Abstract P166: The Primary Stroke Center Transfer Experience to Higher Levels of Care: A Qualitative Study

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L Patterson ◽  
Wendy Dusenbury ◽  
Thomas G Devlin ◽  
Ansley Stanfill ◽  
Georgios K Tsivgoulis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Time ◽  
Transport Systems ◽  
Transport Costs ◽  
Air Ambulances ◽  
Levels Of Care ◽  
Primary Stroke Center ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center ◽  
Theme Identification ◽  
Rapid Transfer

Background: Transfer times from primary stroke centers/acute stroke ready hospitals (PSCs/ASRHs) to higher levels of care have been shown to be excessive in many cases, promoting some to believe that bypass regulations should be instituted. Yet barriers to rapid transfer remain undescribed in the literature. The purpose of this work is to investigate these issues and the locus of control for transfer time delays. Methods: Six national focus groups with PSC/ASRH staff experienced with stroke transfers were conducted by web conference. Interviews were conducted using pre-scripted open-ended questions; information was recorded, and data were transcribed, for theme identification. Results: Participants were from Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Southeast, Midwest, and West Coast USA. Data were grouped into 3 main categories representing where transfer problems initiated. Themes emerging within the Internal PSC/ASRH Category were exclusively emergency department (ED) physician focused including knowing how/when to use advanced imaging and telemedicine resources. Of note, all participants were compliant with door-to-CT and treatment time metrics. Within the Transport Category , themes included inadequate time-to-response by ground and air ambulances, and specialty transport costs. Within the Internal Comprehensive Stroke Center (CSC) Category , themes included complex communication, overwhelmed systems, and poor guidance on patient selection. Conclusions: While ED physician contributors to transfer delays are within the control of PSCs/ASRHs, more challenging factors to rapid transfer include factors within transport systems and CSCs themselves. Quantification of these factors is warranted to support transfer system redesign with rapid access to care.

Abstract P856: Contributors to Internal Primary Stroke Center Transfer Delays: Factors Beyond Stroke Coordinators’ Control

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L Patterson ◽  
Wendy Dusenbury ◽  
Thomas G Devlin ◽  
Ansley Stanfill ◽  
Georgios K Tsivgoulis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Transfer Process ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Physician Education ◽  
Advanced Imaging ◽  
Levels Of Care ◽  
Primary Stroke Center ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center ◽  
Theme Identification ◽  
Major Factors

Background: Stroke coordinators often are challenged to transfer patients to higher levels of care, facing internal system, transport, and comprehensive stroke center (CSC) factors that may slow the transfer process. We aimed to understand the internal challenges faced by stroke coordinators at primary stroke centers/acute stroke ready hospitals (PSC/ASRH) in the transfer process. Methods: Six national focus groups with PSC/ASRH staff experienced with stroke transfers were conducted by web conference. Interviews were conducted using pre-scripted open-ended questions; information was recorded and data were transcribed for theme identification. Results: Participants were from Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Southeast, Midwest, and West Coast USA. Internal PSC/ASRH problems were tied exclusively to physicians: Emergency department (ED) physicians’ lack knowledge of how/when to order advanced imaging; delays initiating telemedicine guidance were common; and, negative attitudes towards stroke emergencies among “tenured” ED physicians were identified. All participants noted that they were compliant with door-to-noncontrast CT and alteplase treatment time metrics, however, radiologists commonly used the full 2-hours allotted for CTA and CTP reads, and many telemedicine neurologists refused to review/interpret advanced imaging choosing to rely on the local general radiologists’ formal interpretation. Conclusions: Major factors contributing to internal PSC/ASRH transfer delays are exclusively physician-based. Physician education, standardized algorithms for advanced imaging selection, more-timely regulatory metrics for advanced imaging interpretation, and improved telemedicine physician expertise and guidance would improve transfer timeliness in these centers.

Effect of “drip-and-ship” and “drip-and-drive” on endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion: a single-center retrospective study

2021 ◽  
pp. 028418512110068
Author(s):  
Yu Hang ◽  
Zhen Yu Jia ◽  
Lin Bo Zhao ◽  
Yue Zhou Cao ◽  
Huang Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Large Vessel ◽  
Large Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Primary Stroke Center ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center

Background Patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by large vessel occlusion (LVO) were usually transferred from a primary stroke center (PSC) to a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) for endovascular treatment (drip-and-ship [DS]), while driving the doctor from a CSC to a PSC to perform a procedure is an alternative strategy (drip-and-drive [DD]). Purpose To compare the efficacy and prognosis of the two strategies. Material and Methods From February 2017 to June 2019, 62 patients with LVO received endovascular treatment via the DS and DD models and were retrospectively analyzed from the stroke alliance based on our CSC. Primary endpoint was door-to-reperfusion (DTR) time. Secondary endpoints included puncture-to-recanalization (PTR) time, modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) rates at the end of the procedure, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days. Results Forty-one patients received the DS strategy and 21 patients received the DD strategy. The DTR time was significantly longer in the DS group compared to the DD group (315.5 ± 83.8 min vs. 248.6 ± 80.0 min; P < 0.05), and PTR time was shorter (77.2 ± 35.9 min vs. 113.7 ± 69.7 min; P = 0.033) compared with the DD group. Successful recanalization (mTICI 2b/3) was achieved in 89% (36/41) of patients in the DS group and 86% (18/21) in the DD group ( P = 1.000). Favorable functional outcomes (mRS 0–2) were observed in 49% (20/41) of patients in the DS group and 71% (15/21) in the DD group at 90 days ( P = 0.089). Conclusion Compared with the DS strategy, the DD strategy showed more effective and a trend of better clinical outcomes for AIS patients with LVO.

How do treatment times impact on functional outcome in stroke patients undergoing thrombectomy in Germany? Results from the German Stroke Registry

2021 ◽  
pp. 174749302098526
Author(s):  
Juliane Herm ◽  
Ludwig Schlemm ◽  
Eberhard Siebert ◽  
Georg Bohner ◽  
Anna C Alegiani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Poor Functional Outcome ◽  
Stroke Registry ◽  
Primary Stroke Center ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center ◽  
Center Time

Background Functional outcome post-stroke depends on time to recanalization. Effect of in-hospital delay may differ in patients directly admitted to a comprehensive stroke center and patients transferred via a primary stroke center. We analyzed the current door-to-groin time in Germany and explored its effect on functional outcome in a real-world setting. Methods Data were collected in 25 stroke centers in the German Stroke Registry-Endovascular Treatment a prospective, multicenter, observational registry study including stroke patients with large vessel occlusion. Functional outcome was assessed at three months by modified Rankin Scale. Association of door-to-groin time with outcome was calculated using binary logistic regression models. Results Out of 4340 patients, 56% were treated primarily in a comprehensive stroke center and 44% in a primary stroke center and then transferred to a comprehensive stroke center (“drip-and-ship” concept). Median onset-to-arrival at comprehensive stroke center time and door-to-groin time were 103 and 79 min in comprehensive stroke center patients and 225 and 44 min in primary stroke center patients. The odds ratio for poor functional outcome per hour of onset-to-arrival-at comprehensive stroke center time was 1.03 (95%CI 1.01–1.05) in comprehensive stroke center patients and 1.06 (95%CI 1.03–1.09) in primary stroke center patients. The odds ratio for poor functional outcome per hour of door-to-groin time was 1.30 (95%CI 1.16–1.46) in comprehensive stroke center patients and 1.04 (95%CI 0.89–1.21) in primary stroke center patients. Longer door-to-groin time in comprehensive stroke center patients was associated with admission on weekends (odds ratio 1.61; 95%CI 1.37–1.97) and during night time (odds ratio 1.52; 95%CI 1.27–1.82) and use of intravenous thrombolysis (odds ratio 1.28; 95%CI 1.08–1.50). Conclusion Door-to-groin time was especially relevant for outcome of comprehensive stroke center patients, whereas door-to-groin time was much shorter in primary stroke center patients. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03356392 . Unique identifier NCT03356392

