Dataset Information

Stroke severity quantification by critical care physicians in a mobile stroke unit.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Cerebral revascularization in acute stroke requires robust diagnostic tools close to symptom onset. The quantitative National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) is widely used in-hospital, whereas shorter and less specific stroke scales are used in the prehospital field. This study explored the accuracy and potential clinical benefit of using NIHSS prehospitally. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Thirteen anesthesiologists trained in prehospital critical care enrolled patients with suspected acute stroke in a mobile stroke unit. NIHSS was completed twice in the acute phase: first prehospitally and then by an on-call resident neurologist at the receiving hospital. The agreement between prehospital and in-hospital NIHSS scores was assessed by a Bland-Altman plot, and inter-rater agreement for predefined clinical categories was tested using Cohen's ?. RESULTS:This Norwegian Acute Stroke Prehospital Project study included 40 patients for analyses. The mean numerical difference between prehospital and in-hospital NIHSS scores was 0.85, with corresponding limits of agreement from -?5.94 to 7.64. Inter-rater agreement (?) for the corresponding clinical categories was 0.38. A prehospital diagnostic workup (NIHSS and computed tomographic examination) was completed in median (quartiles) 10?min (range: 7-14?min). Time between the prehospital and in-hospital NIHSS scores was median (quartiles) 40?min (32-48?min). CONCLUSION:Critical care physicians in a mobile stroke unit may use the NIHSS as a clinical tool in the assessment of patients experiencing acute stroke. The disagreement in NIHSS scores was mainly for very low values and would not have changed the handling of the patients.

SUBMITTER: Hov MR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6504122 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Stroke severity quantification by critical care physicians in a mobile stroke unit.

Hov Maren R MR Røislien Jo J Lindner Thomas T Zakariassen Erik E Bache Kristi C G KCG Solyga Volker M VM Russell David D Lund Christian G CG

European journal of emergency medicine : official journal of the European Society for Emergency Medicine 20190601 3

<h4>Background</h4>Cerebral revascularization in acute stroke requires robust diagnostic tools close to symptom onset. The quantitative National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) is widely used in-hospital, whereas shorter and less specific stroke scales are used in the prehospital field. This study explored the accuracy and potential clinical benefit of using NIHSS prehospitally.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Thirteen anesthesiologists trained in prehospital critical care enrolled patients ...[more]

PMID: 29239899

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInternationally, Mobile Stroke Unit (MSU) ambulances have changed pre-hospital acute stroke care delivery. MSU clinical and cost-effectiveness studies are emerging, but little is known about important factors for achieving sustainability of this innovative model of care.MethodsMixed-methods study from the Melbourne MSU (operational since November 2017) process evaluation. Participant purposive sampling included clinical, operational and executive/management representatives from Ambulance Victoria (AV) (emergency medical service provider), the MSU clinical team, and receiving hospitals. Sustainability was defined as ongoing MSU operations, including MSU workforce and future model considerations. Theoretically-based on-line survey with Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), Self Determination Theory (SDT, Intrinsic Motivation), and open-text questions targeting barriers and benefits was administered (June-September 2019). Individual/group interviews were conducted, eliciting improvement suggestions and requirements for ongoing use. Descriptive and regression analyses (quantitative data) and directed content and thematic analysis (open text and interview data) were conducted.ResultsThere were 135 surveys completed. Identifying that the MSU was beneficial to daily work (β=0.61), not experiencing pressure/tension about working on the MSU (β=0.17) and thinking they did well working within the team model (β=0.17) were significantly associated with wanting to continue working within the MSU model [R2=0.76; F(15, 60)=12.76, P<.001]. Experiences varied between those on the MSU team and those working with the MSU. Advantages were identified for patients (better, faster care) and clinicians (interdisciplinary learning). Disadvantages included challenges integrating into established systems, and establishing working relationships. Themes identified from 35 interviews were MSU team composition, MSU vehicle design and layout, personnel recruitment and rostering, communication improvements between organisations, telemedicine options, MSU operations and dispatch specificity.ConclusionImportant factors affecting the sustainability of the MSU model of stroke care emerged. A cohesive team approach, with identifiable benefits and good communication between participating organisations is important for clinical and operational sustainability.

