Prehospital Stroke Care Part 2: On-Scene Evaluation and Management by Emergency Medical Services Practitioners.

The prehospital phase is a critical component of delivering high-quality acute stroke care. This topical review discusses the current state of prehospital acute stroke screening and transport, as well as new and emerging advances in prehospital diagnosis and treatment of acute stroke. Topics include prehospital stroke screening, stroke severity screening, emerging technologies to aid in the identification and diagnosis of acute stroke in the prehospital setting, prenotification of receiving emergency departments, decision support for destination determination, and the capabilities and opportunities for prehospital stroke treatment in mobile stroke units. Further evidence-based guideline development and implementation of new technologies are critical for ongoing improvements in prehospital stroke care.

Factors associated with door-in-door-out times in large vessel occlusion stroke patients undergoing endovascular therapy.

INTRODUCTION: In the management of large vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS), patients are frequently evaluated first at a non-endovascular stroke center and later transferred to an endovascular stroke center (ESC) for endovascular treatment (EVT). The door-in-door-out time (DIDO) is frequently used as a benchmark for transferring hospitals though there is no universally accepted nor evidenced-based DIDO time. The goal of this study was to identify factors affecting DIDO times in LVOS patients who ultimately underwent EVT. METHODS: The Optimizing Prehospital Use of Stroke Systems of Care-Reacting to Changing Paradigms (OPUS-REACH) registry is comprised of all LVOS patients who underwent EVT at one of nine endovascular centers in the Northeast United States between 2015 and 2020. We queried the registry for all patients who were transferred from a non-ESC to one of the nine ESCs for EVT. Univariate analysis was performed using t-tests to obtain a p value. A priori, we defined a p value of <0.05 as significant. Multiple logistic regression was conducted to determine the association of variables to estimate an odds ratio. RESULTS: 511 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean DIDO times for all patients was 137.8 min. Vascular imaging and treatment at a non-certified stroke center were associated with longer DIDO times by 23 and 14 min, respectively. On multivariate analyses, the acquisition of vascular imaging was associated with 16 additional minutes spent at the non-ESC while presentation to a non-stroke certified hospital was associated with 20 additional minutes spent at the transferring hospital. The administration of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) was associated with 15 min less spent at the non-ESC. DISCUSSION: Vascular imaging and non-stroke certified stroke centers were associated with longer DIDO times. Non-ESCs should integrate vascular imaging into their workflow as feasible to reduce DIDO times. Further work examining other details regarding the transfer process such as transfer via ground or air, could help further identify opportunities to improve DIDO times.

Optimizing Prehospital Stroke Systems of Care-Reacting to Changing Paradigms (OPUS-REACH): a pragmatic registry of large vessel occlusion stroke patients to create evidence-based stroke systems of care and eliminate disparities in access to stroke care.

BACKGROUND: Large vessel occlusion (LVO) strokes are best treated with rapid endovascular therapy (EVT). There are two routes that LVO stroke patients can take to EVT therapy when transported by EMS: primary transport (ambulance transports directly to an endovascular stroke center (ESC) or secondary transport (EMS transports to a non-ESC then transfers for EVT). There is no clear evidence which path to care results in better functional outcomes for LVO stroke patients. To find this answer, an analysis of a large, real-world population of LVO stroke patients must be performed. METHODS: A pragmatic registry of LVO stroke patients from nine health systems across the United States. The nine health systems span urban and rural populations as well as the spectrum of socioeconomic statuses. We will use univariate and multivariate analysis to explore the relationships between type of EMS transport, socioeconomic factors, and LVO stroke outcomes. We will use geographic information systems and spatial analysis to examine the complex movements of patients in time and space. To detect an 8% difference between groups, with a 3:1 patient ratio of primary to secondary transports, 95% confidence and 80% power, we will need approximately 1600 patients. The primary outcome is the patients with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤ 2 at 90 days. Subgroup analyses include patients who receive intravenous thrombolysis and duration of stroke systems. Secondary analyses include socioeconomic factors associated with poor outcomes after LVO stroke. DISCUSSION: Using the data obtained from the OPUS-REACH registry, we will develop evidence based algorithms for prehospital transport of LVO stroke patients. Unlike prior research, the OPUS-REACH registry contains patient-level data spanning from EMS dispatch to ninety day functional outcomes. We expect that we will find modifiable factors and socioeconomic disparities associated with poor outcomes in LVO stroke. OPUS-REACH with its breadth of locations, detailed patient records, and multidisciplinary researchers will design the optimal prehospital stroke system of care for LVO stroke patients.

Derivation and Validation of the Emergency Medical Stroke Assessment and Comparison of Large Vessel Occlusion Scales.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to develop a simple scale to identify patients with prehospital stroke with large vessel occlusion (LVO), without losing sensitivity for other stroke types. METHODS: The Emergency Medical Stroke Assessment (EMSA) was derived from the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) items and validated for prediction of LVO in a separate cohort. We compared the EMSA with the 3-item stroke scale (3I-SS), Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Severity Scale (C-STAT), Rapid Arterial oCclusion Evaluation (RACE) scale, and Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination (FAST-ED) for prediction of LVO and stroke. We surveyed paramedics to assess ease of use and interpretation of scales. RESULTS: The combination of gaze preference, facial asymmetry, asymmetrical arm and leg drift, and abnormal speech or language yielded the EMSA. An EMSA less than 3, 75% sensitivity, and 50% specificity significantly reduced the likelihood of LVO (LR- = .489, 95% confidence interval .366-0.637) versus 3I-SS less than 4 (.866, .798-0.926). A normal EMSA, 93% sensitivity, and 47% specificity significantly reduced the likelihood of stroke (LR- = .142, .068-0.299) versus 3I-SS (.476, .330-0.688) and C-STAT (.858, .717-1.028). EMSA was rated easy to perform by 72% (13 of 18) of paramedics versus 67% (12 of 18) for FAST-ED and 6% (1 of 18) for RACE (χ2 = 27.25, P < .0001), and easy to interpret by 94% (17 of 18) versus 56% (10 of 18) for FAST-ED and 11% (2 of 18) for RACE (χ2 = 21.13, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The EMSA has superior abilities to identify LVO versus 3I-SS and stroke versus 3I-SS and C-STAT. The EMSA has similar ability to triage patients with stroke compared with the FAST-ED and RACE, but is simpler to perform and interpret.

Establishing Recommendations for Stroke Systems in the Thrombectomy Era: The Upstate New York Stakeholder Proceedings.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The American Heart Association/American Stroke Association and Department of Health Stroke Coverdell Program convened a stakeholder meeting in upstate NY to develop recommendations to enhance stroke systems for acute large vessel occlusion. METHODS: Prehospital, hospital, and Department of Health leadership were invited (n=157). Participants provided goals/concerns and developed recommendations for prehospital triage and interfacility transport, rating each using a 3-level impact (A [high], B, and C [low]) and implementation feasibility (1 [high], 2, and 3 [low]) scale. Six weeks later, participants finalized recommendations. RESULTS: Seventy-one stakeholders (45% of invitees) attended. Six themes around goals/concerns emerged: (1) emergency medical services capacity, (2) validated prehospital screening tools, (3) facility capability, (4) triage/transport guidelines, (5) data capture/feedback tools, and (6) facility competition. In response, high-impact (level A) prehospital recommendations, stratified by implementation feasibility, were (1) use of online medical control for triage (6%); (2) regional transportation strategy (31%), standardized emergency medical services checklists (18%), quality metrics (14%), standardized prehospital screening tools (13%), and feedback for performance improvement (7%); and (3) smartphone application algorithm for screening/decision-making (6%) and ambulance-based telemedicine (6%). Level A interfacility transfer recommendations were (1) standardized transfer process (32%)/timing goals (16%)/regionalized systems (11%), performance metrics (11%), image sharing capabilities (7%); (2) provider education (9%) and stroke toolbox (5%); and (3) interfacility telemedicine (7%) and feedback (2%). CONCLUSIONS: The methods used and recommendations generated provide models for stroke system enhancement. Implementation may vary based on geographic need/capacity and be contingent on establishing standard care practices. Further research is needed to establish optimal implementation strategies.

Prehospital Stroke Identification: Factors Associated with Diagnostic Accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Stroke patients misdiagnosed by emergency medical services (EMS) providers have been shown to receive delayed in-hospital care. We aim at determining the diagnostic accuracy of Fire Department of New York (FDNY) EMS providers for stroke and identifying potential reasons for misdiagnosis. METHODS: Prehospital care reports of all patients transported by FDNY EMS to 3 hospitals from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2011, were compared against the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines (GWTG) database (reference standard) for the diagnosis of stroke. Age-adjusted logistic regression models were generated to explore prehospital patient characteristics which are associated with stroke misdiagnosis. RESULTS: Of 72,984 patient transports during the study period, 750 had a GWTG diagnosis of stroke, 468 (62%) of which were identified correctly in the field and 282 (38%) were missed. An additional 268 patients were misdiagnosed as stroke when in fact they had an alternative diagnosis. Overall sensitivity was 62.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58.9-65.8) and specificity was 99.6% (95% CI, 99.6-99.7). No patients who presented with unilateral weakness, facial weakness, or speech problems were missed, whereas patients with atypical complaints like general malaise, dizziness, and headache were more likely to be missed. Seizures led the EMS providers to both overcall a stroke and miss the diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: FDNY EMS care providers missed more than a third of stroke cases. Seizures and other atypical presentations contribute significantly to stroke misdiagnosis in the field. Our findings highlight the need for better prehospital stroke identification methods.

Factors related to the sensitivity of emergency medical service impression of stroke.

OBJECTIVES: To examine factors related to sensitivity of emergency medical services (EMS) stroke impression. METHODS: We reviewed ambulance and hospital records of all patients transported to Long Island College Hospital between January 1, 2009 and January 1, 2011 by the hospital-based EMS with a discharge diagnosis of stroke or a confounding diagnosis, and compared EMS impression to hospital discharge diagnosis. We examined relationships between EMS diagnostic sensitivity and age, gender, ethnicity, NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), motor signs, aphasia, neglect, lesion side, circulation, stroke type, EMS provider level, and documented Cincinnati Pre-hospital Stroke Scale (CPSS) with contingency analysis and logistic regression. RESULTS: Stroke was validated in 18% (56/310) of patients and 50% (28/56) of these were missed by EMS. EMS diagnostic sensitivity was 50% (95% CI: 36-64%), and was related to NIHSS quartile (p = 0.014), with higher sensitivities in 2nd (69%; 95% CI: 44-86%) and 3rd (75%; 95% CI: 47-91%) vs. 1st (20%; 95% CI: 7-45%) and 4th (45%; 95% CI: 21-72%) quartiles, motor signs (62 vs. 14%, p = 0.002), and documented CPSS (84 vs. 32%, p = 0.0002). EMS impression was independently related to NIHSS quartile (1st vs. 2nd adjusted OR = 9.61, 1.13-122.03, p = 0.038) and CPSS (adjusted OR = 12.58, 2.22-111.06, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Stroke was missed more frequently when CPSS was not documented, in patients without motor signs, and in patients with moderate-severe stroke. The sensitivity of prehospital screening for patients with moderate-severe stroke might be improved by including additional non-motor signs and by stressing indications for when screens should be performed.

Emergency medical services in India: the present and future.

India is the second most populous country in the world. Currently, India does not have a centralized body which provides guidelines for training and operation of Emergency Medical Services (EMS). Emergency Medical Services are fragmented and not accessible throughout the country. Most people do not know the number to call in case of an emergency; services such as Dial 108/102/1298 Ambulances, Centralized Accident and Trauma Service (CATS), and private ambulance models exist with wide variability in their dispatch and transport capabilities. Variability also exists in EMS education standards with the recent establishment of courses like Emergency Medical Technician-Basic/Advanced, Paramedic, Prehospital Trauma Technician, Diploma Trauma Technician, and Postgraduate Diploma in EMS. This report highlights recommendations that have been put forth to help optimize the Indian prehospital emergency care system, including regionalization of EMS, better training opportunities, budgetary provisions, and improving awareness among the general community. The importance of public and private partnerships in implementing an organized prehospital care system in India discussed in the report may be a reasonable solution for improved EMS in other developing countries.

A Shorter Door-In-Door-Out Time Is Associated with Improved Outcome in Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke.

Introduction: Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) significantly improves outcomes in large vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS). When a patient with a LVOS arrives at a hospital that does not perform EVT, emergent transfer to an endovascular stroke center (ESC) is required. Our objective was to determine the association between door-in-door-out time (DIDO) and 90-day outcomes in patients undergoing EVT. Methods: We conducted an analysis of the Optimizing Prehospital Stroke Systems of Care-Reacting to Changing Paradigms (OPUS-REACH) registry of 2,400 LVOS patients treated at nine ESCs in the United States. We examined the association between DIDO times and 90-day outcomes as measured by the modified Rankin scale. Results: A total of 435 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean DIDO time for patients with good outcomes was 17 minute shorter than patients with poor outcomes (122 minutes [min] vs 139 min, P = 0.04). Absolute DIDO cutoff times of ≤60 min, ≤90 min, or ≤120 min were not associated with improved functional outcomes (46.4 vs 32.3%, P = 0.12; 38.6 vs 30.6%, P = 0.10; and 36.4 vs 28.9%, P = 0.10, respectively). This held true for patients with hyperacute strokes of less than four-hour onset. Lower baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (11.9 vs 18.2, P = <.001) and younger age (62.5 vs 74.9 years (P < .001) were associated with improved outcomes. On multiple regression analysis, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-2.02) and baseline NIHSS score (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.42-1.98) were associated with improved outcomes while DIDO time was not associated with better outcome (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.30). Conclusion: Although the DIDO time was shorter for patients with a good outcome, this was non-significant in multiple regression analysis. Receipt of intravenous thrombolysis and time to EVT were not associated with better outcomes, while male gender, lower age, arrival by private vehicle, and lower NIHSS score portended better outcomes. No absolute DIDO-time cutoff or modifiable factor was associated with improved outcomes for LVOS. This study underscores the need to streamline DIDO times but not to set an artificial DIDO time benchmark to meet.

Delay in hospital presentation is the main reason large vessel occlusion stroke patients do not receive intravenous thrombolysi.

Objectives: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular therapy (EVT) are the mainstays of treatment for large vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS). Prior studies have examined why patients have not received IVT, the most cited reasons being last-known-well (LKW) to hospital arrival of >4.5 hours and minor/resolving stroke symptoms. Given that LVOS patients typically present moderate-to-severe neurologic deficits, these patients should be easier to identify and treat than patients with minor strokes. This investigation explores why IVT was not administered to a cohort of LVOS patients who underwent EVT. Methods: This is an analysis of the Optimizing the Use of Prehospital Stroke Systems of Care (OPUS-REACH) registry, which contains patients from 9 endovascular centers who underwent EVT between 2015 and 2020. The exposure of interest was the receipt of intravenous thrombolysis. Descriptive summary statistics are presented as means and SDs for continuous variables and as frequencies with percentages for categorical variables. Two-sample t tests were used to compare continuous variables and the chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables between those who received IVT and those who did not receive EVT. Results: Two thousand forty-three patients were included and 60% did not receive IVT. The most common reason for withholding IVT was LKW to arrival of >4.5 (57.2%). The second most common contraindication was oral anticoagulation (15.5%). On multivariable analysis, 2 factors were associated with not receiving IVT: increasing age (odds ratio [OR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.93) and increasing time from LKW-to hospital arrival (OR 0.45 95% CI 0.46-0.49). Conclusion: Like prior studies, the most frequent reason for exclusion from IVT was a LKW to hospital presentation of >4.5 hours; the second reason was anticoagulation. Efforts must be made to increase awareness of the time-sensitive nature of IVT and evaluate the safety of IVT in patients on oral anticoagulants.

A Multicenter Evaluation of a Point-of-Care Blood Glucose Meter System in Critically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: Our purpose was to evaluate the performance of the ACCU-CHEK® Inform II blood glucose monitoring system (Roche Diagnostics GmbH) compared with the perchloric acid hexokinase (PCA-HK) comparator method on the cobas® 6000 analyzer (Roche Diagnostics International Ltd) in critically ill patients. METHODS: Overall, 476 arterial (376 pediatric/adult, 100 neonate), 375 venous, and 100 neonatal heel-stick whole-blood samples were collected and evaluated from critical care settings at 10 US hospitals, including the emergency department, medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs), and neonatal and pediatric ICUs. The ACCU-CHEK Inform II system was evaluated at 2 cutoff boundaries: boundary 1 was ≥95% of results within ±12 mg/dL of the reference (samples with blood glucose <75 mg/dL) or ±12% of the reference (glucose ≥75 mg/dL), and boundary 2 was ≥98% of results within ±15 mg/dL or ±15% of the reference. Clinical performance was assessed by evaluating sample data using Parkes error grid, Monte Carlo simulation, and sensitivity and specificity analyses to estimate clinical accuracy and implications for insulin dosing when using the ACCU-CHEK Inform II system. RESULTS: Proportions of results within evaluation boundaries 1 and 2, respectively, were 96% and 98% for venous samples, 94% and 97% for pediatric and adult arterial samples, 84% and 98% for neonatal arterial samples, and 96% and 100% for neonatal heel-stick samples. Clinical evaluation demonstrated high specificity and sensitivity, with low risk of potential insulin-dosing errors. CONCLUSIONS: The ACCU-CHEK Inform II system demonstrated clinically acceptable performance against the PCA-HK reference method for blood glucose monitoring in a diverse population of critically ill patients in US care settings.

Emergency management of stroke in the era of mechanical thrombectomy.

Emergency management of stroke has been directed at the delivery of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) in a timely fashion. Because of the many limitations attached to the delivery of tPA and the perceived benefits accrued to tPA, its use has been limited. Mechanical thrombectomy, a far superior therapy for the largest and most disabling strokes, large vessel occlusions (LVOs), has changed the way acute strokes are managed. Aside from the rush to deliver tPA, there is now a need to identify LVO and refer those patients with LVO to physicians and facilities capable of delivering urgent thrombectomy. Other parts of emergency department management of stroke are directed at identifying and mitigating risk factors for future strokes and at preventing further damage from occurring. We review here the most recent literature supporting these advances in stroke care and present a framework for understanding the role that emergency physicians play in acute stroke care.

Awareness of Prostate Cancer and Screening Modalities Among Long Island Men.

Despite advances in prostate cancer (PC) treatment and outcomes, it remains one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers and the second leading cause of cancer mortality in men. Furthermore, there exist little data about patient awareness of PC and the frequency of screening. Adult men (470) presenting to the emergency department at a tertiary care center (Stony Brook University) between 2014 and 2015 were surveyed orally for their perceived risk of PC, awareness of PC and screening modalities, and screening history. In a population that mirrors the racial demographics of the United States, it was observed that significant disparities in awareness of PC exist among several populations including those at greatest risk. This study revealed an important opportunity for education on PC and screening modalities among the population of men at risk.

Prehospital stroke scales in urban environments: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and compare the operating characteristics of existing prehospital stroke scales to predict true strokes in the hospital. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases for articles that evaluated the performance of prehospital stroke scales. Quality of the included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. We abstracted the operating characteristics of published prehospital stroke scales and compared them statistically and graphically. RESULTS: We retrieved 254 articles from MEDLINE, 66 articles from EMBASE, and 32 articles from CINAHL Plus database. Of these, 8 studies met all our inclusion criteria, and they studied Cincinnati Pre-Hospital Stroke Scale (CPSS), Los Angeles Pre-Hospital Stroke Screen (LAPSS), Melbourne Ambulance Stroke Screen (MASS), Medic Prehospital Assessment for Code Stroke (Med PACS), Ontario Prehospital Stroke Screening Tool (OPSS), Recognition of Stroke in the Emergency Room (ROSIER), and Face Arm Speech Test (FAST). Although the point estimates for LAPSS accuracy were better than CPSS, they had overlapping confidence intervals on the symmetric summary receiver operating characteristic curve. OPSS performed similar to LAPSS whereas MASS, Med PACS, ROSIER, and FAST had less favorable overall operating characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital stroke scales varied in their accuracy and missed up to 30% of acute strokes in the field. Inconsistencies in performance may be due to sample size disparity, variability in stroke scale training, and divergent provider educational standards. Although LAPSS performed more consistently, visual comparison of graphical analysis revealed that LAPSS and CPSS had similar diagnostic capabilities.