From the Department of Health Policy and Management (Y.X., B.J.), Columbia University, New York, NY.
Mailman School of Public Health and Department of Neurology, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons (N.S.P., J.Z.W., A.K.B., M.S.V.E.), Columbia University, New York, NY.
Stroke. 2019 Apr;50(4):970-977. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.023272.
Background and Purpose- We used a decision analysis approach to analyze triage strategies for patients with acute stroke symptoms while accounting for prehospital large vessel occlusion (LVO) screening methods and key time metrics. Methods- Our decision analysis compared anticipated functional outcomes for patients within the IV-tPA (intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator) treatment window in the mothership and drip-and-ship frameworks. Key branches of the model included IV-tPA eligibility, presence of an LVO, and endovascular therapy eligibility. Our decision analysis evaluated 2 prehospital LVO screening approaches: (1) no formal screening and (2) the use of clinical LVO screening scales. An excellent outcome was defined as modified Rankin Scale scores 0-1. Probabilities and workflow times were guideline-based or imputed from published studies. In sensitivity analyses, we individually and jointly varied transport time to the nearest primary stroke center, additional time required to transport directly to a comprehensive stroke center, and LVO screening scale predictive probabilities. We evaluated 2 separate scenarios: one in which ideal time metrics were achieved and one under current real-world metrics. Results- In the ideal metrics scenario, the drip-and-ship strategy was almost always favored in the absence of formal LVO screening. For patients screened positive for an LVO, mothership was favored if the additional transport time to the comprehensive stroke center was <3 to 23 minutes. Under real-world conditions, in which primary stroke center workflow is slower than ideal, the mothership strategy was favored in more scenarios, regardless of formal LVO screening. For example, mothership was favored with an additional transport time to the comprehensive stroke center of <32 to 99 minutes for patients screened positive for an LVO and <28 to 39 minutes in the absence of screening. Conclusions- Joint consideration of LVO probability, screening, workflow times, and transport times may improve prehospital stroke triage. Drip-and-ship was more favorable when more ideal primary stroke center workflow times were modeled.
背景与目的- 我们使用决策分析方法,分析了急性卒中症状患者的分诊策略,同时考虑了院前大血管闭塞(LVO)筛查方法和关键时间指标。方法- 我们的决策分析比较了在母体框架和滴注-转运框架中,IV-tPA(静脉内组织型纤溶酶原激活剂)治疗窗内的患者预期功能结局。模型的关键分支包括 IV-tPA 适应证、存在 LVO 和血管内治疗适应证。我们的决策分析评估了 2 种院前 LVO 筛查方法:(1)无正式筛查和(2)使用临床 LVO 筛查量表。良好结局定义为改良 Rankin 量表评分 0-1。概率和工作流程时间是基于指南或从已发表的研究中推断出来的。在敏感性分析中,我们分别和联合改变了到最近的初级卒中中心的转运时间、直接转运到综合卒中中心所需的额外时间以及 LVO 筛查量表的预测概率。我们评估了 2 种单独的情况:一种是理想时间指标实现的情况,另一种是当前现实世界指标的情况。结果- 在理想指标的情况下,在没有正式 LVO 筛查的情况下,滴注-转运策略几乎总是更受欢迎。对于 LVO 筛查阳性的患者,如果到综合卒中中心的额外转运时间<3 至 23 分钟,则母体更受欢迎。在现实世界条件下,初级卒中中心的工作流程比理想情况下慢,母体策略在更多情况下更受欢迎,无论是否进行正式的 LVO 筛查。例如,对于 LVO 筛查阳性的患者,如果到综合卒中中心的额外转运时间<32 至 99 分钟,或者在没有筛查的情况下<28 至 39 分钟,则母体更受欢迎。结论- 联合考虑 LVO 概率、筛查、工作流程时间和转运时间可能会改善院前卒中分诊。当更理想的初级卒中中心工作流程时间模型化时,滴注-转运策略更受欢迎。