Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Editorials

Stroke: time to address cognition

Eugene Yee Hing Tang, Louise Robinson and Christopher Price
British Journal of General Practice 2021; 71 (704): 104-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp21X714977
Eugene Yee Hing Tang
Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Campus for Ageing and Vitality, Newcastle upon Tyne.
Roles: Academic GP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Louise Robinson
Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Campus for Ageing and Vitality, Newcastle upon Tyne.
Roles: Professor of Primary Care and Ageing
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher Price
Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Campus for Ageing and Vitality, Newcastle upon Tyne.
Roles: Professor of Stroke and Applied Health Research
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

This article has a correction. Please see:

  • Correction - April 01, 2021

INTRODUCTION

There has been much progress made in specialist stroke services over the last decade; however, increasing volumes of ongoing care occurs in the community, as stroke-survival rates are increasing and patients are living longer independently. Following specialist care, it is important to note that the long-term needs of stroke survivors are not being adequately addressed.1 Further, nearly half of all stroke patients feel abandoned after they leave hospital.2 The physical consequences post-stroke are often addressed as the highest priority due to their impact on dependency and practical care needs, with recognised routes of community referral, for example, to physiotherapy or occupational therapy. However, there are also less obvious and emotional effects such as depression, fatigue, and importantly, post-stroke cognitive changes.2 In fact, nine in ten stroke survivors surveyed reported that they experienced at least one cognitive effect, which is the same number experiencing at least one physical effect.3 It is not always clear how best to manage or who to refer these individuals to even if they do present to their GP upon specialist discharge.

The key questions for primary care are: what more can be done for stroke survivors at risk of cognitive difficulties that might progress to a dementia illness; whose responsibility is it to manage these individuals; and could we find new improved care pathways to address this growing need?

THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM: COGNITIVE DIFFICULTIES POST-STROKE

In the first-year post-stroke, as many as four in ten patients have some degree of cognitive impairment.4 At 6 months, this is associated with lower levels of independence, worse quality of life, greater informal care provision and a greater chance of developing depressive symptoms up until 5-years post-stroke.5 Further, in the year after a major stroke, the incidence of dementia can be nearly 50 times higher compared to that in the general population.6 This creates a significant burden of both cognitive impairment and dementia in the community that may be hidden if not actively assessed. Patients may also experience both personal and organisational barriers, which means that they are less likely to seek help for their ongoing problems such as memory deficits.7

CURRENT CARE

National clinical guidelines recommend that stroke patients have a review 6-months post-stroke.8 Once in the community, primary care is responsible for an annual review that normally includes risk factor management (to reduce recurrent stroke) and providing access to clinical and social care services if needed. However, there is no formal requirement to assess for any subsequent cognitive deficit or indeed a possible dementia illness. The previous dementia direct enhanced service did provide an incentivised way for GPs to opportunistically offer an assessment to at-risk groups, such as stroke patients aged ≥60 years, but this has subsequently been discontinued. Cognition is not the only consequence post-stroke, for example, depressive symptoms can often present many years after the initial stroke, particularly if there is cognitive impairment 6 months post-stroke.5 However, without a formal mechanism to identify these common non-physical post-stroke sequelae and then provide the necessary support and intervention, patients and their families may struggle in the community.

STROKE CARE IN THE COMMUNITY

There is increasing recognition that new approaches are needed to provide better care for stroke survivors, particularly once they are in the community. A previous systematic review looking at different models of stroke follow-up care found that there was a need for high-quality trials in this area, in order to develop primary care-based interventions.9 One trial hoping to address this is the Improving Primary Care After Stroke (IPCAS) trial.10 Here, patients are randomised to either an intervention consisting of a structured review of care needs, a self-management programme, optimised communication between patients and services and a direct point of contact at the GP surgery, or usual care.10 It is hoped that this new multicomponent intervention can help to address the long-term needs of stroke survivors living in the community. Although the trial is not addressing cognitive needs specifically, a checklist is used as part of the structured review of care needs, which could help identify important cognitive deficits. Further, the increased primary care support and improved communication pathways will hopefully reduce some of the barriers associated with patient help-seeking behaviour. While awaiting publication of the trial results, other options should be considered for research or service improvement and evaluation. There could be opportunities to develop more formal pathways between stroke, community, and memory clinic services, particularly if significant cognitive decline post-stroke has been detected. It might also be possible to identify stroke patients to participate in trials of long-term cognitive rehabilitation, and examine whether less service support is needed.

