Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39226055›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Emergency Department Process Times and Door-In-Door-Out Times in Interhospital Transfers After Acute Ischemic Stroke.

Regina Royan, Brian Stamm, Mihai Giurcanu, Steven R Messe, Edward C Jauch, Shyam Prabhakaran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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. Review
  2. Article
  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

6 authors.

Regina RoyanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Brian StammInstitute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Mihai GiurcanuDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Steven R MesseDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Edward C JauchDepartment of Research, Mountain Area Health Education Center, Asheville, North Carolina.
Shyam PrabhakaranDepartment of Neurology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Funding

AHRQ HHS R18 HS027264
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Stroke treatment is exquisitely time sensitive. The door-in-door-out (DIDO) time, defined as the total time spent in the emergency department (ED) at a transferring hospital, is an important quality metric for the care of acute stroke. However, little is known about the contributions of specific process steps to delays and disparities in DIDO time. Objective: To quantify process steps and their association with DIDO times at transferring hospitals among patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study analyzed patients in the American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Stroke registry with AIS presenting between January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021, and transferred from the presenting hospital ED to another acute care hospital for evaluation of thrombolytics, endovascular therapy, or postthrombolytic care. Data were analyzed from July 8 to October 13, 2023. Exposures: Intervals of ED care of ischemic stroke: door-to-imaging and imaging-to-door times. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was DIDO time. Multivariate generalized estimating equations regression models were performed to compare contributions of interval process times to explain variation in DIDO time, controlling for patient- and hospital-level characteristics. Results: Among 28 887 patients (50.5% male; mean [SD] age, 68.3 [14.8] years; 5.5% Hispanic, 14.7% non-Hispanic Black, and 73.2% non-Hispanic White), mean (SD) DIDO time was 171.4 (149.5) minutes, mean (SD) door-to-imaging time was 18.3 (34.1) minutes, and mean (SD) imaging-to-door time was 153.1 (141.5) minutes. In the model adjusting for door-to-imaging time, the following were associated with longer DIDO time: age 80 years or older (compared with 18-59 years; 5.97 [95% CI, 1.02-10.92] minutes), female sex (5.21 [95% CI, 1.55-8.87] minutes), and non-Hispanic Black race (compared with non-Hispanic White 10.09 [95% CI, 4.21-15.96] minutes). In the model including imaging-to-door time as a covariate, disparities in DIDO by age and female sex became nonsignificant, and the disparity by Black race was attenuated (2.32 [95% CI, 1.09-3.56] minutes). Conclusions and Relevance: In this national cohort study of interhospital transfer of patients with AIS, delays in DIDO time by Black race, older age (≥80 years), and female sex were largely explained by the imaging-to-door period, suggesting that future systems interventions should target this interval to reduce these disparities. While existing guidelines and care resources heavily focus on reducing door-to-imaging times, further attention is warranted to reduce imaging-to-door times in the management of patients with AIS who require interhospital transfer.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalIschemic StrokePatient TransferTime-to-TreatmentAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegistriesRetrospective StudiesThrombolytic TherapyTime FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39226055
PMCPMC11372507

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.