Key result
Drive-the-doctor model cuts onset-to-groin puncture time by ~48 minutes compared to drip-and-ship.
Why the study?
Patients with ischemic stroke due to LVO in rural areas are usually transferred to a comprehensive stroke center for EVT, but the impact of a drive-the-doctor model on time savings and clinical outcomes is unknown.
Does a drive-the-doctor model reduce time to treatment and improve clinical outcomes compared to a drip-and-ship model for LVO stroke patients in a rural region?
Does a drive-the-doctor model reduce time to treatment and improve clinical outcomes compared to a drip-and-ship model for LVO stroke patients in a rural region?
Mean Difference: -48.4
Absolute Event Rate: 192.7% vs 241.1%
The 'drive-the-doctor' model for stroke EVT in rural areas could substantially reduce treatment delays and improve outcomes compared to traditional inter-hospital transfer models.
May support rural EVT system redesign; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Patients who present in a primary stroke center (PSC) with ischemic stroke are usually transferred to a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) in case of a large vessel occlusion (LVO) for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) treatment, the so-called 'drip-and-ship' (DS) model. The 'drive-the-doctor' (DD) model modifies the DS model by allowing mobile interventionalists (MIs) to transfer to an upgraded PSC acting as a thrombectomy capable stroke center (TSC), instead of transferring patients to a CSC. Using simulation we estimated time savings and impact on clinical outcome of DD in a rural region. METHODS: Data from EVT patients in northern Netherlands was prospectively collected in the MR CLEAN Registry between July 2014 - November 2017. A Monte Carlo simulation model of DS patients served as baseline model. Scenarios included regional spread of TSCs, pre-hospital patient routing to 'the nearest PSC' or 'nearest TSC', MI's notification after LVO confirmation or earlier prehospital, and MI's transport modalities. Primary outcomes are onset to groin puncture (OTG) and predicted probability of favorable outcome (PPFO) (mRS 0-2). RESULTS: Combining all scenarios OTG would be reduced by 28-58 min and PPFO would be increased by 3.4-7.1%. Best performing and acceptable scenario was a combination of 3 TSCs, prehospital patient routing based on the RACE scale, MI notification after LVO confirmation and MI's transfer by ambulance. OTG would reduce by 48 min and PPFO would increase by 5.9%. CONCLUSIONS: A DD model is a feasible scenario to optimize acute stroke services for EVT eligible patients in rural regions. Key design decisions in implementing the DD model for a specific region are regional spread of TSCs, patient routing strategy, and MI's notification moment and transport modality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maas et al. (2023) studied Acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion (n=165). Drive-the-doctor (DD) model vs. Drip-and-ship (DS) model was evaluated on Onset to groin puncture (OTG) time (MD -48.4 minutes). The drive-the-doctor model with optimal regional design reduced onset to groin puncture time by 48.4 minutes and increased the predicted probability of favorable outcome by 5.9% compared to the drip-and-ship model.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: