Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36215281›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2022

The COVID-19 pandemic effect on the prehospital Madrid stroke code metrics and diagnostic accuracy.

Nicolás Riera-López, Andrea Gaetano-Gil, José Martínez-Gómez, Nuria Rodríguez-Rodil, Borja M Fernández-Félix, Jorge Rodríguez-Pardo, Carmen Cuadrado-Hernández, Emmanuel Pelayo Martínez-González, Alicia Villar-Arias, Fátima Gutiérrez-Sánchez and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. 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

16 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicolás Riera-LópezStroke Commission, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0862-434X
Andrea Gaetano-GilClinical Biostatistics Unit, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5725-531X
José Martínez-GómezIT Department, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.
Nuria Rodríguez-RodilIT Department, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.
Borja M Fernández-FélixClinical Biostatistics Unit, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Jorge Rodríguez-PardoDepartment of Neurology and Stroke Centre, IdiPAZ Health Research Institute (La Paz University Hospital, Autonomous University of Madrid), Madrid, Spain.
Carmen Cuadrado-HernándezStroke Commission, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.
Emmanuel Pelayo Martínez-GonzálezStroke Commission, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.
Alicia Villar-AriasManagement Department, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.
Fátima Gutiérrez-SánchezManagement Department, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.
Pablo Busca-OstolazaManagement Department, Emergency Medical Service of Madrid (SUMMA 112), Madrid, Spain.
Eduardo Montero-RuizInternal Medicine Department, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
Exuperio Díez-TejedorDepartment of Neurology and Stroke Centre, IdiPAZ Health Research Institute (La Paz University Hospital, Autonomous University of Madrid), Madrid, Spain.
Javier ZamoraClinical Biostatistics Unit, Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, IRYCIS, Madrid, Spain.
Blanca Fuentes-GimenoDepartment of Neurology and Stroke Centre, IdiPAZ Health Research Institute (La Paz University Hospital, Autonomous University of Madrid), Madrid, Spain.
Madrid Stroke Network
Madrid Health Service · ESInstituto Cajal · ESHospital La Paz Institute for Health Research · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOnly very few studies have investigated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pre-hospital stroke code protocol. During the first wave, Spain was one of the most affected countries by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus disease pandemic. This health catastrophe overshadowed other pathologies, such as acute stroke, the leading cause of death among women and the leading cause of disability among adults. Any interference in the stroke code protocol can delay the administration of reperfusion treatment for acute ischemic strokes, leading to a worse patient prognosis. We aimed to compare the performance of the stroke code during the first wave of the pandemic with the same period of the previous year.

methodsThis was a multicentre interrupted time-series observational study of the cohort of stroke codes of SUMMA 112 and of the ten hospitals with a stroke unit in the Community of Madrid. We established two groups according to the date on which they were attended: the first during the dates with the highest daily cumulative incidence of the first wave of the COVID-19 (from February 27 to June 15, 2020), and the second, the same period of the previous year (from February 27 to June 15, 2019). To assess the performance of the stroke code, we compared each of the pre-hospital emergency service time periods, the diagnostic accuracy (proportion of stroke codes with a final diagnosis of acute stroke out of the total), the proportion of patients treated with reperfusion therapies, and the in-hospital mortality.

resultsSUMMA 112 activated the stroke code in 966 patients (514 in the pre-pandemic group and 452 pandemic). The call management time increased by 9% (95% CI: -0.11; 0.91; p value = 0.02), and the time on scene increased by 12% (95% CI: 2.49; 5.93; p value = <0.01). Diagnostic accuracy, and the proportion of patients treated with reperfusion therapies remained stable. In-hospital mortality decreased by 4% (p = 0.05).

conclusionsDuring the first wave, a prolongation of the time "on the scene" of the management of the 112 calls, and of the hospital admission was observed. Prehospital diagnostic accuracy and the proportion of patients treated at the hospital level with intravenous thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy were not altered with respect to the previous year, showing the resilience of the stroke network and the emergency medical service.

Indexed as

COVID-19Emergency Medical ServicesStrokeAdultCOVID-19 TestingFemaleHumansPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Thrombolytic Therapy

Identifiers

PMID36215281
PMCPMC9550046
OpenAlexW4304092172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.