Abstract WP429: A Nurse Driven Acute Stroke Alert Process Improves Treatment Times and Treatment Rates

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel D'Amour ◽  
Jayme Strauss ◽  
Amy K Starosciak
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Time ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Treatment Rate ◽  
Treatment Decision Making ◽  
National Rate ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Stroke Team ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center ◽  
Positive Effect

Introduction: Treatment time has gained sufficient popularity because it is now well-known that “Time is Brain”. Treatment rates, however, lag behind in importance even though more lives can be saved by treating more often. Our TJC Comprehensive Stroke Center has a nurse-led stroke alert process that focuses on multiple, rapid, parallel steps to reduce DTN for IV alteplase. The Baptist Emergency Stroke Team (BEST) responders are highly-trained and skilled nurses that assess, coordinate, and initiate processes to ensure the best times. We identified that our treatment rate was lower than the national rate for certified CSCs, so the BEST responders used a stepwise process to develop their own interventions to improve rates. Methods: First, the BEST responders started tracking our monthly rate. Next, they set a rate goal, and then brainstormed how to influence treatment decision-making. The BEST team initiated a monthly PI meeting that focused on the importance of treating disability rather than an NIHSS score. Then the team scripted and rehearsed critical conversations to have providers that advocated specifically for treating disability. The team adopted the motto, “Treat Disability, Not Numbers”. Results Conclusions: Our CSC observed a small decrease in median DTN but double the treatment rate after the BEST responder intervention. In comparison, these statistics did not change at the national CSC level. The sICH rate was reduced from Period A to C, meaning that increased treatment rate did not lead to increased hemorrhagic rate. Nursing initiatives can have a substantial positive effect on increasing the number of patients treated with IV alteplase for acute ischemic stroke.

Abstract W P292: A Comparative Analysis of the Requirements for Certification of Stroke Programs, by Type and by Nationally Recognized Certifying Body

Stroke ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacey Lang
Keyword(s):  
Selection Process ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Program Leaders ◽  
Primary Stroke Center ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Certification Organizations ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center ◽  
Core Measures ◽  
Certification Requirements

Background and Purpose: There are currently three main, nationally recognized organizations that certify facilities as primary or comprehensive stroke centers. One of these organizations also offers a “Stroke Ready” designation. While each of these organizations share many of the same requirements, there are likewise many unique requirements between certifying bodies with respect to the certification requirements, process, performance, and on-going expectations. All should be considered when choosing a partner for certification by organizations that are committed to achieving an appropriate level of certification as determined by clinical capabilities. Differences in core measure requirements and definitions, data collection expectations and re-certification cycles among other factors are often overlooked when stroke program leaders are identifying the best certification partner for their particular organization. This poster will detail the similarities and differences among the various stroke program certifying organizations and present a detailed methodology to assist program leaders with the partner selection process. Methods: The three stroke program certifying organizations were examined for review cycles, levels of certification offered, requirements related to hospital certifications, and reportable core measures. Other factors such as cost, the actual certification process, and other considerations that may impact the successful achievement of certification within a particular organization were also reviewed. Results/Conclusion: While there are many similarities in the stroke center certification requirements and processes among the three certifying organizations, there are also significant differences. In order to ensure that the end product of a journey to certification will align with a hospital’s values, budget, and vision for the stroke program, an evaluation process in advance of certifying body selection is essential. Awareness of the similarities and differences among the stroke certification organizations can facilitate a hospital’s decision-making process for pursuit of certification as a stroke ready center, primary stroke center or comprehensive stroke center

Field triage for endovascular stroke therapy: a population-based comparison

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahesh V Jayaraman ◽  
Morgan L Hemendinger ◽  
Grayson L Baird ◽  
Shadi Yaghi ◽  
Shawna Cutting ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Population Based ◽  
Stroke Severity ◽  
Matched Pairs ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Stroke Therapy ◽  
Transport Time ◽  
Field Triage ◽  
Primary Stroke Center ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center

BackgroundEndovascular therapy (EVT) for stroke improves outcomes but is time sensitive.ObjectiveTo compare times to treatment and outcomes between patients taken to the closest primary stroke center (PSC) with those triaged in the field to a more distant comprehensive stroke center (CSC).MethodsDuring the study, a portion of our region allowed field triage of patients who met severity criteria to a more distant CSC than the closest PSC. The remaining patients were transported to the closest PSC. We compared times to treatment and clinical outcomes between those two groups. Additionally, we performed a matched-pairs analysis of patients from both groups on stroke severity and distance to CSC.ResultsOver 2 years, 232 patients met inclusion criteria and were closest from the field to a PSC; 144 were taken to the closest PSC and 88 to the more distant CSC. The median additional transport time to the CSC was 7 min. Times from scene departure to alteplase and arterial puncture were faster in the direct group (50 vs 62 min; 93 vs 152 min; p<0.001 for both). Among patients who were independent before the stroke, the OR for less disability in the direct group was 1.47 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.93, p=0.003), and 2.06 (95% CI 1.10 to 3.89, p=0.01) for the matched pairs.ConclusionsIn a densely populated setting, for patients with stroke who are EVT candidates and closest to a PSC from the field, triage to a slightly more distant CSC is associated with faster time to EVT, no delay to alteplase, and less disability at 90 days.

Abstract MP35: Blood Pressure Reductions Before Arrival at a Thrombectomy-Capable Hospital Are Associated With Neurologic Worsening in Patients With Large-Vessel Occlusion

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Kobsa ◽  
Ayush Prasad ◽  
Alexandria Soto ◽  
Sreeja Kodali ◽  
Cindy Khanh Nguyen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Time Points ◽  
Good Outcome ◽  
Primary Stroke Center ◽  
Poor Outcomes ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center ◽  
Radiographic Data

Introduction: Decreases in blood pressure (BP) during thrombectomy are associated with infarct progression and worse outcomes. Many patients present first to a primary stroke center (PSC) and are later transferred to a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) to undergo thrombectomy. During this period, important BP variations might occur. We evaluated the association of BP reductions with neurological worsening and functional outcomes. Methods: We prospectively collected hemodynamic, clinical, and radiographic data on consecutive patients with LVO ischemic stroke who were transferred from a PSC for possible thrombectomy between 2018 and 2020. We assessed systolic BP (SBP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) at five time points: earliest recorded, average pre-PSC, PSC admission, average PSC, and CSC admission. We measured neurologic worsening as a change in NIHSS (ΔNIHSS) from PSC to CSC >3 and functional outcome using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge and 90 days. Relationships between variables of interest were evaluated using linear regression. Results: Of 91 patients (mean age 70±16 years, mean NIHSS 12) included, 13 (14%) experienced early neurologic deterioration (ΔNIHSS>3), and 34 (37%) achieved a good outcome at discharge (mRS<3). We found that patients with good outcome had significantly lower SBP at all five assessed time points compared to patients with poor outcome (Figure 1, p<0.05). Percent change in MAP from initial presentation to CSC arrival was independently associated with ΔNIHSS after adjusting for age, sex, and transfer time (p=0.03, β=0.27). Conclusions: Patients with poor outcomes have higher BP throughout the pre-CSC period, possibly reflecting an augmented hypertensive response. Reductions in SBP and MAP before arrival at the CSC are associated with neurologic worsening. These results suggest that BP management strategies in the pre-CSC period to avoid large reductions in BP may improve outcomes in patients affected by LVO stroke.

