Cancellation of the Cardiac Catheterization Lab After Activation for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital ECG-based cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) activation for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction reduces door-to-balloon times, but CCL cancellations (CCLX) remain a challenging problem. We examined the reasons for CCLX, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients presenting as ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction activations who receive emergent coronary angiography (EA) compared with CCLX. METHODS AND RESULTS: We reviewed all consecutive CCL activations between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014 (n=1332). Data were analyzed comparing 2 groups stratified as EA (n=466) versus CCLX (n=866; 65%). Reasons for CCLX included bundle branch block (21%), poor-quality prehospital ECG (18%), non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction ST changes (18%), repolarization abnormality (13%), and arrhythmia (8%). A multivariate logistic regression model using age, peak troponin, and initial ECG findings had a high discriminatory value for determining EA versus CCLX (C statistic, 0.985). CCLX subjects were older and more likely to be women, have prior coronary artery bypass grafting, or a paced rhythm ( P<0.0001 for all). All-cause mortality did not differ between groups at 1 year or during the study period (mean follow-up, 2.186±1.167 years; 15.8% EA versus 16.2% CCLX; P=0.9377). Cardiac death was higher in the EA group (11.8% versus 3.0%; P<0.0001). After adjusting for clinical variables associated with survival, CCLX was associated with an increased risk for all-cause mortality during the study period (hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.28-2.59; P=0.0009). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, prehospital ECG without overreading or transmission lead to frequent CCLX. CCLX subjects differ with regard to age, sex, risk factors, and comorbidities. However, CCLX patients represent a high-risk population, with frequently positive cardiac enzymes and similar short- and long-term mortality compared with EA. Further studies are needed to determine how quality improvement initiatives can lower the rates of CCLX and influence clinical outcomes.

Outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with previous coronary bypass surgery.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the contemporary clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and previous coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), including those with a saphenous vein graft culprit lesion. BACKGROUND: The outcome of STEMI patients with previous CABG is reported to be inferior to those without previous CABG, but limited data is available from the primary percutaneous coronary intervention era. METHODS: Data was extracted from a large, regional STEMI system's prospective database, which contained 3,542 unique STEMI episodes from March 4, 2003 through April 22, 2012. RESULTS: Previous CABG was present in 249 patients (7%). Despite higher comorbidity, patients with versus those without previous CABG had similar in-hospital (4.8% vs. 5.2%; p = 0.82) and 1-year (10.8% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.36) mortality, but 5-year (24.9% vs. 14.2%; p < 0.001) mortality was higher. Patients with previous CABG have similar door-to-balloon times. The culprit vessel was the saphenous vein graft in 84 patients (34%), a native vessel in 104 (42%), with no clear culprit in 59 (24%). The left internal mammary artery graft was not a culprit in any patient. Mortality at 30 days (8.3% vs. 3.9% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.19) and 1 year (14.3% vs. 9.0% vs. 6.8%; p = 0.35) was higher (but not statistically) with a saphenous vein graft culprit and was equivalent at 5 years (25.0% vs. 26.0% vs. 20.3%; p = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with previous CABG treated in a regional STEMI system have similar outcomes as patients without previous CABG, although 5-year mortality is higher. The most common culprit location was a native vessel (42%). Outcomes have improved significantly compared with historical reports.

ST-elevation myocardial infarction diagnosed after hospital admission.

BACKGROUND: Treatment times for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients presenting to percutaneous coronary intervention hospitals have improved dramatically over the past 10 years, particularly for patients using emergency medical services. Limited data exist regarding treatment times and outcomes for patients who develop STEMI after hospital admission. METHODS AND RESULTS: With the use of a comprehensive prospective regional STEMI program database, we evaluated the characteristics and outcomes for patients who develop STEMI after hospital admission. Of the 3795 consecutive STEMI patients treated by the use of the Minneapolis Heart Institute regional STEMI program from March 2003 to January 2013, 990 (26.1%) presented initially to the percutaneous coronary intervention facility, including 640 arriving via emergency medical services, 267 self/family driven, and 83 already admitted to the hospital. Patients with in-hospital presentation were older with higher body mass indexes, were more likely to have hypertension, and to present with pre-percutaneous coronary intervention cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock. Door-to-balloon times (diagnostic ECG-to-balloon for in-hospital patients) were longer than for patients using emergency medical services (76 versus 51 minutes; P<0.001), but similar to self/family-driven patients (76 versus 66 minutes; P=0.13). In-hospital patients had longer lengths of stay (5 versus 3 versus 3 days; P<0.001) and higher 1-year mortality (16.9% versus 10.3% versus 7.1%; P=0.032). These patients frequently had high-risk and complex reasons for admission, including 30.1% with acute coronary syndrome, 22.9% postsurgery, 13.3% respiratory failure, and 8.4% ventricular fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who develop STEMI while in-hospital represent a unique, high-risk subset of patients. They have increased treatment time and lengths of stay and higher mortality rates than the patients presenting via emergency medical services or who are self/family driven.

Feasibility of bedside thoracic ultrasound in the helicopter emergency medical services setting.

INTRODUCTION: Bedside thoracic ultrasound has been shown to be a valuable diagnostic tool in the emergency department. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of bedside thoracic ultrasound in the prehospital HEMS setting. SETTING: Air ambulance helicopters during patient transportation. METHODS: This was a prospective pilot study. 71 consecutive, nonpregnant patients over 18 years old were enrolled. While in flight, providers completed limited bedside thoracic ultrasounds with the patient supine and recorded their interpretation of the presence or absence of the ultrasonographic sliding lung sign on a closed data-set instrument. RESULTS: 41 (58%) of the eligible patients had a recorded thoracic ultrasound acquired in flight. The level of agreement in image interpretation between the flight crew and expert reviewer was substantial (Kappa 0.67, CI 0.44-0.90). The reviewer rated 54% of all images as "good" in quality. The most common reason cited for not completing the ultrasound was lack of enough provider time or space limitations within the aircraft cabin. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that, with limited training, bedside thoracic ultrasound image acquisition and interpretation for the sliding lung sign in the HEMS setting is feasible.

The Critical Imperative: Prehospital Management of the Patient with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Prehospital care is critical to achieve the goal of timely reperfusion in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Prehospital care is delivered by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel, which include emergency medical dispatchers, first responders, and ambulance response. There is considerable variation in the training and capabilities of the EMS providers in the United States depending on the location (ie, rural vs urban) and local jurisdictions. In this article, the key components of prehospital care of the patient with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and the various levels of training and capabilities of EMS providers are discussed.

Prehospital ultrasound by paramedics: results of field trial.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to determine if 9-1-1 paramedics trained in ultrasound (US) could adequately perform and interpret the Focused Assessment Sonography in Trauma (FAST) and the abdominal aortic (AA) exams in the prehospital care environment. METHODS: Paramedics at two emergency medical services (EMS) agencies received a 6-hour training program in US with ongoing refresher education. Paramedics collected US in the field using a prospective convenience methodology. All US were performed in the ambulance without scene delay. US exams were reviewed in a blinded fashion by an emergency sonographer physician overreader (PO). RESULTS: A total of 104 patients had an US performed between January 1, 2008, and January 1, 2009. Twenty AA exams were performed and all were interpreted as negative by the paramedics and the PO. Paramedics were unable to obtain adequate images in 7.7% (8/104) of the patients. Eighty-four patients had the FAST exam performed. Six exams (6/84, 7.1%) were read as positive for free intraperitoneal/pericardial fluid by both the paramedics and the PO. FAST and AA US exam interpretation by the paramedics had a 100% proportion of agreement with the PO. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study shows that with close supervision, paramedics can adequately obtain and interpret prehospital FAST and AA US images under protocol. These results support a growing body of literature that indicates US may be feasible and useful in the prehospital setting.

Harm resulting from inappropriate telephone triage in primary care.

