Trial reportEuropean stroke journal2026
One-year functional outcome of the Flying Intervention Team versus patient interhospital transfer in acute ischaemic stroke.
Trial report in European stroke journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEndovascular thrombectomy is highly effective for large vessel occlusion strokes, yet timely access remains challenging in remote areas. The Flying Intervention Team study demonstrated that dispatching a neurointerventionist team to peripheral hospitals reduces time to treatment. This study evaluates 12-month functional outcomes of enrolled patients. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of a multicentre pseudo-randomised controlled intervention study comparing 2 systems of care in alternating weeks. The study was conducted in 13 nonurban primary stroke centres in Bavaria, Germany. Of 157 patients enrolled between February 2018 and October 2019, 146 had available 12-month follow-up information. Patients were treated either by the flying team or after interhospital transfer to a referral centre. Primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 12 months in the intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, activities of daily living and mortality.
resultsOverall, 146 patients were included (median [IQR] age, 75 [66-80] years; 79 [54%] women), 70 in the flying team group and 76 in the transfer group. Median decision-to-puncture time was 89 min shorter in the flying team group. No significant differences were found in successful reperfusion and complication rates. mRS scores at 12 months favoured the flying team (3 [IQR 1-6] vs 4 [2-6]; adjusted common odds ratio, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.09-3.84). Surviving patients had significantly better quality of life (EQ-5D mean [SD] utility score, 0.79 [0.24] vs 0.68 [0.31]). No significant differences were observed in Barthel index or mortality. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionIn rural stroke patients, deployment of a flying team was associated with better functional outcomes at 12 months. These findings reinforce the potential for broader implementation of the model to increase equitable access to stroke care.
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.