Project description:BackgroundStudies investigating the Mobile Stroke Unit (MSU) concept have shown increased thrombolysis rates, reduced alarm-to-treatment times and improved prehospital triage. Yet, so far, there is no definite scientific proof of better functional outcome after MSU deployment compared to regular ambulances.MethodsWe provide a revised protocol for the second part of the B_PROUD trial as organization of the MSU dispatch did not meet the anticipated standards in the first part. B_PROUD is a pragmatic, prospective study comparing functional outcomes of treatment candidates with or without MSU care. Treatment candidates are defined as patients with a final diagnosis of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, onset-to-dispatch-times ?4?h, disabling symptoms not resolved at time of ambulance arrival, and the ability to ambulate prior to the qualifying event. These patients are included if their emergency call prompted a stroke alarm at the dispatch center during MSU operation hours (7?am-11?pm, Monday-Sunday) and if the emergency is located within the MSU operation area in Berlin, Germany. The intervention group consists of patients who are cared for by the MSU. When the MSU is already in operation for another emergency, MSU dispatches are handled by regular ambulances (about 45%). These dispatches create the control group. Blinded stroke physicians assess the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score in recorded structured interviews 3 months after stroke. The primary outcome is the degree of disability and death over the full range of the mRS. As a change to the previously published protocol and only pertinent in case of more than 9% lost-to-follow-up, a co-primary outcome was introduced consisting of the proportions of death, new institutional care or severe disability in patients with additional use of information from registration offices.PerspectiveThe results will inform parties involved in acute stroke care organization on the effectiveness of the MSU concept.Trial registrationThe protocol is registered in (NCT03931616) and has been approved by the ethical review committee of the Charité - University Medicine Berlin (EA4/109/15) on September 2, 2015. The study protocol of B_PROUD part 1 had been published in the International Journal of Stroke as "Berlin Prehospital Or Usual Delivery of acute stroke care (B_PROUD) - study protocol" (doi: 10.1177/1747493017700152) on March 22, 2017 [1] previous to first patient's registration.

Project description:Rationale: A small but growing number of hospitals are experimenting with emergency department-embedded critical care units (CCUs) in an effort to improve the quality of care for critically ill patients with sepsis and acute respiratory failure (ARF).Objectives: To evaluate the potential impact of an emergency department-embedded CCU at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania among patients with sepsis and ARF admitted from the emergency department to a medical ward or intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2016 to December 2017.Methods: The exposure was eligibility for admission to the emergency department-embedded CCU, which was defined as meeting a clinical definition for sepsis or ARF and admission to the emergency department during the intervention period on a weekday. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS); secondary outcomes included total emergency department plus ICU LOS, hospital survival, direct admission to the ICU, and unplanned ICU admission. Primary interrupted time series analyses were performed using ordinary least squares regression comparing monthly means. Secondary retrospective cohort and before-after analyses used multivariable Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression.Results: In the baseline and intervention periods, 3,897 patients met the inclusion criteria for sepsis and 1,865 patients met the criteria for ARF. Among patients admitted with sepsis, opening of the emergency department-embedded CCU was not associated with hospital LOS (β = -1.82 d; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.50 to 0.87; P = 0.17 for the first month after emergency department-embedded CCU opening compared with baseline; β = -0.26 d; 95% CI, -0.58 to 0.06; P = 0.10 for subsequent months). Among patients admitted with ARF, the emergency department-embedded CCU was not associated with a significant change in hospital LOS for the first month after emergency department-embedded CCU opening (β = -3.25 d; 95% CI, -7.86 to 1.36; P = 0.15) but was associated with a 0.64 d/mo shorter hospital LOS for subsequent months (β = -0.64 d; 95% CI, -1.12 to -0.17; P = 0.01). This result persisted among higher acuity patients requiring ventilatory support but was not supported by alternative analytic approaches. Among patients admitted with sepsis who did not require mechanical ventilation or vasopressors in the emergency department, the emergency department-embedded CCU was associated with an initial 9.9% reduction in direct ICU admissions in the first month (β = -0.099; 95% CI, -0.153 to -0.044; P = 0.002), followed by a 1.1% per month increase back toward baseline in subsequent months (β = 0.011; 95% CI, 0.003-0.019; P = 0.009). This relationship was supported by alternative analytic approaches and was not seen in ARF. No associations with emergency department plus ICU LOS, hospital survival, or unplanned ICU admission were observed among patients with sepsis or ARF.Conclusions: The emergency department-embedded CCU was not associated with clinical outcomes among patients admitted with sepsis or ARF. Among less sick patients with sepsis, the emergency department-embedded CCU was initially associated with reduced rates of direct ICU admission from the emergency department. Additional research is necessary to further evaluate the impact and utility of the emergency department-embedded CCU model.

Dataset Information

Stroke severity quantification by critical care physicians in a mobile stroke unit.

Publications

Stroke severity quantification by critical care physicians in a mobile stroke unit.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets