ArticlePloS one2025
Evaluation of pre- and in-hospital workflows and time intervals with acute ischemic stroke patients.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- The intent is good but… exploring barriers and enablers to clinical pathway use in regional Australian Emergency Departments.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026Article
- Association of emergency department stroke care processes with rehabilitation outcomes after first-ever stroke.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Observational
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
objectiveStroke is one of the leading causes of death and disability globally. Rapid recanalization therapy for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients is critical for improving outcome. While in-hospital time intervals have decreased and treatment methods have improved over the past decade, pre-hospital time intervals have remained unchanged. This study aims to develop a comprehensive understanding of the prognosis of AIS patients based on pre-hospital and in-hospital data.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted in Southwest Finland covering the period of 01/01/2022-31/12/2022. The study included a total of 174 AIS patients who were conveyed by the emergency medical services (EMS) to Turku University Hospital (TUH) and given intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular treatment (EVT). Pre- and in-hospital care records of AIS patients were analyzed to evaluate workflows, time intervals, and the impacts of these time intervals on patient outcome. Binary logistic regression analysis was utilized to identify predictors of on-scene time (OST) and favorable outcome.
resultsThe median OST for EMS was 19 minutes. Analysis indicated that the scene of the stroke event being an apartment building, barriers to care such as a locked door, vertigo as a symptom, and EMS taking measurements on-scene were predictive of longer OST. Longer OST was observed to negatively impact patient outcome, along with symptom severity and gender. Using the stroke code as the dispatch code and positive FAST signs were associated with shorter OST. In-hospital median door to needle time (DNT) was 14 minutes in the IVT group and 11 minutes in the IVT+EVT group. EMS prenotification was associated with shorter in-hospital time intervals.
conclusionsThe presence of vertigo as a symptom poses challenges to identification by EMS. Pre-hospital OST meets national targets, but EMS workflows could be optimized to reduce OST and thereby positively influence patient outcome. These findings underscore the need for targeted interventions in EMS protocols to improve stroke care outcomes.
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.