Abstract P246: Hospital Acquired Pneumonia and Dysphagia Screening in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: Findings From Get With the Guidelines-Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
National guidelines recommend dysphagia screening (DS) before any oral intake in hospitalized stroke patients to reduce the risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). We examined the relationship between DS and HAP in acute ischemic stroke patients in the Get With the Guidelines-Stroke (GWTG-S) program. Methods: Data from 1251 GWTG-S hospitals from 04/01/2003 to 03/01/2009 were analyzed. GWTG-S defines HAP as a clinical diagnosis of pneumonia requiring antibiotics. Use of a bedside, evidence-based swallow screen prior to any oral intake qualified as a DS. Univariate analyses (chi-square for categorical variables or Wilcoxon for continuous variables) and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the relationship between DS and HAP, adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics Results: Among 365,726 ischemic stroke patients, 213097 (59.83%) underwent DS, and 25,166 (6.88%) developed HAP. When compared to patients without pneumonia ( Table 1 ), patients with HAP were older and more frequently had CAD/MI, diabetes, prior stroke/TIA, dyslipidemia, atrial fibrillation. They, underwent DS less often, and had increased length of stay, morbidity and in-hospital mortality. Among the subgroup who had NIHSS recorded (n=160,837, 44%), HAP patients had higher median NIHSS (13 vs. 5). Among patients with NIHSS<2, 3.3% developed HAP. In multivariate analysis, factors independently associated with a lower risk of HAP were DS (OR 0.86 [0.83-0.90]), female (OR 0.83 [0.81-0.85]), dyslipidemia (OR 0.84 [0.82-0.86]), and hypertension (OR 0.96 [0.94-0.98]). Discussion: Our data suggests that dysphagia screening is associated with a lower likelihood of HAP, but screening rates remain low. Strategies that increase the rate of dysphagia screening among all stroke patients, even those with mild strokes, should be more broadly implemented. Prospective validation of these findings is warranted. Table 1. Unadjusted associations between patient and hospital characteristics and clinical outcomes Overall(% or value) HAP(% or value) No HAP(% or value) Study Population 365726 (100%) 25166(6.9%) 340560(93.1%) Age (years) Median (IQR) 73(61, 82) 77(66, 85) 73(61,82) Female 52.5 49.2 52.8 Dysphagia Screen Performed 59.8 54.8 60.2 In Hospital Death 5.7 18.1 4.8 P-values are <.0001 for all comparisons and are based on Chi-square test (for dichotomous and nominal factors) or Wilcoxon test (for ordinal and continuous factors)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".