Why the study?
Does the use of emergency medical services reduce ischemic time in patients presenting with STEMI?
Does the use of emergency medical services reduce ischemic time in patients presenting with STEMI?
Underutilization of emergency medical services by STEMI patients is common and is associated with significantly longer symptom-to-balloon times and lower rates of primary PCI.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies in Western countries found that the emergency medical service (EMS) was under-used in patients with myocardial infarction. AIM: We sought to determine the prevalence of immediate EMS utilisation among Singapore patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and correlated the use of the EMS with the symptom-to-balloon and door-to-balloon times. METHODS: We studied 252 patients admitted with STEMI to our institution from August 2008 to September 2009. Information regarding demographic characteristics, whether EMS was used, reperfusion procedural details and mortality rates were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Among the recruited patients, 89 (35.3%) used the EMS (EMS group) and 163 (64.7%) did not use the EMS (non-EMS group). In the latter group, 98 (60.1%) arrived at our institution through their own transport, 56 (34.4%) first consulted general practitioners, and 9 (5.5%) initially consulted another hospital without acute medical services. Among the 245 (out of 252, 97.2%) patients who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the EMS group was more likely to undergo primary PCI (P= 0.003) while the non-EMS group was more likely to undergo non-urgent PCI (P= 0.002). In patients who underwent primary PCI, the EMS group had a shorter symptom-to-balloon time (average difference 81.6 min, P= 0.002). The door-to-balloon time was similar for both groups. CONCLUSION: Despite the availability of a centralised EMS, 64.7% of patients with STEMI did not contact EMS at presentation. These patients were less likely to receive primary PCI and had a significantly longer symptom-to-balloon time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tan et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: