Literature DB >> 31285874

Paramedic-initiated helivac to tertiary hospital for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a strategy for improving treatment delivery times.

Paul Davis1,2, Graham J Howie2, Bridget Dicker1,2, Nicholas K Garrett3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In regions of New Zealand without coronary catheterisation laboratory (CCL) facilities, patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are often subjected to prolonged delays before receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) if it is the chosen reperfusion strategy. Therefore, we aimed to trial a new process of paramedic-initiated helivac of STEMI patients from the field directly to the CCL.
METHODS: Utilising a prospective observational approach, over a 48-month period, paramedics identified patients with a clinical presentation and electrocardiogram features consistent with STEMI and transported them directly to the regional air ambulance base for helivac to the CCL (flight time 30-35 minutes). These patients were compared to two historic STEMI cohorts either transported by paramedics to the region's local hospital or self-presenting, prior to helivac. The primary outcome measures were: first medical contact-to-balloon (FMCTB) time and accuracy of paramedic diagnosis. Secondary outcome measures were mortality at 30 days and six months, and hospital length of stay (LOS).
RESULTS: A total of 92 patients underwent helivac for PPCI (mean age of 64 years, SD ±10.3). Median FMCTB time was 155 minutes (IQR 27) for the historic cohorts (n=57), versus 102 minutes (IQR 16) for the experimental cohort (n=35, P<0.001). Paramedic diagnosis showed a sensitivity of 97% (95% CI: 85 to 99) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 84 to 100) with no inappropriate CCL activations. No significant difference was observed between groups in terms of 30 day and 6-month mortality. Hospital LOS was significantly shorter among the experimental cohort (P=0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Paramedic-initiated helivac of STEMI patients from the field directly to the CCL for PPCI is safe and feasible and can significantly improve time-to-treatment to within benchmark timeframes, resulting in reduced hospital LOS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); air ambulances; ambulances; emergency medical services (EMS); percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)

Year:  2019        PMID: 31285874      PMCID: PMC6588767          DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2019.05.45

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Dis        ISSN: 2072-1439            Impact factor:   2.895


  29 in total

1.  Early recognition and early access for acute coronary syndromes in New Zealand: key links in the chain of survival.

Authors:  Helen Tanner; Peter Larsen; Nigel Lever; Duncan Galletly
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  2006-04-21

2.  Impact of time to treatment on mortality after prehospital fibrinolysis or primary angioplasty: data from the CAPTIM randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Philippe Gabriel Steg; Eric Bonnefoy; Sylvie Chabaud; Frédéric Lapostolle; Pierre-Yves Dubien; Pascal Cristofini; Alain Leizorovicz; Paul Touboul
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2003-11-17       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Angioplasty vs thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative overview of the effects of interhospital transportation.

Authors:  F Zijlstra
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 29.983

4.  A randomized trial of transfer for primary angioplasty versus on-site thrombolysis in patients with high-risk myocardial infarction: the Air Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction study.

Authors:  Cindy L Grines; Donald R Westerhausen; Lorelei L Grines; J Timothy Hanlon; Timothy L Logemann; Matti Niemela; W Douglas Weaver; Marianne Graham; Judith Boura; William W O'Neill; Carlos Balestrini
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2002-06-05       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  Multicentre randomized trial comparing transport to primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis vs combined strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to a community hospital without a catheterization laboratory. The PRAGUE study.

Authors:  P Widimský; L Groch; M Zelízko; M Aschermann; F Bednár; H Suryapranata
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 29.983

6.  Thrombolytic therapy vs primary percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction in patients presenting to hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Thomas Aversano; Lynnet T Aversano; Eugene Passamani; Genell L Knatterud; Michael L Terrin; David O Williams; Sandra A Forman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-04-17       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Acute Coronary Syndrome patients in New Zealand receive less invasive management when admitted to hospitals without invasive facilities.

Authors:  Chris Ellis; Gerald Devlin; Philip Matsis; John Elliott; Michael Williams; Greg Gamble; Stewart Mann; John French; Harvey White
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  2004-07-09

8.  A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Henning R Andersen; Torsten T Nielsen; Klaus Rasmussen; Leif Thuesen; Henning Kelbaek; Per Thayssen; Ulrik Abildgaard; Flemming Pedersen; Jan K Madsen; Peer Grande; Anton B Villadsen; Lars R Krusell; Torben Haghfelt; Preben Lomholt; Steen E Husted; Else Vigholt; Henrik K Kjaergard; Leif Spange Mortensen
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-08-21       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. Final results of the randomized national multicentre trial--PRAGUE-2.

Authors:  P Widimský; T Budesínský; D Vorác; L Groch; M Zelízko; M Aschermann; M Branny; J St'ásek; P Formánek
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 29.983

Review 10.  Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials.

Authors:  Ellen C Keeley; Judith A Boura; Cindy L Grines
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-01-04       Impact factor: 79.321

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.