Reply to “Hospital stroke registers: Similarities and differences”

Dear Editor:

It was with great interest that we read the letter in response to our recently published article¹ underscoring the importance and benefits of stroke registries, and we wish to thank the authors for their valuable remarks.

We agree that very few stroke registries have been published in our setting; this is especially significant in view of the high prevalence and great social impact of stroke. Prospective registries (not only for stroke, but for any condition) are a good working methodology and represent high-quality patient care. Furthermore, registries are essential to understand the natural history and trends of any condition; this is particularly relevant in the case of stroke, given the numerous diagnostic and treatment advances seen in stroke management. In addition to data from simple registries, it would be extremely helpful to have cumulative data and trend analyses such as those published by the team working at Hospital Universitari Sagrat Cor.^2,3 Likewise, a prospective registry is a source of data for future studies.

In summary, we thank the authors for their interest in our study and endorse their comments on stroke registries.

Conflicts of interest

The author has no conflicts of interest to declare.