| Literature DB >> 31684901 |
Laurien S Kuhrij1,2, Perla J Marang-van de Mheen3, Renske M van den Berg-Vos4, Frank-Erik de Leeuw5,6, Paul J Nederkoorn7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) plays a prominent role in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). The sooner IVT is administered, the higher the odds of a good outcome. Therefore, registering the in-hospital time to treatment with IVT, i.e. the door-to-needle time (DNT), is a powerful way to measure quality improvement. The aim of this study was to identify determinants that are associated with extended DNT.Entities:
Keywords: Intravenous thrombolysis; Quality improvement; Stroke
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31684901 PMCID: PMC6827229 DOI: 10.1186/s12883-019-1512-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurol ISSN: 1471-2377 Impact factor: 2.474
Baseline characteristics
| Total | 2015 | 2016 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of patients | 9518 | 4814 | 4704 | |
| Number of hospitals | 75 | 75 | 74 | |
| Patient characteristics | ||||
| Age in years (mean,sd) | 71.0 (13.7) | 70.9 (13.9) | 71.0 (13.6) | 0.77 |
| Women (n, %) | 4297 (46.0%) | 2207 (46.4%) | 2090 (45.5%) | 0.39 |
| Median onset-to-door time (IQR) | 71.0 (45–119) | 71.0 (45–119) | 71.0 (45–119) | 0.89 |
| Hospital factors | ||||
| Admission to comprehensive stroke center | 3079 (32.3%) | 1619 (33.6%) | 1460 (31.0%) | 0.01 |
| Admission during off-hours | 4696 (49.2%) | 2358 (49.0%) | 2328 (49.5%) | 0.64 |
| Median door-to-needle time (IQR) | 26.0 (20–37) | 27.0 (20–37) | 25.0 (19–35) | < 0.001 |
| Outcome measure | ||||
| In-hospital mortality | 561 (5.9%) | 296 (6.2%) | 265 (5.6%) | 0.29 |
Effect of patient- and clinical determinants on door-to-needle time, expressed in odds ratio’s (with 95th confidence intervals) for different cut-off points
| Door-to-needle time | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariable analysis | ||||
| Cut-off point in minutes | Median | 90th percentile | Mediana | 90th percentileb | |
| 26 | 55 | 26 | 55 | ||
| Age (years) | |||||
| < 50 | 1.19 (1.01–1.40)c | 1.42 (1.11–1.81) c | 1.16 (0.98–1.37) | 1.38 (1.07–1.76) d | |
| 50–75 | Reference | ||||
| > 75 | 1.12 (0.98–1.27) | 1.18 (0.95–1.45) | 1.11 (0.97–1.27) | 1.21 (0.97–1.49) | |
| Female sex | 1.21 (1.11–1.32) c | 1.08 (0.94–1.24) | 1.17 (1.05–1.31)d | – | |
| Onset-to-door time (minutes) | |||||
| < 40 | 1.10 (0.99–1.23) | 1.42 (1.20–1.66) c | 1.15 (1.00–1.33) | 1.37 (1.11–1.69) d | |
| 40–180 | Reference | ||||
| > 180 | 0.76 (0.65–0.88) c | 0.40 (0.28–0.57) c | 0.75 (0.61–0.91) d | 0.46 (0.28–0.56) d | |
| Admission to comprehensive stroke center | 0.94 (0.86–1.03) | 1.27 (1.10–1.46) c | – | 1.26 (1.04–1.50) d | |
| Admission during off-hours | 1.15 (1.06–1.25) c | 1.08 (0.95–1.24) | 1.12 (1.01–1.25) d | – | |
| Year of inclusion | |||||
| 2015 | 1.24 (1.14–1.34) c | 0.97 (0.85–1.11) | 1.33 (1.14–1.35) d | – | |
| 2016 | Reference | ||||
aAdjusted for age, female sex, onset-to-door time, admission during off-hours and year of inclusion. bAdjusted for age, onset-to-door time and admission to comprehensive stroke center. cP-value below 0.1. dP-value below 0.05
Fig. 1Association between onset-to-door time and door-to-needle time using a linear model with regression line and 95% CI. A heatmap was added
Effect of patient- and clinical factors on onset-to-door time, expressed in odds ratio’s (with 95th confidence intervals) for different cut-off points
| Onset-to-door time | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariable analysis | ||||
Cut-off point in minutes | Median | 90th percentile | Mediana | 90th percentileb | |
| 71 | 175 | 71 | 175 | ||
| Age (years) | |||||
| < 50 | 0.94 (0.80–1.10) | 0.98 (0.73–1.28) | 0.93 (0.80–1.10) | 0.93 (0.69–1.23) | |
| 50–75 | Reference | ||||
| > 75 | 1.40 (1.29–1.52)c | 1.29 (1.12–1.49) c | 1.38 (1.26–1.50)d | 1.27 (1.10–1.47) d | |
| Female sex | 1.23 (1.13–1.33) c | 1.21 (1.05–1.39) c | 1.16 (1.06–1.26) d | 1.16 (1.01–1.33) d | |
| Admission to comprehensive stroke center | 0.98 (0.90–1.06) | 1.27 (1.10–1.46) c | – | 1.25 (1.08–1.44) d | |
| Admission during off-hours | 1.11 (1.02–1.20) c | 1.21 (1.05–1.38) c | 1.12 (1.03–1.21) d | 1.18 (1.03–1.36) d | |
| Year of inclusion | |||||
| 2015 | 1.00 (0.92–1.08) | 1.02 (0.89–1.17) | – | – | |
| 2016 | Reference | ||||
aAdjusted for age, female sex and admission during off-hours. bAdjusted for age, female sex, admission to comprehensive stroke center and admission during off-hours. cP-value below 0.1. dP-value below 0.05
Effect of patient and clinical factors on in-hospital mortality
| In-hospital mortality | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariable analysis | ||||
| OR(95%CI) | OR (95% CI) | ||||
| Age (years) | |||||
| < 50 | 0.18 (0.06–0.43) | < 0.01 | 0.17 (0.05–0.41) | < 0.01 | |
| 50–75 | Reference | ||||
| > 75 | 3.53 (2.90–4.31) | < 0.01 | 3.45 (2.86–4.19) | < 0.01 | |
| Female sex | 1.33 (1.12–1.58) | < 0.01 | 1.06 (0.89–1.27) | 0.51 | |
| Admission to comprehensive stroke center | 1.32 (1.10–1.57) | < 0.01 | 1.39 (1.56–1.66) | < 0.01 | |
| Admission during off-hours | 1.09 (0.92–1.29) | 0.34 | – | – | |
| Year of inclusion | |||||
| 2015 | 0.91 (0.77–1.08) | 0.27 | – | – | |
| 2016 | Reference | ||||
| Onset-to-door time | |||||
| < 180 | Reference | ||||
| > = 180 | 0.88 (0.63–1.19) | 0.42 | – | – | |
| Door-to-needle time | |||||
| < 55 | Reference | ||||
| > = 55a | 1.48 (1.15–1.88) | < 0.01 | 1.54 (1.19–1.98) | < 0.01 | |
aCorresponding with the 90th percentile