Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24028711›Full record

ArticlePrehospital emergency care

An evaluation of emergency medical services stroke protocols and scene times.

Mehul D Patel, Jane H Brice, Chailee Moss, Chirayath M Suchindran, Kelly R Evenson, Kathryn M Rose, Wayne D Rosamond

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Prehospital emergency care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mehul D PatelReceived May 15, 2013 from the Departments of Epidemiology (MDP, KRE, WDR) and Biostatistics (CMS), Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; the Department of Emergency Medicine (JHB, CM), School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; and SRA International (KMR), Durham, North Carolina. Revision received June 14, 2013; accepted for publication June 20, 2013.
Jane H Brice
Chailee Moss
Chirayath M Suchindran
Kelly R Evenson
Kathryn M Rose
Wayne D Rosamond
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Carolina Population CenterR24HD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MORGAN, SAMUEL PHILIP · 2005 to 2014
$10.0M
Cardiovascular Epidemiology Training GrantT32HL007055 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Wayne D. Rosamond · 1986 to 2026
$10.0M
NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007055NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD050924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute stroke patients require immediate medical attention. Therefore, American Stroke Association guidelines recommend that for suspected stroke cases, emergency medical services (EMS) personnel spend less than 15 minutes on-scene at least 90% of the time. However, not all EMS providers include specific scene time limits in their stroke patient care protocols.

objectiveWe sought to determine whether having a protocol with a specific scene time limit was associated with less time EMS spent on scene. Methods. Stroke protocols from the 100 EMS systems in North Carolina were collected and abstracted for scene time instructions. Suspected stroke events occurring in 2009 were analyzed using data from the North Carolina Prehospital Medical Information System. Scene time was defined as the time from EMS arrival at the scene to departure with the patient. Quantile regression was used to estimate how the 90th percentile of the scene time distribution varied by systems with protocol instructions limiting scene time, adjusting for system patient volume and metropolitan status.

resultsIn 2009, 23 EMS systems in North Carolina had no instructions regarding scene time; 73 had general instructions to minimize scene time; and 4 had a specific limit for scene time (i.e., 10 or 15 min). Among 9,723 eligible suspected stroke events, mean scene time was 15.9 minutes (standard deviation 6.9 min) and median scene time was 15.0 minutes (90th percentile 24.3 min). In adjusted quantile regression models, the estimated reduction in the 90th percentile scene time, comparing protocols with a specific time limit to no instructions, was 2.2 minutes (95% confidence interval 1.3, 3.1 min). The difference in 90th percentile scene time between general and absent instructions was not statistically different (0.7 min [95% confidence interval -0.1, 1.4 min]).

conclusionProtocols with specific scene time limits were associated with EMS crews spending less time at the scene while general instructions were not. These findings suggest EMS systems can modestly improve scene times for stroke by specifying a time limit in their protocols.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicAlgorithmsEmergency Medical ServicesHumansNorth CarolinaRetrospective StudiesStrokeTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID24028711
PMCPMC3973028
OpenAlexW2007742079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.