Predicts outcome and mortality after acute ischaemic stroke using age, NIHSS and comorbidities.
THRIVE Score for Ischaemic Stroke: Clinical Guide
Browse Knowledge HubPredicts outcome and mortality after acute ischaemic stroke using age, NIHSS and comorbidities.
Overview
Predicts outcome and mortality after acute ischaemic stroke using age, NIHSS and comorbidities.
Clinical Significance
Higher THRIVE scores are associated with worse functional outcome and higher mortality.
When to Use
- Use as structured clinical decision support when the required data are available and reliable.
How It Is Calculated
- The displayed variables are combined using the published equation, decision rule or weighted point system.
Interpretation
- Higher THRIVE scores are associated with worse functional outcome and higher mortality.
Worked Example
Enter verified patient data in the displayed units; MedicalC applies the published model.
Limitations
- Risk and classification tools can be misapplied outside their validated population.
- Missing, estimated or non-contemporaneous data may materially change the result.
Clinical Pearls
- Document the inputs, units, date and clinical setting with the result.
- Use serial scores only when the same instrument and measurement method are used consistently.
Common Mistakes
- Using the tool without confirming entry criteria.
- Using approximate or incorrectly converted values.
- Treating a prognostic score as a standalone treatment decision.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this tool calculate?
Predicts outcome and mortality after acute ischaemic stroke using age, NIHSS and comorbidities.
Can this result be used alone?
No. Interpret it with the full clinical assessment, applicable entry criteria and current guidance.
References
- Flint AC et al. Stroke. 2010;41:1239-1243. — Primary or supporting reference for the implemented model.
Reviewed by: MedicalC Clinical Editorial Team
Last reviewed: July 2026
Clinical Disclaimer
MedicalC calculators and clinical tools are intended to support healthcare professionals. They do not replace clinical judgement, individual patient assessment, local guidance or specialist advice.
Results should always be interpreted in the context of the patient’s history, examination, investigations, current clinical condition and applicable professional guidance.
