ArticlePrehospital and disaster medicine2021
A Comparison of Time to Treatment between an Emergency Department Focused Stroke Protocol and Mobile Stroke Units.
Article in Prehospital and disaster medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of Medicare-Medicaid Dual Eligibility and Race and Ethnicity With Ischemic Stroke Severity.JAMA network open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSan Francisco (California USA) is a relatively compact city with a population of 884,000 and nine stroke centers within a 47 square mile area. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) transport distances and times are short and there are currently no Mobile Stroke Units (MSUs).
methodsThis study evaluated EMS activation to computed tomography (CT [EMS-CT]) and EMS activation to thrombolysis (EMS-TPA) times for acute stroke in the first two years after implementation of an emergency department (ED) focused, direct EMS-to-CT protocol entitled "Mission Protocol" (MP) at a safety net hospital in San Francisco and compared performance to published reports from MSUs. The EMS times were abstracted from ambulance records. Geometric means were calculated for MP data and pooled means were similarly calculated from published MSU data.
resultsFrom July 2017 through June 2019, a total of 423 patients with suspected stroke were evaluated under the MP, and 166 of these patients were either ultimately diagnosed with ischemic stroke or were treated as a stroke but later diagnosed as a stroke mimic. The EMS and treatment time data were available for 134 of these patients with 61 patients (45.5%) receiving thrombolysis, with mean EMS-CT and EMS-TPA times of 41 minutes (95% CI, 39-43) and 63 minutes (95% CI, 57-70), respectively. The pooled estimates for MSUs suggested a mean EMS-CT time of 35 minutes (95% CI, 27-45) and a mean EMS-TPA time of 48 minutes (95% CI, 39-60). The MSUs achieved faster EMS-CT and EMS-TPA times (P <.0001 for each).
conclusionsIn a moderate-sized, urban setting with high population density, MP was able to achieve EMS activation to treatment times for stroke thrombolysis that were approximately 15 minutes slower than the published performance of MSUs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.