Impact of Primary Stroke Center Certification on Location of Acute Ischemic Stroke Care in Georgia

Background and purpose: In-hospital stroke-onset assessment and management present numerous challenges, especially in community hospitals. Comprehensive analysis of key stroke care metrics in community-based primary stroke centers is under-studied. Methods: Medical records were reviewed for patients admitted to a community hospital for non-cerebrovascular indications and for whom a stroke alert was activated between 2013 and 2019. Demographic, clinical, radiologic and laboratory information were collected for each incident stroke. Descriptive statistical analysis was employed. When applicable, Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-Square tests were used to compare median values and categorical data between pre-specified groups. Statistical significance was set at alpha = 0.05. Results: There were 192 patients with in-hospital stroke-alert activation; mean age (SD) was 71.0 years (15.0), 49.5% female. 51.6% (99/192) had in-hospital ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. The most frequent mechanism of stroke was cardioembolism. Upon stroke activation, 45.8% had ischemic stroke while 40.1% had stroke mimics. Stroke team response time from activation was 26 minutes for all in-hospital activations. Intravenous thrombolysis was utilized in 8% of those with ischemic stroke; 3.4% were transferred for consideration of endovascular thrombectomy. In-hospital mortality was 17.7%, and the proportion of patients discharged to home was 34.4% for all activations. Conclusion: The in-hospital stroke mortality was high, and the proportions of patients who either received or were considered for acute intervention were low. Quality improvement targeting increased use of acute stroke intervention in eligible patients and reducing hospital mortality in this patient cohort is needed.

Download Full-text

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

Acta Radiologica ◽

10.1177/02841851211006897 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Abstract WP399: Reduced Cost and Decreased Length of Stay Associated with Acute Ischemic Stroke Care Provided by Nurse Practitioners: A Single Primary Stroke Center Experience

Stroke ◽

10.1161/str.48.suppl_1.wp399 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 48 (suppl_1) ◽

Author(s):

Leah Roering ◽

Michelle Peterson ◽

Muhammad Shah Miran ◽

Melissa Freese ◽

Kenneth Shea ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Length Of Stay ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

Nurse Practitioners ◽

Acute Care Hospital ◽

Stroke Care ◽

Care Hospital ◽

Medical Provider ◽

The Mean ◽

Stroke Center

Background: Nurse practitioner (NP) have a wider role in modern stroke centers providing quality evidence based care to patients in both in and outpatient settings for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and transient ischemic attack (TIA) patients. We studied the outcome measures, length of stay (LOS) and cost before and after implementation of nurse practitioners as the primary medical provider in a community based stroke center. Methods: St Cloud hospital is acute care hospital with dedicated stroke service responsible for workup and management of all patients admitted with AIS and TIA. From March 2014-March 2015, all patients were primarily managed by stroke neurologists with or without support of NP, representing physician driven arm. From June 2015-March 2016 all non-critical patients were managed primarily by NP, representing the NP driven arm of care. For this analysis, we excluded all patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage or intracerebral hemorrhage. Using ICD codes, we abstracted LOS and hospitalization cost for all patients, and compared between two arms. Results: A total of 822 patients were included in physician arm and 336 in NP arm. The mean age was 72±14 years for both arms, and 54.4% were male in physician arm and 57.4% were male in NP arm. The mean total LOS for the physician arm was 3.1 ±3.3 days while 2.9±3.6 for NP arm (p=0.6). The total cost for physician arm was $11,286.70 ±$10,920.90 while the NP arm was $10,277.30± $10,142.30 (p=0.1). Conclusion: There is a trend towards lower cost and length of stay with implementation of NP as primary stroke provider for patients admitted with acute ischemic stroke.

Download Full-text

Abstract 5: Do Stroke Centers Reduce Mortality for Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke? An Instrumental Variable Analysis

Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes ◽

10.1161/circoutcomes.4.suppl_1.a5 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽

Author(s):

Ying Xian ◽

Robert G Holloway ◽

Katia Noyes ◽

Manish N Shah ◽

Bruce Friedman

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Hospital Mortality ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

New York State ◽

Selection Effect ◽

Stroke Care ◽

Instrumental Variable Analysis ◽

All Cause Mortality ◽

Stroke Center

Background: Although the establishment of stroke centers based on the Brain Attack Coalition recommendations has great potential to improve quality of stroke care, little is known about whether stroke centers improve health outcomes such as mortality. Methods: Using 2005-2006 New York State Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System data, we identified 32,783 hospitalized patients age 18+ with a principal diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke (ICD-9 433.x1, 434.x1 and 436). We compared in-hospital mortality and up to one year all-cause mortality between New York State Designated Stroke Centers and non-stroke center hospitals. Because patients were not randomly assigned to hospitals, stroke centers might treat different types of patients than other hospitals (a selection effect). We used a “natural randomization” approach, instrumental variable analysis (differential distance was the instrument), to control for this selection effect. To determine whether the mortality difference was specific to stroke care, we repeated the analysis using a different group of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage (N=53,077). Results: Of the 32,783 stroke patients, nearly 50% (16,258) were admitted to stroke centers. Stroke centers had lower unadjusted in-hospital mortality and 30-, 90-, 180-, and 365-day all-cause mortality than non-stroke centers (7.0% vs. 7.8%, 10.0% vs. 12.6%, 14.6% vs. 17.5%, 18.0% vs. 21.0%, 22.4% vs. 26.2%, respectively). After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, comorbidities, and the patient selection effect, stroke centers were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality. The adjusted differences were -2.6%, -2.7%, -1.8%, and -2.3% for 30-, 90-, 180- and 365-day mortality (all p<0.05). The adjusted difference in in-hospital mortality was -0.8% but was not statistically significant. In a specificity analysis of patients with GI hemorrhage, stroke centers had slightly higher mortality. Conclusions: Hospitals that are Designated Stroke Centers had lower mortality for acute ischemic stroke than non-stroke center hospitals. The mortality benefit was specific to stroke and was not observed for GI hemorrhage. Providing stroke centers nationwide has the potential to reduce mortality.

Download Full-text

Emergency Medical Services Support for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Thrombolysis at a Primary Stroke Center

Journal of brain disease ◽

10.4137/jcnsd.s2221 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 1 ◽

pp. JCNSD.S2221

Author(s):

Byron R. Spencer ◽

Omar M. Khan ◽

Bentley J. Bobrow ◽

Bart M. Demaerschalk

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Acute Stroke ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

Stroke Onset ◽

Stroke Patients ◽

Emergency Medical ◽

Field Assessment ◽

Primary Stroke Center ◽

Stroke Center

Background Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is a vital link in the overall chain of stroke survival. A Primary Stroke Center (PSC) relies heavily on the 9-1-1 response system along with the ability of EMS personnel to accurately diagnose acute stroke. Other critical elements include identifying time of symptom onset, providing pre-hospital care, selecting a destination PSC, and communicating estimated time of arrival (ETA). Purpose Our purpose was to evaluate the EMS component of thrombolysed acute ischemic stroke patient care at our PSC. Methods In a retrospective manner we retrieved electronic copies of the EMS incident reports for every thrombolysed ischemic stroke patient treated at our PSC from September 2001 to August 2005. The following data elements were extracted: location of victim, EMS agency, times of dispatch, scene, departure, emergency department (ED) arrival, recordings of time of stroke onset, blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), cardiac rhythm, blood glucose (BG), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), Cincinnati Stroke Scale (CSS) elements, emergency medical personnel field assessment, and transport decision making. Results Eighty acute ischemic stroke patients received thrombolysis during the study interval. Eighty-one percent arrived by EMS. Two EMS agencies transported to our PSC. Mean dispatch-to-scene time was 6 min, on-scene time was 16 min, transport time was 10 min. Stroke onset time was recorded in 68%, BP, HR, and cardiac rhythm each in 100%, BG in 81%, GCS in 100%, CSS in 100%, and acute stroke diagnosis was made in 88%. Various diagnostic terms were employed: cerebrovascular accident in 40%, unilateral weakness or numbness in 20%, loss of consciousness in 16%, stroke in 8%, other stroke terms in 4%. In 87% of incident reports there was documentation of decision-making to transport to the nearest PSC in conjunction with pre-notification. Conclusion The EMS component of thrombolysed acute ischemic stroke patients care at our PSC appeared to be very good overall. Diagnostic accuracy was excellent, field assessment, decision-making, and transport times were very good. There was still room for improvement in documentation of stroke onset and in employment of a common term for acute stroke.

Download Full-text

Mandatory Neuroendovascular Evolution: Meeting the New Demands

Interventional Neurology ◽

10.1159/000495075 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 69-82

Author(s):

Mohammad El-Ghanem ◽

Francisco E. Gomez ◽

Prateeka Koul ◽

Rolla Nuoman ◽

Justin G. Santarelli ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

Symptom Onset ◽

Mechanical Thrombectomy ◽

Stroke Care ◽

Endovascular Intervention ◽

Stroke Patients ◽

Hub And Spoke ◽

Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽

Stroke Center

Background: Traditionally, patients undergoing acute ischemic strokes were candidates for mechanical thrombectomy if they were within the 6-h window from onset of symptoms. This timeframe would exclude many patient populations, such as wake-up strokes. However, the most recent clinical trials, DAWN and DEFUSE3, have expanded the window of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke patients to within 24 h from symptom onset. This expanded window increases the number of potential candidates for endovascular intervention for emergent large vessel occlusions and raises the question of how to efficiently screen and triage this increase of patients. Summary: Abbreviated pre-hospital stroke scales can be used to guide EMS personnel in quickly deciding if a patient is undergoing a stroke. Telestroke networks connect remote hospitals to stroke specialists to improve the transportation time of the patient to a comprehensive stroke center for the appropriate level of care. Mobile stroke units, mobile interventional units, and helistroke reverse the traditional hub-and-spoke model by bringing imaging, tPA, and expertise to the patient. Smartphone applications and social media aid in educating patients and the public regarding acute and long-term stroke care. Key Messages: The DAWN and DEFUSE3 trials have expanded the treatment window for certain acute ischemic stroke patients with mechanical thrombectomy and subsequently have increased the number of potential candidates for endovascular intervention. This expansion brings patient screening and triaging to greater importance, as reducing the time from symptom onset to decision-to-treat and groin puncture can better stroke patient outcomes. Several strategies have been employed to address this issue by reducing the time of symptom onset to decision-to-treat time.

Download Full-text

Effect of Interhospital Transfer on Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Stroke ◽

10.1161/strokeaha.118.024091 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 50 (4) ◽

pp. 923-930 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Esmee Venema ◽

Adrien E. Groot ◽

Hester F. Lingsma ◽

Wouter Hinsenveld ◽

Kilian M. Treurniet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Endovascular Treatment ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

Functional Outcome ◽

Functional Independence ◽

Modified Rankin Scale ◽

Interhospital Transfer ◽

Primary Stroke Center ◽

Transferred Patients ◽

Stroke Center

Background and Purpose— To assess the effect of inter-hospital transfer on time to treatment and functional outcome after endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke, we compared patients transferred from a primary stroke center to patients directly admitted to an intervention center in a large nationwide registry. Methods— MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) Registry is an ongoing, prospective, observational study in all centers that perform EVT in the Netherlands. We included adult patients with an acute anterior circulation stroke who received EVT between March 2014 to June 2016. Primary outcome was time from arrival at the first hospital to arterial groin puncture. Secondary outcomes included the 90-day modified Rankin Scale score and functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score of 0–2). Results— In total 821/1526 patients, (54%) were transferred from a primary stroke center. Transferred patients less often had prestroke disability (227/800 [28%] versus 255/699 [36%]; P =0.02) and more often received intravenous thrombolytics (659/819 [81%] versus 511/704 [73%]; P <0.01). Time from first presentation to groin puncture was longer for transferred patients (164 versus 104 minutes; P <0.01, adjusted delay 57 minutes [95% CI, 51–62]). Transferred patients had worse functional outcome (adjusted common OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62–0.90]) and less often achieved functional independence (244/720 [34%] versus 289/681 [42%], absolute risk difference −8.5% [95% CI, −8.7 to −8.3]). Conclusions— Interhospital transfer of patients with acute ischemic stroke is associated with delay of EVT and worse outcomes in routine clinical practice, even in a country where between-center distances are short. Direct transportation of patients potentially eligible for EVT to an intervention center may improve functional outcome.

Download Full-text

TRIAGE-STROKE: Treatment strategy In Acute larGE vessel occlusion: Prioritize IV or endovascular treatment—A randomized trial

International Journal of Stroke ◽

10.1177/1747493019869830 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

pp. 103-108 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anne Behrndtz ◽

Søren P Johnsen ◽

Jan B Valentin ◽

Martin F Gude ◽

Rolf A Blauenfeldt ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

Endovascular Therapy ◽

Hospital Setting ◽

Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽

Large Vessel ◽

Stroke Severity ◽

Study Results ◽

Primary Stroke Center ◽

Stroke Center

Rationale For patients with acute ischemic stroke and large vessel occlusions, intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular therapy are standard of care, but the effect of endovascular therapy is superior to intravenous thrombolysis. If a severe stroke with symptoms indicating large vessel occlusions occurs in the catchment area of a primary stroke center, there is equipoise regarding optimal transport strategy. Aim For patients presenting with suspected large vessel occlusions (PASS ≥ 2) and a final diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke, we hypothesize that bypassing the primary stroke center will result in an improved 90-day functional outcome. Sample size We aim to randomize 600 patients, 1:1. Design A national investigator-driven, multi-center, randomized assessor-blinded clinical trial. The Prehospital Acute Stroke Severity Scale has been developed. It identifies most patients with large vessel occlusions in the pre-hospital setting. Patients without a contraindication for intravenous thrombolysis are randomized to either transport directly to a comprehensive stroke centers for intravenous thrombolysis and of endovascular therapy or to a primary stroke center for intravenous thrombolysis and subsequent transport to a comprehensive stroke centers for of endovascular therapy, if needed. Outcomes The primary outcome will be the 90-day modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) for all patients with acute ischemic stroke. Secondary outcomes include 90-day mRS for all randomized patients, all patients with ischemic stroke but without large vessel occlusions, and patients with hemorrhagic stroke. The safety outcomes include severe dependency or death and time to intravenous thrombolysis for ischemic stroke patients. Discussion Study results will influence decision making regarding transport strategy for patients with suspected large vessel occlusions.

Download Full-text