PURPOSE: Our objective was to assess and categorize harm occurring to patients who called their physicians' office after-hours but did not have their call forwarded to the physician because they stated that their call was not an emergency. METHODS: We collected data on 4949 calls handled by our answering service for 1 year in a family medicine residency office in Denver, CO. Of the 2835 after-hours clinical calls, we reviewed all 288 clinical calls that were not forwarded to the "on-call" physician. Complete data on 119 clinical calls included reason for call, frequency of next day appointments, Emergency Department visits, hospital admissions and outcomes. Outcomes were reviewed and coded for harm to the patient by experienced medical errors coders. RESULTS: When patient calls were not forwarded, 51% had an appointment, 4% an Emergency Department visit, and 2% were admitted to the hospital within 2 weeks. Analysis revealed that 3% suffered harm, and 26% experienced discomfort due to the delay. Although 66% required no intervention, 1% required emergency transport and 4% a medication change. CONCLUSIONS: Harm may occur when patients' calls are not forwarded to the on-call physician. Although the level of harm is generally temporary and minimal, the potential exists for serious harm to occur. Physicians need to re-evaluate the way they handle after-hours calls.

Are frequent callers to family physicians high utilizers?

PURPOSE: Our objective was to describe patients who telephone frequently after hours to physicians (frequent callers) and categorize their medical problems and resource utilization. METHODS: Charts of frequent callers were reviewed and compared with those of a systematically selected group from the same family medicine residency practice (control group). Data collected included demographic and clinical information, as well as information on utilization of office, emergency department, and hospital services. In addition, 4 family physicians reviewed the patient information and identified the primary diagnosis for frequent callers. RESULTS: Frequent callers were predominately female; had 3 times as many office visits, diagnoses, and medications; and had 8 times as many hospital admissions as the control group. The most common primary diagnostic categories were psychiatric disorders (36%), pain (21%), chronic illnesses (16%), pregnancy (13%), and common problems of childhood (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Frequent callers represent a unique group of patients with high utilization of health care services. Better targeted patient education and referral to other support services may decrease the number of calls and utilization of health services. Alternatively, among high utilizers, frequent telephone calls may be a substitute for other forms of care.

After-hours telephone triage affects patient safety.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the management of after-hours calls to primary care physicians and identify potential errors that might delay evaluation and treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Survey of primary care practices and audit of after-hours phone calls. Ninety-one primary care offices (family medicine, internal medicine, obstetrics, and pediatrics) were surveyed in October and November 2001. Data collected included number of persons answering the calls, information requested, instructions to patients, who decided whether to contact the on-call physician, and subsequent handling of all calls. We evaluated all after-hours calls to an index office that were not forwarded to the on-call physician. Four family physicians independently reviewed the calls while unaware that these calls had not been forwarded to the physician on call to determine the appropriate triage. POPULATION: Primary care physicians and their telephone answering services. OUTCOME MEASURES (1) Who decided to initiate immediate contact with the physician? (2) Percentage of calls identified as emergent or nonemergent by patients. (3) Independent physician ratings of nonemergent calls. RESULTS: More than two thirds of the offices used answering services to take their calls. Ninety-three percent of the practices required the patient to decide whether the problem was emergent enough to require immediate notification of the on-call physician. Physician reviewers reported that 50% (range, 22%-77%) of the calls not forwarded to the on-call physician represented an emergency needing immediate contact with the physician. CONCLUSIONS: After-hours call systems in most primary care offices impose barriers that may delay care. All clinical patient calls should be sent to appropriately trained medical personnel for triage decisions. We urge all clinicians that use an answering service to examine their policies and procedures for possible sources of medical error.

Reasons for after-hours calls.

Previous studies of after-hours calls to family physicians focused on caller demographics, medical triage skills, and patient satisfaction, and were usually conducted for a limited time. We examined the frequency and nature of calls to a family practice residency over 1 year. Caller and patient information, date, time, and chief complaint were obtained from answering service logs. The 5 most frequent chief complaints related to medications, pain, obstetric issues, fever, and nausea. Interestingly, 56 "high utilizers" (0.6% of all patients) accounted for 23% of the calls.