Search

Background: Patients with a presumed diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or stroke may have had contact with several healthcare providers prior to hospital arrival. The aim of this study was to describe the various prehospital paths and the effect on time delays of patients with ACS or stroke.Methods: This prospective observational study included patients with presumed ACS or stroke who may choose to contact four different types of health care providers. Questionnaires were completed by patients, general practitioners (GP), GP cooperatives, ambulance services and emergency departments (ED). Additional data were retrieved from hospital registries.Results: Two hundred two ACS patients arrived at the hospital by 15 different paths and 243 stroke patients by ten different paths. Often several healthcare providers were involved (60.8 % ACS, 95.1 % stroke). Almost half of all patients first contacted their GP (47.5 % ACS, 49.4 % stroke). Some prehospital paths were more frequently used, e.g. GP (cooperative) and ambulance in ACS, and GP or ambulance and ED in stroke. In 65 % of all events an ambulance was involved. Median time between start of symptoms and hospital arrival for ACS patients was over 6 h and for stroke patients 4 h. Of ACS patients 47.7 % waited more than 4 h before seeking medical advice compared to 31.6 % of stroke patients. Median time between seeking medical advice to arrival at hospital was shortest in paths involving the ambulance only (60 min ACS, 54 min stroke) or in combination with another healthcare provider (80 to 100 min ACS, 99 to 106 min stroke).Conclusions: Prehospital paths through which patients arrived in hospital are numerous and often complex, and various time delays occurred. Delays depend on the entry point of the health care system, and dialing the emergency number seems to be the best choice. Since reducing patient delay is difficult and noticeable differences exist between various prehospital paths, further research into reasons for these different entry choices may yield possibilities to optimize paths and reduce overall time delay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim: In acute ischemic stroke, under- or overestimation of body weight can lead to dosing errors of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator with consequent reduced efficacy or increased risk of hemorrhagic complications. Measurement of body weight is more accurate than estimation of body weight but potentially leads to longer door-to-needle times. Our aim was to assess if weight modality (estimation of body weight versus measurement of body weight) is associated with (i) symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rate, (ii) clinical outcome, and (iii) door-to-needle times. Methods: Consecutive patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis between 2009 and 2016 from 14 hospitals were included. Baseline characteristics and outcome parameters were retrieved from medical records. We defined symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage according to the European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (ECASS)-III definition and clinical outcome was assessed with the modified Rankin Scale. The association of weight modality and outcome parameters was estimated with regression analyses. Results: A total of 4801 patients were included. Five hospitals used measurement of body weight (n = 1753), six hospitals used estimation of body weight (n = 2325), and three hospitals (n = 723) changed from estimation of body weight to measurement of body weight during the study period. In 2048 of the patients (43%), measurement of body weight was used and in 2753 (57%), estimation of body weight. In the measurement of body weight group, an inbuilt weighing bed was used in 1094 patients (53%) and a patient lift scale in 954 patients (47%). In the estimation of body weight group, policy regarding estimation was similar. Estimation of body weight was not associated with increased symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage risk (adjusted odds ratio = 1.16; 95% confidence interval 0.83–1.62) or favorable outcome (adjusted odds ratio = 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.82–1.21), but it was significantly associated with longer door-to-needle times compared to measurement of body weight using an inbuilt weighing bed (adjusted B = 3.57; 95% confidence interval 1.33–5.80) and shorter door-to-needle times compared to measurement of body weight using a patient lift scale (−3.96; 95% confidence interval −6.38 to −1.53). Conclusion: We did not find evidence that weight modality (estimation of body weight versus measurement of body weight) to determine recombinant tissue plasminogen activator dose in intravenous thrombolysis eligible patients is associated with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or clinical outcome. We did find that estimation of body weight leads to longer door-to-needle times compared to measurement of body weight using an inbuilt weighing bed and to shorter door-to-needle times compared to measurement of body weight using a patient lift scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]