Association of Neighborhood Deprivation With Thrombolysis and Thrombectomy for Acute Stroke in a Health System With Universal Access

Foad Taghdiri,Manav V Vyas,Moira K Kapral,Lauren Lapointe-Shaw,Peter C Austin,Preston Tse,Joan Porter,Yue Chen,Jiming Fang,Amy Ying Xin Yu,Manav V. Vyas,Moira K. Kapral,Peter C. Austin,Amy Xin Yu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000207924
IF: 9.9
2023-11-28
Neurology
Abstract:Background and Objectives The association between socioeconomic status and acute ischemic stroke treatments remain uncertain, particularly in countries with universal health care systems. This study aimed to investigate the association between neighborhood-level material deprivation and the odds of receiving IV thrombolysis or thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke within a single-payer, government-funded health care system. Methods We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked administrative data from Ontario, Canada. This study involved all community-dwelling adult Ontario residents hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke between 2017 and 2022. Neighborhood-level material deprivation, measured in quintiles from least to most deprived, was our main exposure. We considered the receipt of thrombolysis or thrombectomy as the primary outcome. We used multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for baseline differences to estimate the association between material deprivation and outcomes. We performed a sensitivity analysis by additionally adjusting for hospital type at initial assessment. Furthermore, we tested whether hospital type modified the associations between deprivation and outcomes. Results Among 57,704 patients, those in the most materially deprived group (quintile 5) were less likely to be treated with thrombolysis or thrombectomy compared with those in the least deprived group (quintile 1) (16.6% vs 19.6%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.63–0.93). The association was consistent when evaluating thrombolysis (13.0% vs 15.3%, aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64–0.96) and thrombectomy (6.4 vs 7.8%, aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.90) separately. There were no statistically significant differences between the middle 3 quintiles and the least deprived group. These associations persisted after additional adjustment for hospital type, and there was no interaction between material deprivation and hospital type ( p interaction >0.1). Discussion We observed disparities in the use of thrombolysis or thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke by socioeconomic status despite access to universal health care. Targeted health care policies, public health messaging, and resource allocation are needed to ensure equitable access to acute stroke treatments for all patients.
clinical neurology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?