CONCLUSION

Given the significant effects of stroke, primary care needs to find ways to improve and adopt new ways of working so that patients do not continue to feel ‘abandoned’. Evidence-based interventions need to be developed in order to address some of these concerns, but GPs in general need to be aware of the long-term visible, and more importantly invisible, effects of stroke.

Notes

Funding

Eugene Yee Hing Tang was funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research Capacity Building grant. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Competing interests

The authors have declared no competing interests.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2021

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. McKevitt C,
    2. Fudge N,
    3. Redfern J,
    4. et al.
    (2011) Self-reported long-term needs after stroke. Stroke 42, 5, 1398–1403.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Stroke Association
    (2016) A new era for stroke, https://www.stroke.org.uk/sites/default/files/anefs_report_web.pdf (accessed 20 Jan 2021).
  3. 3.↵
    1. Stroke Association
    (2018) Chapter 1. Hidden effects of stroke. Lived experience of stroke report, http://www.stroke.org.uk/sites/default/files/conferences/nisc/documents/lived_experience_of_stroke_chapter_1.pdf (accessed 20 Jan 2021).
  4. 4.↵
    1. Sexton E,
    2. McLoughlin A,
    3. Williams DJ,
    4. et al.
    (2019) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of cognitive impairment no dementia in the first year post-stroke. Eur Stroke J 4, 2, 160–171.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Rohde D,
    2. Gaynor E,
    3. Large M,
    4. et al.
    (2019) The impact of cognitive impairment on poststroke outcomes: a 5-year follow-up. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 32, 5, 275–281.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    1. Pendlebury ST,
    2. Rothwell PM
    (2019) Incidence and prevalence of dementia associated with transient ischaemic attack and stroke: analysis of the population-based Oxford Vascular Study. Lancet Neurology 18, 3, 248–258.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Tang EYH,
    2. Price C,
    3. Stephan BCM,
    4. et al.
    (2018) Post-stroke memory deficits and barriers to seeking help: views of patients and carers. Fam Pract 36, 4, 506–510.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    1. Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party (ICSWP)
    (2016) National clinical guideline for stroke (ICSWP), 5th edn.
  9. 9.↵
    1. Allison R,
    2. Shelling L,
    3. Dennett R,
    4. et al.
    (2011) The effectiveness of various models of primary care-based follow-up after stroke: a systematic review. Prim Health Care Res Dev 12, 3, 214–222.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Mullis R,
    2. Aquino MRJ,
    3. Dawson SN,
    4. et al.
    (2019) Improving Primary Care After Stroke (IPCAS) trial: protocol of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate a novel model of care for stroke survivors living in the community. BMJ Open 9, 8, e030285.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 71 (704)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 71, Issue 704
March 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Stroke: time to address cognition
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Stroke: time to address cognition
Eugene Yee Hing Tang, Louise Robinson, Christopher Price
British Journal of General Practice 2021; 71 (704): 104-105. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp21X714977

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Stroke: time to address cognition
Eugene Yee Hing Tang, Louise Robinson, Christopher Price
British Journal of General Practice 2021; 71 (704): 104-105. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp21X714977
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • INTRODUCTION
    • THE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM: COGNITIVE DIFFICULTIES POST-STROKE
    • CURRENT CARE
    • STROKE CARE IN THE COMMUNITY
    • CONCLUSION
    • Notes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Faecal immunochemical test: challenges and opportunities for cancer diagnosis in primary care
  • Cervical screening: the evolving landscape
  • Greater support, recognition, and research for health visiting post-pandemic
Show more Editorials

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242