ArticleOpen access emergency medicine : OAEM2024
Accuracy of FAST-ED for Assessment Large Vessel Occlusion of Acute Ischemic Stroke in Emergency Department.
Article in Open access emergency medicine : OAEM, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acute Ischemic Stroke in 2026: From Time to Penumbra-An Updated Narrative Review of Reperfusion Strategies with a Latin American Implementation Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Acupuncture for Ischemic Stroke: A Critical Evaluation of Biological Mechanisms and Methodological Challenges.International journal of general medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute large vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS) requires swift and precise assessment for effective treatment. The Field Assessment Stroke Triage for Emergency Destination (FAST-ED) protocol shows promise for rapid LVOS evaluation but lacks extensive validation. This study aims to assess the accuracy of FAST-ED in predicting LVOS and compare its predictive capability with the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Methods: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at Thammasat University Hospital. Participants included those aged 18 years or older who presented with symptoms of acute stroke syndrome within 24 hours of onset. The study focused on comparing FAST-ED assessments by emergency department physicians with NIHSS evaluations by neurologists, followed by vascular imaging, which included brain multiphase CT angiography, MRI with MRA, and transcranial Doppler ultrasound combined with carotid Doppler ultrasound. Statistical analyses included the use of AuROC to assess the effectiveness of FAST-ED and to compare FAST-ED with NIHSS. Results: 130 patients were included in the analysis, with 47 diagnosed with LVOS. No significant differences were found in most baseline characteristics between LVOS and non-LVOS groups, except for a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation and lower systolic blood pressure in the LVOS group. The FAST-ED scale demonstrated a fair ability to predict LVOS with an AuROC of 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI); 0.70, 0.87). A FAST-ED cut point of ≥4 showed improved specificity and likelihood ratio. Comparing FAST-ED≥4 with NIHSS≥6 revealed similar AuROC (0.74, 95% CI; 0.65, 0.82 and 0.72, 95% CI; 0.64, 0.80, respectively), with no significant statistical difference (p=0.661). Conclusion: FAST-ED scale, especially with a cut-off point of ≥4, exhibits fair overall accuracy in predicting LVOS in patients who presented with suspected acute stroke within 24 hours at the ED. This predictive capability is closely comparable to that of the NIHSS at a cut-off point of ≥6.
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.