Long-Term Functional Outcome of Telestroke Patients Treated Under Drip-and-Stay Paradigm Compared with Patients Treated in a Comprehensive Stroke Center: A Single Center Experience.

Objective:The purpose of this study is to compare long-term functional outcome for patients who receive intravenous alteplase (tPA) at a primary stroke center (spoke) through telestroke consultations and remain at the spoke (drip-and-stay) with that for patients who receive tPA at the comprehensive stroke center (hub).Methods:Data on baseline characteristics, stroke severity on presentation, door to needle (DTN) time, the rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) and long-term outcomes for all patients evaluated at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) hub and MUSC telestroke network spoke sites between January 2016 and March 2017 were collected. Eligible patients received tPA at either the spoke or hub location during the study period. Patients who received mechanical thrombectomy were excluded from the study. Functional outcome was assessed with 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Descriptive statistics were used to compare patient demographics and clinical outcomes across the two groups.Results:Total of 426 were identified (60 hub patients and 366 drip-and-stay patients). There were no significant differences in patient age, sex, admission National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), sICH, or DTN times between the two groups. mRS of 0-2 at 90 days was achieved in 37 (61.7%) of the hub and in 255 (69.7%) in the drip-and-stay patients (p = 0.216). On regression analysis, there was no difference in the adjusted relative risk of having a lower mRS between drip-and-stay and hub patients (incidence rate ratio 1.14, p = 0.278, 95% confidence interval [0.9-1.43]).Conclusion:Our study shows no difference in the long-term functional outcome for patients who received tPA through telestroke consultation and remained at spoke hospitals (drip-and-stay) compared with patients who received tPA at the hub.

Impact of Treatment Time on the Long-Term Outcome of Stroke Patients Treated With Mechanical Thrombectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term functional outcome of stroke in patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) performed during work hours (on-hours) versus after-hours, weekends, and official holidays (off-hours). METHODS: Data on all patients receiving MT at a comprehensive stroke center was collected between December 2014-December 2016. Our primary outcomes were the discharge and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS). We developed propensity scores for off-hours treatment and used inverse probability of treatment weights to address confounding. We estimated logistic regression to assess the relationship between off-hours treatment and favorable patient outcomes. Independent variables include receiving thrombectomy during the off-hours, admission National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), door to groin time in minutes, age, and race. RESULTS: During the study period, 80 (41%) patients underwent thrombectomy during on-hours and 116 (59%) during off-hours. Mean age was 69.1 years for the on-hours group and 64.1 years for the off-hours group (P = .02). There were no statistically significant differences in median admission NIHSS, rate of alteplase administration, mean time from last known well to thrombectomy, rate of revascularization, and rate of hemorrhagic transformation between the 2 groups. Logistic regression analysis showed the probability of a favorable outcome at discharge (mRS ≤ 2) is 12.6 % lower for off-hours patients (P = .038, [95%CI -.25 to -.01]). For patients with a 90-day mRS (n = 117), the probability of a favorable outcome was 18.7% lower for those treated during the off-hours (P = .029, [95%CI -.36 to -.02]). CONCLUSIONS: There is a higher probability of a good functional outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients who receive MT when performed during regular work hours.

Door to needle time and functional outcome for mild ischemic stroke over telestroke.

INTRODUCTION: Faster intravenous alteplase (tPA) administration from time of symptom onset is associated with better functional outcome. Lack of recognition of mild ischemic stroke (MIS) might result in delay in treatment with tPA. We hypothesise that patients with MIS have a longer door to needle (DTN) time when compared to patients with severe stroke symptoms. METHODS: Data on all patients who received tPA at spoke hospitals through the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) telestroke network were analysed. Collected data included baseline characteristics, stroke severity on presentation measured by the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), the rate of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage, discharge location, and discharge functional outcome measured by the modified Rankin scale. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Of the 454 patients treated with tPA through the MUSC telestroke network in the period from January 2013 to April 2017, 98 (22%) had MIS defined as NIHSS ≤ 5 on presentation; the remaining 356 (78%) patients were found to have severe stroke defined as NIHSS > 5 on presentation. Patients presenting with MIS were found to have a delay in receiving intravenous tPA by ∼10 min (p = 0.007) and approximately 15% of them had poor functional outcome at discharge. Patients with a MIS on presentation have significantly more prolonged DTN time. Nearly 15% of low severity strokes had poor outcome even after receiving tPA.

Effects of preoperative teaching of the use of a pain scale with patients in the PACU.

Clinical observations have shown that patients arriving in the PACU who had no experience using a pain scale had more difficulty rating their pain in the immediate postoperative period. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine if preoperative instruction on the use of a pain scale would improve the patient's ability to self-report pain in the Phase I PACU. The sample consisted of 50 English speaking, orthopedic patients between the ages of 19 and 75 years. A visual numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain was used to teach patients in the holding area. Twenty-six of these patients had previous experience with the NRS and 24 had no experience. Of those with experience, 21 (80%) could use the pain scale in the PACU. Of the 24 patients who were taught in the holding area, 20 (85%) could use the pain scale to rate their pain in the PACU. The results of this study suggest that if patients have previous experience with a pain scale, or if they are taught preoperatively, they can more effectively self-report pain postoperatively. Future studies should be conducted to involve a larger sample, a variety of surgeries, and non-English-speaking patients.