METHODOLOGY: Prospective observational cohort study of consecutive surviving VLBW infants and randomly sampled NBW infants born in the Kuala Lumpur Maternity Hospital between 1 December 1989 and 31 December 1992. Infants were followed up regularly during the first year of life, after correction for prematurity.
RESULTS: Compared with NBW infants (n = 106), VLBW infants (n = 127) had significantly higher risk of failure to thrive (odds ratio [OR] = 8.0, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.1 to 354.3), wheezing (OR = 3.7, 95% CI: 1.6 to 9.3), rehospitalization (OR = 2.3, 95% CI: 1.1 to 5.0), cerebral palsy (OR = 8.6, 95% CI: 2.0 to 77.6), neurosensory hearing loss (OR = 12.0, 95% CI: 1.7 to 513.6) and visual loss (7.9 vs 0%, P = 0.002). The mean mental developmental index (MDI) and mean psychomotor developmental index (PDI) at 1 year of age were significantly lower among VLBW infants (MDI 99 [SD = 28], PDI 89 [SD = 25]) than NBW infants (MDI 106 [SD = 18], PDI 101 [SD = 18]) (95% CI for difference between means being MDI: -14.1 to -1.7; and PDI: -17.6 to -6.0). Logistic regression analysis showed that among VLBW infants: (i) male sex, Malay ethnicity and bronchopulmonary dysplasia were significant risk factors associated with wheezing; (ii) longer duration of oxygen therapy during the neonatal period, seizures after the post-neonatal period and wheezing were significant risk factors associated with rehospitalization; and (iii) longer duration of oxygen therapy during the neonatal period was a significant risk factor associated with adverse neurodevelopmental outcome during the first year of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with NBW infants, VLBW Malaysian infants had significantly higher risks of physical and neuro-developmental morbidities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a multi-centre cohort study involving 5 PSCs and 7 ASRHs in Malaysia. Through review of medical records of AIS patients who received IVT from 01 January 2014 to 30 June 2021, real-world data was extracted for analysis. Univariate and multivariate regression models were employed to evaluate the role of PSCs versus ASRHs in post-IVT outcomes and complications. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
RESULTS: A total of 313 multi-ethnic Asians, namely 231 from PSCs and 82 from ASRHs, were included. Both groups were comparable in baseline demographic, clinical, and stroke characteristics. The efficiency of IVT delivery (door-toneedle time), functional outcomes (mRS at 3 months post- IVT), and rates of adverse events (intracranial haemorrhages and mortality) following IVT were comparable between the 2 groups. Notably, 46.8% and 48.8% of patients in PSCs and ASRHs group respectively (p=0.752) achieved favourable functional outcome (mRS≤1 at 3 months post-IVT). Regression analyses demonstrated that post-IVT functional outcomes and adverse events were independent of the role of PSCs or ASRHs.
CONCLUSION: Our study provides real-world evidence which suggests that IVT can be equally safe, effective, and efficiently delivered in ASRHs. This may encourage the establishment of more ASRHs to extend the benefits of IVT to a greater proportion of stroke populations and enhance the regional stroke care.