among adults aged 18 to 50 years: follow-up of transient ischemic attack and stroke patients and unelucidated risk factor evaluation (FUTURE) study. Stroke 2014; 45: 1157–1160.
7.
Daniel K, et al: What are the social consequences of stroke for working-aged adults? A systematic review. Stroke 2009; 40:e431–e440.
8.
Essue BM, et al: How are household economic circumstances affected after a stroke? The Psychosocial Outcomes In StrokE (POISE) Study. Stroke 2012; 43: 3110–3113.
9.
Maaijwee NA, et al: Long-term increased risk of unemployment after young stroke: a long-term follow-up study. Neurology 2014; 83: 1132–1138.
10.
Rolfs A, et al: Prevalence of fabry disease in patients with cryptogenic stroke: a -prospective study. Lancet 2005; 366: 1794–1796.
11.
Bevan H, Sharma K, Bradley W: Stroke in young adults. Stroke 1990; 21: 382–386.
12.
Bergman EM, et al: National registry-based case-control study: comorbidity and stroke in young adults. Acta Neurol Scand 2015; 131: 394–399.
13.
Cadilhac DA, et al: Protocol and pilot data for establishing the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry. Int J Stroke 2010; 5: 217–226.
14.
Saposnik G, et al: Age disparities in stroke quality of care and delivery of health services. Stroke 2009; 40: 3328–3335.
15.
Simpson CR, et al: Evidence for age and sex differences in the secondary prevention of stroke in scottish primary care. Stroke 2005; 36: 1771–1775.
16.
Fonarow GC, et al: Age-related differences in characteristics, performance measures, treatment trends, and outcomes in patients with ischemic stroke. Circulation 2010; 121: 879–891.
17.
Evans SM, et al: Development of clinical-quality registries in Australia: the way forward. Med J Aust 2011; 194: 360–363.
18.
Tu JV, et al: Impracticability of informed consent in the registry of the canadian stroke network. N Eng J Med 2004; 350: 1414–1421.
19.
Lannin NA, et al: Telephone follow-up was more expensive but more efficient than postal in a national stroke registry. J Clin Epidemiol 2013; 66: 896–902.
20.
Dorman PJ, et al: Is the EuroQol a valid measure of health-related quality of life after stroke? Stroke 1997; 28: 1876–1882.
21.
Viney R, et al: An Australian discrete choice experiment to value EQ-5D health states. Health Econ 2014; 23: 729–742.
22.
Jaro MA: Probabilistic linkage of large public health data files. Stat Med 1995; 14: 491–498.
23.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA). Canberra, 2011.
24.
Counsell C, et al: Predicting outcome after acute and subacute stroke: development and validation of new prognostic models. Stroke 2002; 33: 1041–1047.
25.
Janssen B, Szende A: Population norms for the EQ-5D; in Szende A, Janssen B, Cabases J (eds): Self-Reported Population Health: An International Perspective Based on EQ-5D. Dordrecht, Springer Netherlands, 2014, pp 19–30.
26.
Kim SK, et al: Estimation of minimally important differences in the EQ-5D and SF-6D indices and their utility in stroke. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2015; 13: 32.
27.
National Stroke Foundation, Clinical Guidelines for Stroke Management. Melbourne, 2010.
28.
Vos T, et al: Burden of disease and injury in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples: the indigenous health gap. Int J Epidemiol 2009; 38: 470–477.
29.
Cadilhac DA, Lannin NA, Anderson CS, Kim J, Andrew N, Kilkenny M, Shehata S, Grabsch B, Levi C, Faux S, Dewey H, Hill K, Donnan G, Hand P, Grimley R, Middleton S; AuSCR Consortium: The Australian Stroke Clinical Registry Annual Report 2015. The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, December 2016, Report No. 7, pages 42.
30.
Imam MA, et al: Loss to follow-up after total hip replacement: a source of bias in patient reported outcome measures and registry datasets? Hip Int 2014; 24: 465–472.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
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.