Key result
Mobile stroke unit rendezvous linked to ~60% reduction in dispatch-to-door time vs standard EMS transport.
Why the study?
Most mobile stroke programs in the United States are rooted in urban settings, and the impact of an MSTU rendezvous process with rural emergency medical services was unestablished.
Does a Mobile Stroke Treatment Unit (MSTU) with a rural EMS rendezvous process improve timely stroke care metrics in patients with acute stroke?
Cohort (n=1,174)
No
Does a Mobile Stroke Treatment Unit (MSTU) with a rural EMS rendezvous process improve timely stroke care metrics in patients with acute stroke?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The implementation of a Mobile Stroke Treatment Unit with a rural EMS rendezvous process significantly reduces dispatch-to-needle and dispatch-to-puncture times for acute stroke patients in underserved areas.
BACKGROUND: Mobile stroke units, also sometimes called Mobile Stroke Treatment Units (MSTUs) are changing the paradigm of acute stroke care and are considered to be an extension of the time is brain concept. Of the <20 active Mobile Stroke Programs in the United States, most are rooted in urban settings. In July 2023, the first MSTU in Florida was launched in Alachua County, implementing a unique and innovative rendezvous process with rural emergency medical services (EMS). We compared stroke outcome metrics between the MSTU, including rendezvous patients, and the standard process of EMS to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with acute stroke evaluated in the MSTU and those transported to the ED by the standard EMS stroke alert process at an academic Comprehensive Stroke Center between July 25, 2023 and May 31, 2024. Patient demographic and acute stroke metrics were extracted to complete univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Across all 3 groups, both MSTU patients with (n=76) and without (n=291) rendezvous compared with EMS-to-ED patients (n=807), had significantly shorter mean dispatch-to-door times (29.4 versus 28.5 versus 73.2 minutes, respectively; P <0.01), dispatch-to-needle times (41.3 versus 44.6 versus 104.1 minutes, respectively; P <0.01), and dispatch-to-puncture (92.7 versus 81.9 versus 138.0 minutes, respectively; P <0.01). In rural counties, MSTU rendezvous patients (n=76) compared with EMS-to-ED patients (n=206), had shorter mean dispatch-to-door and dispatch-to-needle times (41.3 versus 97.8 minutes, respectively; P <0.001). After adjusting for age and sex, these differences remained significant (odds ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.07–1.37]; P <0.01 and odds ratio, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.07–3.04]; P =0.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates the effectiveness of MSTUs in Florida and establishes that the MSTU rendezvous process significantly improves timely stroke care in underserved rural counties.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Davis et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Acute stroke (n=1,174). Mobile Stroke Treatment Unit (MSTU) evaluation vs. Standard EMS stroke alert process to the emergency department was evaluated on Mean dispatch-to-door time (p=<0.01). Mobile Stroke Treatment Unit evaluation with rural EMS rendezvous reduced mean dispatch-to-door time compared to standard EMS transport.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: