Search

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.

Acute stroke care begins before hospital arrival, and several prehospital factors are critical in influencing overall patient care and poststroke outcomes. This topical review provides an overview of the state of the science on prehospital components of stroke systems of care and how emergency medical services systems may interact in the system to support acute stroke care. Topics include layperson recognition of stroke, prehospital transport strategies, networked stroke care, systems for data integration and real-time feedback, and inequities that exist within and among systems.

Background: Telestroke has been increasingly adopted by hospitals with limited access to neurological expertise and is often followed by transfer for a higher level of care. We sought to characterize factors independently associated with patient transfers after telestroke consultation in our regional telestroke network. Methods: We studied all telestroke consults from our urban comprehensive stroke center from 1/1/2005 to 06/30/2022 using the records in our telehealth portal. We examined the annual proportion of transfers among all consults overall and stratified by 6 levels of NIHSS severity and 4 levels of spoke hospital rurality. We used generalized linear mixed models to evaluate the association between transfer and patient demographics, hospital characteristics, use of video and care quality metrics (timeliness and tPA use), accounting for clustering by spoke hospital. Results: We identified 20,618 consecutive telestroke consults, of which 5,276 (25.6%) were transferred (602 cases excluded with unknown transfer status). The proportion of transfers decreased significantly over the study period (Figure). Decreases were observed for all rurality strata and all but the most severe strokes. After adjusting for temporal trends, factors independently associated with transfer included younger age, male gender, more severe stroke, and tPA use (Table). Conclusion: In our regional telestroke network, the proportion of transfers decreased substantially from 2005 to 2022 overall and across almost all patient and hospital groups. Telestroke may facilitate capacity management and retaining care in lower cost community settings, which may increase healthcare value.

Introduction: Ischemic stroke (IS) patients are frequently transferred between hospitals. Our objective was to determine whether patient insurance status contributes to variation in access to stroke center care among transferred patients with IS. Methods: We compiled California data on every nonfederal hospital admission from 2010-17 and used ICD-9, ICD-10, and DRG codes to identify IS patients transferred from an initial emergency department to another hospital. Transfers were categorized based on whether or not the patient was ultimately discharged from a stroke center hospital (primary or comprehensive). Patient insurance status was categorized as private, Medicare, Medicaid or self/uninsured. Clusters of closely connected hospitals via transfer frequency were identified using network science community detection methods. Within each cluster, we examined the degree of disparity in stroke center access by quantifying the difference between the insurance groups with the highest and lowest proportion of transfers discharged from a stroke center. Results: We identified 10,049 IS transfers during the study period (private 5,297 [53%]; Medicare 3,328 [33%]; Medicaid 904 [9%]; self/uninsured 520 [5%]). Stroke center access varied by patient insurance (overall 87%, private 89%, Medicare 87%, Medicaid 82%, self 72%). There were 14 clusters of closely connected hospitals via transfers. In the highest performing cluster, 100% of transferred patients in each insurance category were discharged from a stroke center (delta 0). The lowest performing cluster was also the largest (n=2,364 transfers); in this cluster 69% of transfers were discharged from a stroke center, ranging from 32% of self-pay transfers to 81% of privately insured transfers (highest delta among all clusters: 49%). Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that current care patterns differ by insurance status. Further research is needed to determine interventions to address this disparity.

Introduction: Many stroke patients initially present to non-stroke center hospitals. However, the delivery of Emergency Department (ED)-based acute stroke care at smaller, non-academic (i.e., community) EDs is less well-described than for larger, academic hospitals. Hypothesis: There is wide variation in community EDs’ performance on acute stroke care delivery measures. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of a cohort of stroke patients from EDs participating in the Emergency Quality Network (E-QUAL) stroke collaborative, a national stroke quality improvement project targeted to community EDs. Sites used ICD10 codes to identify ischemic stroke patients and submitted data using a web-based submission portal. EDs with data from at least 20 patients were included. For each site, we calculated median door-to-imaging (DTI), door-to-needle (DTN), and door-in-door-out (DIDO) times among transferred patients and ED length of stay (LOS) among admitted patients. We also determined the proportions of eligible patients arriving with 3.5 hours of last known well who received thrombolysis within 4.5 hours, of patients with documentation of severity assessment performance and of dysphagia screening. We used descriptive statistics to illustrate variation. Results: Of the 54 participating EDs, data were available for 45, and 28 included ≥ 20 patients. Of included EDs, median annual ED volume was 34,648 (IQR 21,250-47,120) and 40% were rural. Performance varied on DTI, DIDO among transferred patients, and LOS among admitted patients (Table). Performance was more consistent on documentation of severity assessment and dysphagia screening. Conclusions: Performance on stroke care delivery measures varied between these community EDs and data in the literature from larger hospitals that typically participate in national registries. Future efforts to improve emergency stroke care delivery should consider unique factors impacting care at smaller, community EDs.

Study Objective: Though select inpatient-based performance measures exist for the care of patients with nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), Emergency Departments (EDs) lack measurement instruments designed to support and improve care processes in the hyperacute phase. To address this, we propose a set of measures applying a syndromic (rather than diagnosis-based) approach informed by performance data from a national sample of community EDs participating in the Emergency Quality Network Stroke Initiative (E-QUAL). Methods: We convened a workgroup of experts in acute neurologic emergencies. The group considered the appropriate use case for each proposed measure (internal quality improvement [QI], benchmarking, or accountability) and examined data from E-QUAL-participating EDs to consider the validity and feasibility of proposed measures. The initially conceived set included 14 measure concepts of which 7 were selected for inclusion in the measure set after review of data and further deliberation. To inform the process, we collected data from E-QUAL participating EDs. EDs used a web-based portal to submit data from chart reviews on patients with ICH during 2020-2021. Descriptive statistics characterize performance and identify variation. Results: Proposed measures include 2 for QI, benchmarking, and accountability, 3 for QI and benchmarking and 2 for QI only (Table). Of the E-QUAL participating EDs, 35 had sufficient case volume (≥25) and were included for review of preliminary performance data. Median annual ED volume was 44,000 (IQR 31,337-67,000) and 16 (48%) reported typically transferring patients with ICH. The Table includes available performance data. Conclusion: Application of these measures may identify opportunities for improvement and focus QI resources on evidence-based targets. The proposed measures warrant further development and validation to support broader implementation and advance national healthcare quality goals.

Background and Purpose: Patient care-seeking has likely changed during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In stroke, delayed or avoided care may translate to substantial morbidity. We sought to determine the effect of the pandemic on patterns of stroke patient presentation and quality of care. Methods: We analyzed data from 25 New England hospitals: one urban, academic comprehensive stroke center and telestroke hub, and 24 spoke hospitals in the telestroke network. We included all telestroke consultations from the 24 spokes, and all stroke admissions to the comprehensive stroke center hub from November 1, 2019 through April 30, 2020. We compared rates of presentation, timeliness presentation, and quality of care pre- versus post-March 1, 2020. We examined trends in patient demographics, stroke severity, timeliness, diagnoses including large vessel occlusion, alteplase use, and endovascular thrombectomy among eligible subjects. We compared proportions and bivariate comparisons to examine for changes pre- versus post-March 1, 2020 and used linear regression to examine trends over time. Results: Among 1248 patient presentations (844 telestroke consultations, 404 comprehensive stroke center admissions), telestroke consultations and ischemic stroke patient admissions decreased among the spokes and hub. Age and stroke severity were unchanged over the study period. We found no change in alteplase administration at telestroke spoke hospitals but did note a decrease in both alteplase use and thrombectomy at our comprehensive stroke center. Time metrics for patient presentation and care delivery were unchanged; however, rates of adherence for the quality measures dysphagia screening, early antithrombotic initiation, and early venous thromboembolism prophylaxis were reduced during the pandemic. Conclusions: In this regional analysis, we found decreasing telestroke consultations and ischemic stroke admissions, and reduced performance on stroke quality of care measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contrary to prior reports, we did not find an increase in thrombectomy nor decrease in clinical severity that might be expected if patients with milder symptoms avoided hospitalization.

Background: Optimal care for patients with stroke relies on timely recognition and rapid transport to appropriate treatment, often by emergency medical services (EMS). Our primary objective was to describe EMS time intervals for patients with suspected stroke in the United States. We also sought to quantify the variation in EMS time intervals by geographic location and urbanicity. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional evaluation of EMS 9-1-1 activations (ie, calls for service) included in the 2018 and 2019 National EMS Information System datasets. We included ground or air EMS activations for a 9-1-1 scene response where a patient aged ≥18 years with suspected stroke was treated and transported by EMS. Time intervals for dispatch, response, scene, transport, and total prehospital time (ie, from dispatch to hospital arrival) were calculated, stratified by ground and air transport type. Results: A total of 410 187 activations for suspected stroke were included, of which 98% were a ground transport. The median total prehospital time for ground transports was 35 minutes (interquartile range, 27–45, 90th percentile 58). Median total prehospital time for air transports was substantially longer at 56 minutes (interquartile range, 43–70, 90th percentile 86). Times varied by Census division and urbanicity with the shortest ground total prehospital times in the East North Central division and urban areas and longest times in the East South Central and rural and frontier areas. Conclusions: Timely EMS response and transport is critical for optimizing care of patients with suspected stroke. Using a large, national dataset of EMS activations, we found variations by geographic location and urbanicity in total prehospital time for ground and air EMS activations for patients with stroke.

Objective: Many U.S. emergency departments (EDs) lack access to stroke neurologists to support decision-making for thrombolytics and identification of thrombectomy-eligible patients. We outline a strategy to identify hospitals where telestroke might improve access and estimate potential gains in both the number of patients receiving reperfusion treatment and lives saved. Methods: We identified all EDs that provided ischemic stroke care for a Medicare beneficiary during 2018. We then excluded those with clear stroke expertise or with another ED with stroke expertise within 20 miles. At these EDs, we used annual ischemic stroke volumes and previously-derived risk ratios to quantify estimated marginal benefits (additional patients receiving reperfusion and additional lives saved) with the introduction of telestroke. Results: Among 4657 US EDs that provided stroke care in 2018, 1057 had limited stroke capabilities in their ED or within 20 miles. Of these 1057 EDs, 83.1% were in rural communities, and they cared for a median of 6 ischemic stroke patients per year. We estimate telestroke introduction to all 1057 would lead to 164 (95% CI 93-247) additional patients receiving reperfusion treatment and 90 (95% CI 2-180) additional lives saved annually (Figure). If only 263 EDs in the the top quartile of marginal benefit were targeted, this would capture over half of the estimated benefits. Conclusions: We estimate that approximately a quarter of U.S. EDs, primarily small rural EDs, would benefit most from new telestroke capacity. Our strategy may be used to improve stroke systems of care and maximize specialist access for the U.S. population.

Introduction: Studies have shown independent associations of lower admission hemoglobin (HB) levels with larger spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) volumes and poor outcomes, possibly mediated by hematoma expansion (HE). Objective: We retrospectively investigated the association of HB levels over the first week post ICH with functional outcomes (FO) and neuroimaging findings in patients with spontaneous ICH (>30 mL). We explored whether comorbidities modify the effects of HB. Methods: We analyzed HB levels from subjects enrolled in the Minimally Invasive Surgery Plus Alteplase for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Evacuation phase 3 trial (MISTIE III). The exposure was admission HB and the HB nadir in the first week. The primary outcome was good FO at 180 days, defined as modified Rankin Scale of 0-3. Secondary outcomes were good FO at 365 days, 30-day mortality, admission ICH volume, and HE (>6 mL). Linear and logistic regression models were used to test the association of HB with clinical outcomes and neuroimaging findings. All models were adjusted for age, sex, race, treatment (medical Vs. MISTIE), Glasgow Coma Scale, ICH volume, presence of intraventricular hemorrhage, and ICH location (deep Vs. lobar). We investigated effect modification of comorbidities on association of HB with FO. Results: A total of 493 of 499 enrolled patients (61% males, mean age 61(SD=12) years, median ICH volume 41.8 (IQR=30.8-51.5) mL) were included. Patients with good FO at 180 days had a higher admission HB (13.2 Vs. 12.6 g/dl, p=0.001) and a higher nadir HB (11.7 Vs. 10.9 g/dl, pinteraction = 0.045). Conclusions: In patients with ICH > 30 mL, higher nadir HB in the first week was associated with better long-term FO and smaller ICH volumes, but not with HE. Early hemoglobin changes may serve as a prognostic biomarker and a potentially modifiable factor to improve FO.

Backgound: In 2011, nearly 20% of Americans lacked timely access to alteplase-capable hospitals. We update this work by assessing access to stroke centers and emergency departments (EDs) with telestroke capacity. Our objectives are to identify all US EDs with acute stroke capabilities (i.e., in a confirmed stroke center or with telestroke capacity), and to characterize the proportion of the US population with access to an ED with either capacity. Methods: We used the 2019 National ED Inventory-USA to identify all US EDs and characterize stroke capabilities by hospital stroke center status (none, acute stroke ready hospital [ASRH], primary stroke center [PSC], thrombectomy-capable or comprehensive stroke center [TSC/CSC]) and telestroke capacity. We used 2020 US Census data for census block group population and centroid. For each block group, we used ArcGIS to assess whether an ED with stroke expertise was within a 60 minute (min) response and transport time by ground emergency medical services (EMS). To determine the transport time, we used data from actual EMS stroke transports using the 2019 National EMS Information System with median EMS dispatch, response, and scene times in access calculations. Results: Of 5,587 US EDs, 2,563 (46%) were in a stroke center (691 ASRH, 1,505 PSC, 367 TSC/CSC); of these, 55% also had telestroke capacity. Of the 3,024 (54%) that were not a confirmed stroke center, 36% had telestroke. We estimate that 91% of the US population is within 60 min of a confirmed stroke center by ground EMS and 96% is within 60 min of a confirmed stroke center or telestroke ED (Figure). The percentage of the population without access to a confirmed stroke center or telestroke ED varied by region, from 1% in the Middle Atlantic to 9% in the West Mountain. Conclusion: Relative to previous reports, an increasing proportion of the US population has access to acute stroke expertise. While geographic disparities in access remain, telestroke plays an important role in filling this gap.

Introduction: Prehospital recognition and rapid transport of stroke patients by emergency medical services (EMS) is critical to optimize access to time-sensitive care. We aimed to describe EMS time intervals for suspected stroke patients in the U.S. and to quantify variation in EMS time intervals by geographic location and urbanicity. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional evaluation of EMS 9-1-1 activations (i.e., calls for service) included in the 2018 and 2019 National EMS Information System. We included ground and air EMS activations for a scene response where a patient aged ≥18 years old with suspected stroke (EMS impression of I60-I63 or G45) was treated and transported by EMS. Time intervals for dispatch, response, scene, transport, and total prehospital time were calculated, stratified by ground and air transport type. Results: A total of 415,342 activations for suspected stroke were included, of which 98% were a ground transport. The overall median total prehospital time for ground transports was 35 minutes (IQR 27-45, 90 th percentile 58; Table). Median total prehospital time for air transports was substantially longer at 56 minutes (IQR 43-70, 90 th percentile 86). Times varied by census division and urbanicity with the shortest median total prehospital time of ground transports in the East North Central division (31 min, IQR 25-40) and urban areas (34 min, IQR 27-43) and longest times in the East South Central (39 min, IQR 30-52), rural (40 min, IQR 28-56), and frontier (44 min, IQR 29-63) areas. Conclusions: With ongoing focus on optimizing time-to-treatment for acute stroke interventions, prehospital transport can be targeted for quality improvement. While some variation is expected due to geographical constraints, we found substantial variation in prehospital transport times for suspected stroke that may present opportunities for future improvement. These findings may inform health services research and policy efforts to improve stroke care access.

Backgrounds: Telestroke is associated with improved reperfusion and improved outcomes for stroke patients. Our objective was to examine the effect of telestroke on procedural timeliness and outcomes among patients transferred for endovascular therapy (EVT). Methods: We identified all EVT encounters at our urban, telestroke-enabled, academic comprehensive stroke center (CSC) from 1/1/2017 to 12/31/2020 in our institutional Get With The Guidelines-Stroke registry linked with our telestroke consultation records. EVT encounters were categorized based on mode of arrival: i) transferred via the telestroke network (Tx+TS), ii) transferred without telestroke (Tx-TS), or iii) directly presenting to the CSC (DP). The three groups were then compared on efficacy and safety measurements including first-pass rate, successful reperfusion (TICI 2b/3) and post-procedure complications, as well as mortality and functional independence (mRS ≤ 2) outcomes both at discharge and 90-day post discharge using multi-group testing. Results: After excluding 29 encounters with unknown arrival mode, our sample of 287 EVT encounters included 168 Tx+TS cases, 35 Tx-TS cases, and 84 DP cases. Patients’ demographics and baseline characteristics (NIHSS at admission and prior comorbidities) were balanced across the groups (Table). Compared to both Tx-TS and DP, Tx+TS has significantly shorter door to puncture time (Tx+TS: 30 mins vs. Tx-TS: 62 mins vs. DP: 92 mins, p < 0.001). Procedural efficacy and safety, in-hospital outcomes and post discharge outcomes were similar across groups. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that telestroke plays an important role among patients transferred for EVT with improved procedural timeliness, and outcomes similar to those of directly presenting patients.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background and Purpose: In 2018, 2 randomized controlled trials showed the benefit of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke patients treated 6 to 24 hours from last known well using imaging-guided selection. However, little is known about outcomes in contemporary nontrial settings. We assessed the frequency of EVT and outcomes beyond 6 hours in the US Get With The Guidelines–Stroke clinical registry. Methods: We analyzed all acute ischemic stroke patients treated with EVT between January 1, 2009 and October, 1, 2018, at Get With The Guidelines–Stroke hospitals in the United States. We assessed trends over time in frequency of EVT beyond 6 hours, compared patient characteristics and outcomes between those treated within versus beyond 6 hours, and evaluated the associations between EVT time and outcomes. Results: We identified 53 702 patients at 697 sites treated with EVT during the study period. Treatment after 6 hours from last known well occurred in 17 720 (33%) of all 53 702 EVT cases (median 4.7 hours, interquartile range, 3.3–7 hours). The proportion of EVT cases treated after 6 hours from last known well varied widely across sites (median 30%, interquartile range, 24%–38%). Compared with patients treated within 6 hours, those treated beyond six hours were younger, less likely to have atrial fibrillation, less likely to arrive by ambulance, had lower stroke severity, were less likely to be anticoagulated, and more likely to be treated at centers with higher EVT volumes. After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, patients receiving EVT beyond 6 hours had less favorable in-hospital mortality, ambulation at discharge, and discharge disposition compared to those treated within 6 hours. Conclusions: EVT is frequently performed for patients with ischemic stroke after 6 hours from last known well, accounting for one-third of cases nationally, and adjusted functional outcomes at discharge are worse in these patients compared to those treated with EVT within 6 hours. Further efforts are needed for optimal EVT outcomes in clinical practice settings.

Background: Telestroke is increasingly used by hospitals, but there has been limited research on its impact on treatment and outcomes. Methods: Using a 100% sample of traditional Medicare beneficiaries over a 10-year period, we compared the care patterns and outcomes of acute ischemic stroke admissions that first presented to hospitals with telestroke capacity to matched admissions in control hospitals without telestroke capacity. Matching was based on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, hospital characteristics, and month and year of admission. Our primary outcomes were receipt of reperfusion treatment through thrombolysis with alteplase or thrombectomy, mortality at 30 days from admission, spending through 90 days from admission, and functional status as measured by days spent in community living after discharge. Results: Over the period January 2008 through June 2017, there were 87,338 ischemic stroke admissions cared for at 643 telestroke hospitals of which 76,636 (88%) were matched to an admission at a control hospital. Compared to control admissions, admissions that started in telestroke hospitals had higher rates of reperfusion treatment (6.76% and 5.98%; difference 0.78, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.03, p Conclusions: Patients with ischemic stroke treated at hospitals with telestroke capacity were more likely to receive reperfusion treatment and had lower 30-day mortality.

Introduction: Patterns of hospital presentation have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. In stroke, delayed or avoided care may translate to substantial morbidity. We sought to determine the effect of the pandemic on patterns of stroke patient presentation and quality of care. Methods: We analyzed data from 25 New England hospitals: one urban, academic comprehensive stroke center (CSC) and telestroke hub, and 24 spoke hospitals in the telestroke network. We included all telestroke consultations from the 24 spokes and stroke admissions to the CSC from 11/1/2019 through 4/30/2020. We examined trends in stroke presentation including large vessel occlusion (LVO), alteplase use, and endovascular thrombectomy among eligible subjects. We compared proportions and bivariate comparisons to examine for changes pre- vs. post-3/1/2020, and used linear regression to examine trends over time. Results: Among 1248 patient presentations, telestroke consultations (0.4 fewer consults per week, p=0.005) and ischemic stroke patient admissions (decrease of 0.2 patients per week, p=0.04) decreased among the spokes and hub. Age and stroke severity were unchanged over the study period. We found no change in alteplase administration at telestroke spoke hospitals, but did note a decrease in both alteplase use (1.5 per week prior to March 1 st and 1 per week after, p=0.05) and thrombectomy at our CSC (0.1 fewer cases per week, p=0.02). Time metrics for patient presentation and care delivery were unchanged, however, rates of adherence for several quality measures were reduced during the pandemic (Table 1). Conclusions: In this regional analysis, we found decreasing telestroke consultations and ischemic stroke admissions, and reduced performance on stroke quality of care measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contrary to prior reports, we did not find an increase in thrombectomy nor decrease in clinical severity that might be expected if patients with milder symptoms avoided hospitalization.

Background: Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients are frequently transferred between hospitals, however it is not clear whether these transfers are optimized with respect to proximity and quality of the destination hospital. Our primary object was to identify hospital characteristics associated with sending and receiving AIS patients. Methods: Using a comprehensive statewide dataset, we identified all AIS patient transfers occurring between all 78 Massachusetts (MA) hospitals from 2007 and 2015. Hospital variables included hospital quality reputation (US News & World Report), hospital capabilities (stroke center status, annual stroke volume, and trauma center designation), and institutional affiliations (same vs. not). We also included network variables to control for the structure of hospital-to-hospital transfers. We used relational event modeling to account for complex temporal and relational dependencies associated with patient transfers. This method decomposes events into a decision to transfer, and if so, the receiving hospital destination, and models them using a discrete-choice framework. Results: Among 73,114 AIS admissions in MA during the 8-year study period, there were 7,189 (9.8%) transfers. After accounting for travel time between hospitals and structural network characteristics, factors associated with increased likelihood of being a receiving hospital included teaching hospital status, hospitals of the same or higher quality, the same or higher stroke center status, and the same hospital affiliation (Table). Conclusion: Patients experiencing AIS in MA are frequently transferred between hospitals. After accounting for multiple relevant hospital characteristics, hospital affiliation remains an important factor in determining transfer destination. While there may be some benefits to hospital affiliation, stroke systems of care should be designed to maximize patient benefit and leverage interfacility transfer accordingly.

Background: Administrative data are frequently used in stroke research. Ensuring accurate identification of ischemic stroke patients, and those receiving thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is critical to ensure representativeness and generalizability. We examined differences in patient samples based on different modes of identification, and propose a strategy for future patient and procedure identification in large administrative databases. Methods: We used nonpublic administrative data from the state of California to identify all ischemic stroke patients discharged from an emergency department or inpatient hospitalization from 2010-2017 based on ICD-9 (2010-2015), ICD-10 (2015-2017), and MS-DRG discharge codes. We identified patients with interhospital transfers, patients receiving thrombolytics, and patients treated with EVT based on ICD, CPT and MS-DRG codes. We determined what proportion of these transfers and procedures would have been identified with ICD versus MS-DRG discharge codes. Results: Of 365,099 ischemic stroke encounters, most (87.7%) had both a stroke-related ICD-9 or ICD-10 code and stroke-related MS-DRG code; 12.3% had only an ICD-9 or ICD-10 code, and 0.02% had only a MS-DRG code. Nearly all transfers (99.9%) were identified using ICD codes. We identified32,433 thrombolytic-treated patients (8.9% of total) using ICD, CPT, and MS-DRG codes; the combination of ICD and CPT codes identified nearly all (98%). We identified 7,691 patients treated with EVT (2.1% of total) using ICD and MS-DRG codes; both MS-DRG and ICD-9/-10 codes were necessary because ICD codes alone missed 13.2% of EVTs. CPT codes only pertain to outpatient/ED patients and are not useful for EVT identification. Conclusions: ICD-9/-10 diagnosis codes capture nearly all ischemic stroke encounters and transfers, while the combination of ICD-9/-10 and CPT codes are adequate for identifying thrombolytic treatment in administrative datasets. However, MS-DRG codes are necessary in addition to ICD codes for identifying EVT, likely due to favorable reimbursement for EVT-related MS-DRG codes incentivizing accurate coding.

Objective: Although many emergency departments (EDs) have telestroke capacity, it is unclear why some EDs consistently use telestroke and others do not. We compared the characteristics and practices of EDs with robust and low assimilation of telestroke. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with representatives of EDs that received telestroke services from 10 different networks and had used telestroke for a minimum of two years. We used maximum diversity sampling to select EDs for inclusion and applied a positive deviance approach, comparing programs with robust and low assimilation. Data collection was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. For the qualitative analysis, we created site summaries and conducted a supplemental matrix analysis to identify themes. Results: Representatives from 21 EDs with telestroke, including 11 with robust assimilation and 10 with low assimilation, participated. In EDs with robust assimilation, telestroke workflow was highly protocolized, programs had the support of leadership, telestroke use and outcomes were measured, and individual providers received feedback about their telestroke use. In EDs with low assimilation, telestroke was perceived to increase complexity, and ED physicians felt telestroke did not add value or had little value beyond a telephone consult. EDs with robust assimilation identified four sets of strategies to improve assimilation: strengthening relationships between stroke experts and ED providers, improving and standardizing processes, addressing resistant providers, and expanding the goals and role of the program. Conclusion: Greater assimilation is associated with standardized workflow, leadership support, ongoing evaluation and quality improvement efforts, and mechanisms to address resistant ED providers.

Background: Most data on spoke emergency departments (EDs) using telestroke come from single academic hub-and-spoke networks. Our objective was to describe characteristics of EDs using telestroke in a national sample. Methods: We surveyed a convenience sample of 366 EDs among those who self-identified as using telestroke on the 2016 National ED Inventory (NEDI)-USA, which goes to all US EDs. Surveys were mailed to ED directors, with follow-up phone calls to non-responders. The survey characterized ED staffing, transfer patterns, in-person consultant availability, alteplase use, and frequency of telestroke consultations. Descriptive statistics are reported. Results: Of the 4,410 EDs responding to the NEDI-USA telemedicine question, 1,824 (41%) reported using telestroke. Compared to non-surveyed telestroke EDs (n=1458), the 366 surveyed EDs had lower annual ED visit volume, and were more often rural and critical access hospitals. Of these, 320 (91%) affirmed use of telestroke on our secondary survey. Many were rural (n=157, 49%); few were academic (n=4, 1%). Only 132 EDs (41%) reported that > 80% of attending physicians were board certified or board eligible in emergency medicine. Joint Commission Stroke Center certification was reported by 101 EDs (32%) and alternative certification by another 53 (17%). Fifty-two EDs (16%) reported availability of an in-person neurologist, with 32 (10%) available within 30 minutes, and 29 (9%) available 24/7. Frequency of telestroke consultation varied (Figure). Most EDs administered alteplase in the past year (n=261, 82%); some reported alteplase administration without telestroke consultation (n=94, 30%). EDs frequently admitted TIA and stroke patients without thrombolysis (78% and 55% respectively), but fewer (24%) admitted alteplase-treated patients. Conclusions: Telestroke is frequently used in US EDs. Of those surveyed, many had non-emergency medicine attending staffing and use the technology regularly.