Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective: to analyze the performance of FAST and BE-FAST scales in prehospital stroke recognition and their repercussions on access to reperfusion therapy. Method: an integrative review was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, LILACS, SciELO and the Virtual Health Library, including studies published from 2021 to July 2026. Results: twenty-eight studies were synthesized. FAST showed high operational feasibility but lower sensitivity for posterior circulation events and mild deficits. BE-FAST expanded the detection of balance and visual abnormalities, potentially reducing false negatives, although with lower specificity. Clinical benefit depended on combining the scale with clinical reasoning, last-known-well documentation, capillary glucose testing, prenotification and transport to the appropriate stroke center. Conclusion: BE-FAST can complement FAST but does not replace structured neurological assessment, continuing education and regional management of the stroke pathway.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fábio Caxico de Abreu Júnior (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: