Patient’s understanding of and satisfaction with acute stroke treatment

• Published in: Clinical neurology and neurosurgery Vol. 237; p. 108163
• Main Authors: Vanguru, Husitha R., Čierny, Marek, Blaginykh, Elena, Handshoe, Lacy S., Uchino, Ken
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier B.V 01.02.2024; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Angioedema; Cardiovascular system; Communication; Consent; Decision making; Editing; Health education; Health literacy; Hemorrhage; Interviews; Ischemic stroke; Likert scale; Neurology; Patient communication; Patients; Self report; Stroke; Telemedicine; Thrombectomy; Thrombolysis; Writing; Patient communication; Thrombectomy; Ischemic stroke; Telemedicine; Consent; Thrombolysis
• ISSN: 0303-8467; 1872-6968
• DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2024.108163

We aimed to assess patient and surrogate understanding of and satisfaction with communication regarding acute stroke treatments of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular therapy (EVT). In this single health-system prospective observational study, patients or their surrogates were interviewed within 72 h of acute stroke therapy. Respondent’s satisfaction and self-reported understanding were rated on a Likert scale. Responses to open-ended questions were evaluated for recall of purpose and risks of treatment. Of 56 completed interviews (24 patients and 32 surrogates), 33 patients received IVT alone, 11 IVT and EVT, 12 EVT alone. Forty participants (71%) reported being extremely satisfied with their acute stroke care, 46 (82%) reported no difficulty understanding the purpose of treatment, while 36 (64%) reported no difficulty understanding risks. Two or more risks were verbalized by 8 (24%) participants for IVT, 2 (17%) for EVT, and 7 (64%) for both IVT and EVT. Brain bleeding was the most recalled risk for IVT and “lack of benefit” for EVT. Majority of the participants were extremely satisfied and reported no difficulty understanding purpose and risks of acute stroke treatment, however only 30% were able to verbalize two or more risks associated with the treatment. •We evaluated satisfaction, understanding, and recall of stroke treatment consent.•Majority of participants were satisfied and reported no difficulty understanding.•Only 30% of participants were able to verbalize two or more risks of treatment.•Subjective difficulty in understanding negatively correlated with satisfaction.