Literature DB >> 30118372

Prognostic Value of BEFAST vs. FAST to Identify Stroke in a Prehospital Setting.

David Pickham, André Valdez, Jelle Demeestere, Robin Lemmens, Linda Diaz, Sherril Hopper, Karen de la Cuesta, Fannie Rackover, Kenneth Miller, Maarten G Lansberg.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Use of prehospital stroke scales may enhance stroke detection and improve treatment rates and delays. Current scales, however, may lack detection accuracy. As such, we examined whether adding coordination (Balance) and diplopia (Eyes) assessments increase the accuracy of the Face-Arms-Speech-Time (FAST) scale in a multisite prospective study of emergency response activations for presumed stroke.
METHODS: This was a prospective study of emergency response activations for presumed stroke in Santa Clara County, California. Emergency medical responders were trained in the Balance-Eyes-Face-Arms-Speech-Time (BEFAST) scale and administered the scale on scene to all patients who were within 6 hours of onset of neurological symptoms. Each patient's final diagnosis (stroke vs. no stroke) was based on review of hospital records. We compared the performance of the BEFAST and FAST scales for stroke detection.
RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-nine patients were included in our analysis. Compared to nonstroke patients (n = 200), stroke patients (n = 159) more often scored positive on each of the five elements of the BEFAST scale (p < 0.05 for each). In multivariable analysis, only facial droop and arm weakness were independent predictors of stroke (p < 0.05). BEFAST and FAST scale accuracy for stroke identification was comparable (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.70 vs. AUC = 0.69, p = 0.36). Optimal cutoff for stroke detection was ≥1 for both scales. At this threshold, the positive predictive value (PPV) was 0.49 for the BEFAST and 0.53 for the FAST scale, and the negative predictive value (NPV) was 0.93 for BEFAST and 0.86 for FAST.
CONCLUSION: Adding coordination and diplopia assessments to face, arm, and speech assessment does not improve stroke detection in the prehospital setting.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acute stroke; assessment; prehospital; stroke

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30118372     DOI: 10.1080/10903127.2018.1490837

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care        ISSN: 1090-3127            Impact factor:   3.077


  6 in total

1.  Stroke Network of Wisconsin (SNOW) Scale Predicts Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke in the Prehospital Setting.

Authors:  Kessarin Panichpisal; Sarah Erpenbeck; Paul Vilar; Reji P Babygirija; Maharaj Singh; M Riccardo Colella; Richard A Rovin
Journal:  J Patient Cent Res Rev       Date:  2022-04-18

Review 2.  Prehospital stroke care, a narrative review.

Authors:  Zi Wang; Yuchuan Ding; Paul Fu
Journal:  Brain Circ       Date:  2018-12-31

Review 3.  Characteristics of patients who had a stroke not initially identified during emergency prehospital assessment: a systematic review.

Authors:  Stephanie P Jones; Janet E Bray; Josephine Me Gibson; Graham McClelland; Colette Miller; Chris I Price; Caroline L Watkins
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 2.740

4.  A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing FAST and BEFAST in Acute Stroke Patients.

Authors:  Xinjie Chen; Xiaoxiao Zhao; Fan Xu; Mingjin Guo; Yifan Yang; Lianmei Zhong; Xiechuan Weng; Xiaolei Liu
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 4.003

Review 5.  [Initial preclinical assessment on-site].

Authors:  Bonaventura Schmid; Florian Sauer; Hans-Jörg Busch
Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 1.595

6.  Potential Impact of C-STAT for Prehospital Stroke Triage up to 24 Hours on a Regional Stroke System.

Authors:  James L Li; Jason T McMullan; Heidi Sucharew; Joseph P Broderick; Brian Katz; Pamela Schmit; Opeolu Adeoye
Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 2.686

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.