Gender differences in the functional recovery after acute stroke.
OBJECTIVE
PurposezzInterest in gender differences in the effects of acute stroke is growing worldwide. However, gender differences in functional recovery after acute stroke in the Korean population have yet to be evaluated. The aim of this investigation was to compare long-term functional outcomes between male and female after acute stroke.


METHODS
Patients with acute stroke were enrolled prospectively between January 2005 and January 2009. Baseline characteristics, risk factors, stroke subtypes, time delay from onset to arrival at a hospital, active treatment, and stroke severity were compared between male and female. Differences in mortality and disability at discharge, and at 3 months and 1 year after stroke onset were also investigated. Functional disabilities were categorized into two groups: good outcome (score on modified Rankin scale ≤2) and poor outcome (score on modified Rankin scale >2).


RESULTS
Among 1,055 patients with acute stroke, 575 were male (aged 64.83±11.98 years, mean±SD) and 480 were female (aged 70.09±13.02 years). There were no gender differences in mortality at 3 months and 1 year after stroke. The frequency of poor outcomes was higher in female patients than in male patients at discharge (39.8% versus 30.9%, respectively; p=0.003), the 3 months follow-up (32.3% versus 20.8%, respectively; p<0.001), and the 1 year follow-up (31.1% versus 18.7%, respectively; p=0.001). After adjusting for multiple confounding factors including age and stroke severity, the female gender persisted as a predictor of poor functional outcome at 3 months and 1 year after stroke.


CONCLUSIONS
Female patients have greater difficulty than male patients in recovering from a disabled state after acute stroke. Future studies should investigate the causes of this gender difference.
Department of Neurology, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Ji-Sun
JS
Kim
Kyung-Bok
KB
Lee
Hakjae
H
Roh
Moo-Young
MY
Ahn
Hye-Won
HW
Hwang
Stroke. 2008 Apr;39(4):1090-5
18292386
Eur Neurol. 2001;45(4):199-205
11385256
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1998 Winter;10(1):34-40
9547464
Stroke. 2007 Jul;38(7):2123-6
17525398
Stroke. 2009 Apr;40(4):1032-7
19211484
Stroke. 2001 Dec 1;32(12):2735-40
11739965
Stroke. 2003 Jul;34(7):1581-5
12805490
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004 Jul-Aug;13(4):171-7
17903971
Stroke. 1993 Jan;24(1):35-41
7678184
Ann Emerg Med. 2007 Aug;50(2):99-107
17478010
Neuroepidemiology. 2005;24(3):123-8
15637449
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2009;28(5):427-34
19738370
Stroke. 1993 Jul;24(7):976-82
8322398
Stroke. 2009 Apr;40(4):1078-81
19211487
Stroke. 2003 Aug;34(8):1970-5
12855818
Lancet Neurol. 2008 Oct;7(10):915-26
18722812
Stroke. 2005 Apr;36(4):809-14
15731476
J Public Health Med. 1999 Dec;21(4):385-94
11469359
Neurology. 2006 Feb 14;66(3):306-12
16476927
Stroke. 2009 Apr;40(4):1063-9
19211497
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1998 Winter;10(1):41-7
9547465
Stroke. 2003 May;34(5):1114-9
12690218
Stroke. 2007 Nov;38(11):2960-4
17901387
Stroke. 2007 Sep;38(9):2541-8
17673706
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2003 May-Jun;12(3):119-26
17903915