Abstract WP126: Association of 24-Hour Blood Pressure Parameters Post-Intravenous Alteplase With Symptomatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Taha Nisar ◽  
Toluwalase Tofade ◽  
Ava Liberman ◽  
Priyank Khandelwal
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Intracerebral Hemorrhage ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Binary Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Symptomatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage ◽  
Intravenous Alteplase ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center

Introduction: Higher blood pressure (BP) at presentation is associated with a higher risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) post-intravenous alteplase (IV-rtPA). We investigated the association of different BP parameters post-IV-rtPA with the development of sICH at a tertiary care center. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of adult patients with an acute ischemic stroke treated with IV-rtPA at a comprehensive stroke center from July 2014 to March 2018. We excluded patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy. At the comprehensive stroke center, the BP values are documented according to standard post-IV-rtPA care guidelines. We recorded the BP values over a period of 24-hours post-IV-rtPA. A binary logistic regression analysis was performed, controlling for age, sex, pre-treatment NIHSS, atrial fibrillation, onset to treatment time, with the BP parameters as the predictors. The primary outcome was the development of sICH. SICH was defined as an intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) that causes worsening of NIHSS score by ≥4 points post-IV-rtPA. Results: 84 patients met our inclusion criteria. 45 (53.57%) patients were male. The mean age was 63.50±15 years. 5 (5.95%) patients developed sICH. In our cohort, the BP parameters of higher maximum systolic blood pressure (SBP) (195.8±9 vs.172.22±17; OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.26; P 0.016), higher maximum diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (120.2±18 vs.104.76±15; OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.17; P 0.04), wider SBP range (79.4±20 vs.58.75±18; OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.12; P 0.033), wider DBP range (74.2±27 vs.47.27±15; OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.2; P 0.008), and coefficient variation (CV) DBP (17.7±6 vs.12.65±4; OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01-1.42; P 0.048) were significantly associated with a risk of sICH post IV-rtPA. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates significant risk of sICH with higher maximum SBP and DBP, wider SBP and DBP ranges, and CV DBP post-IV-rtPA.

Abstract TP248: Reduced Door-in-Door-Out Time Increases the Likelihood of Endovascular Thrombectomy for Large Vessel Occlusion Patients

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kavit Shah ◽  
Shashvat Desai ◽  
Benjamin Morrow ◽  
Pratit Patel ◽  
Habibullah Ziayee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Carotid ◽  
Large Vessel ◽  
Large Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Endovascular Thrombectomy ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Rapid Transfer

Introduction: Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is recommended for patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) presenting within 24 hours of last seen well (LSW). Unfortunately, patients transferred from spoke hospitals to receive EVT have poorer outcomes compared to those presenting directly to the hub, underscoring the importance of rapid transfer timing - door-in-door-out (DIDO). Methods: Data were analyzed from consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients with proximal large vessel occlusions (LVO) transferred to our comprehensive stroke center for EVT. The following variable were studied: DIDO, baseline NIHSS/mRS, presentation CT ASPECTs, site of LVO, treatment, and clinical outcome. Results: Ninety patients with internal carotid or middle cerebral artery (M1) occlusion at the spoke hospital were included in the study. At the hub hospital, 75% (68) underwent emergent cerebral angiography (DSA) with intent to perform EVT. Reasons for not undergoing angiography at hub hospital included large stroke burden (59%) and improvement in NIHSS score (41%). Overall, DIDO time was 184 (130-285) minutes. Mean DIDO time was significantly lower for patients who underwent DSA at hub hospital compared to patients who did not (207 versus 272 minutes, p=0.031). 92% (12) of patients with DIDO <=120 minutes (n=13) underwent EVT compared to 73% (56) of patients with DIDO >120 minutes (n=77). Every 30-minute delay after 120 minutes lead to a 6% reduction in the likelihood of EVT. Lower DIDO time [OR-0.92 (0.9-0.96), p=0.04] and higher ASPECTS score [OR-1.4 (1.1-1.9), p=0.013] at spoke hospital are predictors of EVT at hub hospital. Conclusion: Reduced DIDO times are associated with higher likelihood of receiving EVT. DIDO should be treated on par as in-hospital time metrics and methods should be in place to optimize transfer times.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document