BACKGROUND: Thrombolysis remains the only approved therapy for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS); however, its utilisation is reported to be low. AIMS: This study aimed to determine the reasons for the low utilisation of thrombolysis in clinical practice. METHOD: Five metropolitan hospitals comprising two tertiary referral centres and three district hospitals conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study. Researchers identified patients discharged with a principal diagnosis of AIS over a 12-month time period (July 2009-July 2010), and reviewed the medical record of systematically chosen samples. RESULTS: The research team reviewed a total of 521 records (48.8% females, mean age 74.4 ± 14 years, age range 5-102 years) from the 1261 AIS patients. Sixty-nine per cent of AIS patients failed to meet eligibility criteria to receive thrombolysis because individuals arrived at the hospital later than 4.5 hours after the onset of symptoms. The factors found to be positively associated with late arrival included confusion at onset, absence of a witness at onset and waiting for improvement of symptoms. However, factors negatively associated with late arrival encompassed facial droop, slurred speech and immediately calling an ambulance. Only 14.7% of the patients arriving within 4.5 hours received thrombolysis. The main reasons for exclusion included such factors as rapidly improving symptoms (28.2%), minor symptoms (17.2%), patient receiving therapeutic anticoagulation (6.7%) and severe stroke (5.5%). CONCLUSION: A late patient presentation represents the most significant barrier to utilising thrombolysis in the acute stroke setting. Thrombolysis continues to be currently underutilised in potentially eligible patients, and additional research is needed to identify more precise criteria for selecting patients for thrombolysis.
BACKGROUND: Thrombolysis remains the only approved therapy for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS); however, its utilisation is reported to be low. AIMS: This study aimed to determine the reasons for the low utilisation of thrombolysis in clinical practice. METHOD: Five metropolitan hospitals comprising two tertiary referral centres and three district hospitals conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study. Researchers identified patients discharged with a principal diagnosis of AIS over a 12-month time period (July 2009-July 2010), and reviewed the medical record of systematically chosen samples. RESULTS: The research team reviewed a total of 521 records (48.8% females, mean age 74.4 ± 14 years, age range 5-102 years) from the 1261 AISpatients. Sixty-nine per cent of AISpatients failed to meet eligibility criteria to receive thrombolysis because individuals arrived at the hospital later than 4.5 hours after the onset of symptoms. The factors found to be positively associated with late arrival included confusion at onset, absence of a witness at onset and waiting for improvement of symptoms. However, factors negatively associated with late arrival encompassed facial droop, slurred speech and immediately calling an ambulance. Only 14.7% of the patients arriving within 4.5 hours received thrombolysis. The main reasons for exclusion included such factors as rapidly improving symptoms (28.2%), minor symptoms (17.2%), patient receiving therapeutic anticoagulation (6.7%) and severe stroke (5.5%). CONCLUSION: A late patient presentation represents the most significant barrier to utilising thrombolysis in the acute stroke setting. Thrombolysis continues to be currently underutilised in potentially eligible patients, and additional research is needed to identify more precise criteria for selecting patients for thrombolysis.
Authors: Harold P Adams; Gregory del Zoppo; Mark J Alberts; Deepak L Bhatt; Lawrence Brass; Anthony Furlan; Robert L Grubb; Randall T Higashida; Edward C Jauch; Chelsea Kidwell; Patrick D Lyden; Lewis B Morgenstern; Adnan I Qureshi; Robert H Rosenwasser; Phillip A Scott; Eelco F M Wijdicks Journal: Stroke Date: 2007-04-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Werner Hacke; Markku Kaste; Erich Bluhmki; Miroslav Brozman; Antoni Dávalos; Donata Guidetti; Vincent Larrue; Kennedy R Lees; Zakaria Medeghri; Thomas Machnig; Dietmar Schneider; Rüdiger von Kummer; Nils Wahlgren; Danilo Toni Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dawn Kleindorfer; Jane Khoury; Joseph P Broderick; Eric Rademacher; Daniel Woo; Matthew L Flaherty; Kathleen Alwell; Charles J Moomaw; Alex Schneider; Arthur Pancioli; Rosie Miller; Brett M Kissela Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-06-04 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Debbie A Quain; Mark W Parsons; Allan R Loudfoot; Neil J Spratt; Malcolm K Evans; Michelle L Russell; Angela T Royan; Andrea G Moore; Ferdinand Miteff; Carolyn J Hullick; John Attia; Patrick McElduff; Christopher R Levi Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2008-10-20 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Peter Sandercock; Joanna M Wardlaw; Richard I Lindley; Martin Dennis; Geoff Cohen; Gordon Murray; Karen Innes; Graham Venables; Anna Czlonkowska; Adam Kobayashi; Stefano Ricci; Veronica Murray; Eivind Berge; Karsten Bruins Slot; Graeme J Hankey; Manuel Correia; Andre Peeters; Karl Matz; Phillippe Lyrer; Gord Gubitz; Stephen J Phillips; Antonio Arauz Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-05-23 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Mohamed Acherqui; Hajar Khattab; Younes Habtany; Rim Amzil; Salma Bellakhdar; Hicham El Otmani; Bouchra El Moutawakil; Mohammed Abdoh Rafai Journal: Pan Afr Med J Date: 2020-08-26
Authors: Lane J Liddle; Christine A Dirks; Brittany A Fedor; Mohammed Almekhlafi; Frederick Colbourne Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-01-06 Impact factor: 4.003