Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul;53(7):2307-2316.
doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.037687. Epub 2022 May 17.

Socioeconomic Inequalities in Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Affiliations

Socioeconomic Inequalities in Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Sine Mette Øgendahl Buus et al. Stroke. 2022 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Reperfusion therapies (thrombolysis and thrombectomy) are of paramount importance for the recovery after ischemic stroke. We aimed to investigate if socioeconomic status (SES) was associated with the chance of receiving reperfusion therapy for ischemic stroke in a country with tax-funded health care.

Methods: This nationwide register-based cohort study included patients with ischemic stroke registered in the Danish Stroke Registry between 2015 and 2018. SES was determined by prestroke educational attainment, income level, and employment status. Data on SES was obtained from Statistics Denmark and linked on an individual level with data from the Danish Stroke Registry. Risk ratios (RR) for receiving reperfusion therapies were calculated using univariate and multivariable Poisson regression with robust variance.

Results: A total of 37 187 ischemic stroke patients were included. Low SES, as defined by education, income and employment status, was associated with lower treatment rates. The socioeconomic gradient was most pronounced according to employment status, with intravenous thrombolysis rates of 23.7% versus 15.8%, and thrombectomy rates of 5.1% versus 2.8% for employed versus unemployed patients. When the analyses were restricted to patients with timely hospital arrival, and adjusted for age, sex and immigrant status, low SES according to income and employment remained unfavorable for the likelihood of receiving intravenous thrombolysis: adjusted RR, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.86-0.95) for low versus high income, and adjusted RR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.71-0.84) for unemployed versus employed patients. Similarly, low SES according to income and employment status remained unfavorable for the likelihood of receiving thrombectomy: adjusted RR, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.72-0.95) for low versus high income and adjusted RR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.53-0.88) for unemployed versus employed patients.

Conclusions: Socioeconomic inequalities in reperfusion treatment rates among ischemic stroke patients prevail, even in a country with tax-funded universal health care.

Keywords: employment; healthcare disparities; ischemic stroke; reperfusion; socioeconomic factors; thrombectomy; thrombolytic therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Publication types