Mac Grory Brian, Sun Jie-Lena, Alhanti Brooke, Lusk Jay, Li Fan, Adeoye Opeolu, Furie Karen, Hasan David, Messe Steven, Sheth Kevin N, Schwamm Lee H, Smith Eric E, Bhatt Deepak L, Fonarow Gregg C, Saver Jeffrey L, Xian Ying, Grotta James
Department of Neurology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
JAMA Neurol. 2024 Dec 1;81(12):1250-1262. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.3659.
Clinical trials have suggested that prehospital management in a mobile stroke unit (MSU) improves functional outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke who are potentially eligible for intravenous thrombolysis, but there is a paucity of real-world evidence from routine clinical practice on this topic.
To determine the association between prehospital management in an MSU vs standard emergency medical services (EMS) management and the level of global disability at hospital discharge.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a retrospective, observational, cohort study that included consecutive patients with a final diagnosis of ischemic stroke who received either prehospital management in an MSU or standard EMS management between August 1, 2018, and January 31, 2023. Follow-up ended at hospital discharge. The primary analytic cohort included those who were potentially eligible for IV thrombolysis. A separate, overlapping cohort including all patients regardless of diagnosis was also analyzed. Patient data were obtained from the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines-Stroke (GWTG-Stroke) Program, a nationwide, multicenter quality assurance registry. This analysis was completed in May 2024.
Prehospital management in an MSU (vs standard EMS management).
The primary efficacy end point was the utility-weighted modified Rankin Scale (UW-mRS) score. The secondary efficacy end point was independent ambulation status. The coprimary safety end points were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and in-hospital mortality.
Of 19 433 patients (median [IQR] age, 73 [62-83] years; 9867 female [50.8%]) treated at 106 hospitals, 1237 (6.4%) received prehospital management in an MSU. Prehospital management in an MSU was associated with a better score on the UW-mRS at discharge (adjusted mean difference, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.05) and a higher likelihood of independent ambulation at discharge (53.3% [468 of 878 patients] vs 48.3% [5868 of 12 148 patients]; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.13). There was no statistically significant difference in sICH (5.2% [57 of 1094] vs 4.2% [545 of 13 014]; aRR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.94-1.75]) or in-hospital mortality (5.7% [70 of 1237] vs 6.2% [1121 of 18 196]; aRR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78-1.27) between the 2 groups.
Among patients with acute ischemic stroke potentially eligible for intravenous thrombolysis, prehospital management in an MSU compared with standard EMS management was associated with a significantly lower level of global disability at hospital discharge. These findings support policy efforts to expand access to prehospital MSU management.
临床试验表明,对于可能适合静脉溶栓的急性缺血性脑卒中患者,在移动卒中单元(MSU)进行院前管理可改善功能结局,但关于这一主题,来自常规临床实践的真实世界证据较少。
确定在MSU进行院前管理与标准紧急医疗服务(EMS)管理之间的关联,以及出院时的总体残疾水平。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项回顾性观察队列研究,纳入了2018年8月1日至2023年1月31日期间最终诊断为缺血性脑卒中且接受了MSU院前管理或标准EMS管理的连续患者。随访至出院结束。主要分析队列包括那些可能适合静脉溶栓的患者。还分析了一个单独的、重叠的队列,包括所有诊断的患者。患者数据来自美国心脏协会的“遵循指南-卒中”(GWTG-卒中)项目,这是一个全国性的多中心质量保证登记处。该分析于2024年5月完成。
在MSU进行院前管理(与标准EMS管理相比)。
主要疗效终点是效用加权改良Rankin量表(UW-mRS)评分。次要疗效终点是独立行走状态。共同主要安全终点是症状性颅内出血(sICH)和院内死亡率。
在106家医院治疗的19433例患者(中位年龄[四分位间距],73[62-83]岁;9867例女性[50.8%])中,1237例(6.4%)接受了MSU院前管理。在MSU进行院前管理与出院时UW-mRS评分更好(调整后平均差异,0.03;95%置信区间,0.01-0.05)以及出院时独立行走的可能性更高相关(53.3%[878例患者中的468例]对48.3%[12148例患者中的5868例];调整后风险比[aRR],1.08;95%置信区间,1.03-1.13)。两组之间在sICH(5.2%[1094例中的57例]对4.2%[13014例中的545例];aRR,1.30;95%置信区间,0.94-1.75])或院内死亡率(5.7%[1237例中的70例]对6.2%[18196例中的1121例];aRR,1.03;95%置信区间,0.78-1.27)方面无统计学显著差异。
在可能适合静脉溶栓的急性缺血性脑卒中患者中,与标准EMS管理相比,在MSU进行院前管理与出院时显著更低的总体残疾水平相关。这些发现支持扩大院前MSU管理可及性的政策努力。