Key result
GP-led STEMI thrombolysis yields similar door-to-needle times and complication rates versus physician-led EDs.
Why the study?
Diminishing confidence of some GPs in small rural health services to administer thrombolytics was identified as a barrier to timely reperfusion for STEMI patients in northeast Victoria, Australia.
Does thrombolysis administered by GPs in small rural EDs achieve similar treatment times and clinical outcomes compared to physician-led sub-regional EDs in STEMI patients?
Observational (n=68)
Yes
Does thrombolysis administered by GPs in small rural EDs achieve similar treatment times and clinical outcomes compared to physician-led sub-regional EDs in STEMI patients?
Thrombolysis for STEMI administered by GPs in small rural EDs achieves similar door-to-needle times and clinical outcomes as physician-led sub-regional EDs, supporting decentralized reperfusion strategies where timely PCI is unavailable.
Supports GP-led thrombolysis feasibility in rural STEMI; hypothesis-generating pilot data requiring larger prospective confirmation.
INTRODUCTION: Urgent angiogram is best treatment for patients presenting with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the first 90 min after contacting medical help. For Australian residents of inner and outer regional areas and remote or very remote areas, quick access to angiograms is not available. Numerous approaches have been developed to maximize reperfusion but delays due to systematic and patient factors persist. Diminishing confidence of some GPs in small rural health services to administer thrombolytics was one barrier to timely reperfusion identified in northeast Victoria, Australia. The aim of this study was to compare the frequency and outcomes of STEMI patients treated with thrombolysis by GPs in small rural emergency departments (EDs) with the outcomes from thrombolysis for STEMI in the physician-led, sub-regional ED in northeast Victoria. METHODS: Data were gathered by a medical file audit. Outcome measures were the frequency of STEMI, symptom to presentation times, mode of transport to hospital, ambulance call to presentation at ED times, door to needle (DTN) times, subsequent percutanous intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG), physician follow up and death. RESULTS: In total 68 cases were audited. Univariate analysis showed no significant differences between the GP-led or physician-led EDs in time from onset of symptoms to presentation, DTN times, thrombolysis related complications or subsequent access to PCI or CABG. Follow-up care was similar in both groups. Transport to hospital differed between the groups with only half of all cases arriving at the ED by ambulance, almost all of which went to the sub-regional hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombolysis for STEMI in the small GP-led EDs had similar results to thrombolysis administered by the physician-led ED. There is substantial time benefit to be gained by encouraging GP-led EDs to provide thrombolysis treatment, thereby improving patient prognosis and survival.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Krones et al. (2012) conducted an observational in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=68). Thrombolysis in GP-led small rural EDs vs. Thrombolysis in physician-led sub-regional ED was evaluated on Time from onset of symptoms to presentation, door to needle (DTN) times, thrombolysis related complications, subsequent access to PCI or CABG, and follow-up care. Thrombolysis for STEMI in small GP-led emergency departments resulted in similar door-to-needle times and complication rates compared to a physician-led sub-regional emergency department.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: