ArticleCardiology and therapy2022
The Barriers to Rapid Reperfusion in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.
Article in Cardiology and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Mobilizing Clinical Leadership to Achieve Timely Reperfusion in Acute ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
iTide 2 - STEMI Follow-up Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to the Implementation of Acute Coronary Syndrome Guidelines in Healthcare: A Systematic Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Temporal improvements in prehospital systems-of-care for ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients in Victoria, Australia: a retrospective study.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Barriers to Timely Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) in Rural vs. Urban Settings: A Health System Approach.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to quantify the contribution of various obstacles to timely reperfusion therapy in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and to improve performance in a mixed remote rural/urban region.
methodsFrom November 1, 2020 to April 23, 2021, patients with acute STEMI were prospectively monitored with the critical time intervals, treatment modalities, and outcomes registered. Selected clinical decision-makers in 11 hospitals were appointed as improvement agents and systematically provided with weekly updated information about absolute and relative performance. Suggestions for improvements were invited and shared.
resultsOnly 29% of the 146 patients received reperfusion therapy within recommended time limits [prehospital thrombolysis, 2/48; in-hospital thrombolysis, 0/20; primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), 37/68, with median intervals from the first medical contact of 44, 49, and 133 min, respectively]. Efficiency varied considerably between health trusts: median time from the first medical contact to prehospital thrombolysis ranged from 29 to 54 min (hazard ratio 4.89). The predominant, remediable causes for delays were erroneous tactical choices and protracted electrocardiographic diagnostication, decision-making, and administration of fibrinolytic medication. During the trial, the time to pPCI was non-significantly reduced.
conclusionWe found several targets for system improvements in order to mitigate reperfusion delays along the entire chain of care, regardless of reperfusion modality chosen. More patients should receive prehospital thrombolysis. The most important measures will be training to ensure a more efficient on-site workflow, improved protocols and infrastructure facilitating the communication between first responders and in-hospital clinicians, and education emphasizing prehospital transport times. CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER: NCT04614805.
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.