OBJECTIVE: Since stroke symptoms are often vague, and acute therapies for stroke are more recently available, it has been hypothesized that stroke patients may not be treated with the same urgency as myocardial infarction (MI) patients by emergency medical services (EMS). To examine this hypothesis, EMS transport times were examined for both stroke and MI patients who used a paramedic-level, county-based EMS system for transportation to a single hospital during 1999. METHODS: Patients were first identified by their hospital discharge diagnosis as stroke (ICD-9 430-436, n = 50) or MI (ICD-9 410, n = 55). Trip sheets with corresponding transport times were retrospectively obtained from the 911 center. A separate analysis was performed on patients identified by dispatchers with a chief complaint of stroke (n = 85) or MI (n = 372). RESULTS: Comparing stroke and MI patients identified by ICD-9 codes, mean EMS transport times in minutes did not meaningfully differ with respect to dispatch to scene arrival time (8.3 vs 8.9, p = 0.61), scene time (19.5 vs 21.4, p = 0.23), and transport time (13.7 vs 16.2, p = 0.10). Mean total call times in minutes from dispatch to hospital arrival were similar between stroke and MI patients (41.5 vs 46.4, p = 0.22). Results were similar when comparing patients identified by dispatchers with a chief complaint indicative of stroke or MI. CONCLUSION: In this single county, EMS response times were not different between stroke and MI patients. Replication in other EMS settings is needed to confirm these findings.
OBJECTIVE: Since stroke symptoms are often vague, and acute therapies for stroke are more recently available, it has been hypothesized that strokepatients may not be treated with the same urgency as myocardial infarction (MI) patients by emergency medical services (EMS). To examine this hypothesis, EMS transport times were examined for both stroke and MI patients who used a paramedic-level, county-based EMS system for transportation to a single hospital during 1999. METHODS:Patients were first identified by their hospital discharge diagnosis as stroke (ICD-9 430-436, n = 50) or MI (ICD-9 410, n = 55). Trip sheets with corresponding transport times were retrospectively obtained from the 911 center. A separate analysis was performed on patients identified by dispatchers with a chief complaint of stroke (n = 85) or MI (n = 372). RESULTS: Comparing stroke and MI patients identified by ICD-9 codes, mean EMS transport times in minutes did not meaningfully differ with respect to dispatch to scene arrival time (8.3 vs 8.9, p = 0.61), scene time (19.5 vs 21.4, p = 0.23), and transport time (13.7 vs 16.2, p = 0.10). Mean total call times in minutes from dispatch to hospital arrival were similar between stroke and MI patients (41.5 vs 46.4, p = 0.22). Results were similar when comparing patients identified by dispatchers with a chief complaint indicative of stroke or MI. CONCLUSION: In this single county, EMS response times were not different between stroke and MI patients. Replication in other EMS settings is needed to confirm these findings.
Authors: Mehul D Patel; Jane H Brice; Chailee Moss; Chirayath M Suchindran; Kelly R Evenson; Kathryn M Rose; Wayne D Rosamond Journal: Prehosp Emerg Care Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 3.077