Effects of emergency medical service transport on acute stroke care

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 1344-1347 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Minnerup ◽  
H. Wersching ◽  
M. Unrath ◽  
K. Berger
2001 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 357-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Camerlingo ◽  
L. Casto ◽  
B. Censori ◽  
B. Ferraro ◽  
G. Gazzaniga ◽  
...  

Nosotchu ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-205
Author(s):  
Hiroyuki Yokota ◽  
Makoto Takagi ◽  
Toru Aruga ◽  
Noriaki Aoki

Nosotchu ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 545-550
Author(s):  
Tomoaki Kumagai ◽  
Masahiro Mishina ◽  
Kenkichi Takei ◽  
Hisashi Matsumoto ◽  
Shushi Kominami ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 499-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Hanks ◽  
Ge Wen ◽  
Shuhan He ◽  
Sarah Song ◽  
Jeffrey L. Saver ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 241-245
Author(s):  
Haitham M. Hussein ◽  
David C. Anderson

Objective: We conducted an online survey to gauge the acceptance of sending acute stroke patients with suspected large vessel occlusion (LVO) directly to an endovascular-capable hospital (ECH) even if that means bypassing a closer alteplase-capable hospital (ACH) without endovascular capability. Methods: The survey was composed of two cases of acute stroke, one with cortical symptoms suggestive of LVO and the other without. In each case, responders were asked to choose between triaging to a closer ACH or an ECH that is further away and to provide an opinion regarding the maximum extra travel time they would tolerate if they chose the ECH. The survey was sent electronically to national groups of neurologists, emergency department (ED) physicians, emergency medical service (EMS) directors, and stroke coordinators. Results: There were 320 responders from 44 states, most of them with 10 years or more of experience. Most of the responders, 72.5%, chose ECH for the LVO case, while 56% chose ACH for the non-LVO case. There were marked differences in responses by specialty: neurology strongly supported ECH for LVO and strongly supported ACH for non-LVO, most ED and EMS chose ECH for both cases, and stroke coordinators were the least supportive of bypassing ACH. Almost all groups agreed on 30 min as the acceptable extra transfer time to ECH. Conclusion: Among the survey responders, there is a broad acceptance of the idea of bypassing ACH and going straight to ECH when LVO is suspected; however, there is less agreement on triaging patients with non-LVO stroke.


Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (7) ◽  
pp. 1991-1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salvatore Rudilosso ◽  
Carlos Laredo ◽  
Víctor Vera ◽  
Martha Vargas ◽  
Arturo Renú ◽  
...  

Background and Purpose: The purpose of the study is to analyze how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected acute stroke care in a Comprehensive Stroke Center. Methods: On February 28, 2020, contingency plans were implemented at Hospital Clinic of Barcelona to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Among them, the decision to refrain from reallocating the Stroke Team and Stroke Unit to the care of patients with COVID-19. From March 1 to March 31, 2020, we measured the number of emergency calls to the Emergency Medical System in Catalonia (7.5 million inhabitants), and the Stroke Codes dispatched to Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. We recorded all stroke admissions, and the adequacy of acute care measures, including the number of thrombectomies, workflow metrics, angiographic results, and clinical outcomes. Data were compared with March 2019 using parametric or nonparametric methods as appropriate. Results: At Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, 1232 patients with COVID-19 were admitted in March 2020, demanding 60% of the hospital bed capacity. Relative to March 2019, the Emergency Medical System had a 330% mean increment in the number of calls (158 005 versus 679 569), but fewer Stroke Code activations (517 versus 426). Stroke admissions (108 versus 83) and the number of thrombectomies (21 versus 16) declined at Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, particularly after lockdown of the population. Younger age was found in stroke admissions during the pandemic (median [interquartile range] 69 [64–73] versus 75 [73–80] years, P =0.009). In-hospital, there were no differences in workflow metrics, angiographic results, complications, or outcomes at discharge. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic reduced by a quarter the stroke admissions and thrombectomies performed at a Comprehensive Stroke Center but did not affect the quality of care metrics. During the lockdown, there was an overload of emergency calls but fewer Stroke Code activations, particularly in elderly patients. Hospital contingency plans, patient transport systems, and population-targeted alerts must act concertedly to better protect the chain of stroke care in times of pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document