Background: There is no quality metric for emergency physicians' diagnostic time for acute coronary occlusion. Objective: We sought to quantify diagnostic time associated with automated interpretation, classic STelevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) criteria, STEMIequivalents, and subtle occlusions, using electrocardiogram (ECG)-to-activation of catheterization laboratory time. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study reviewed all code STEMI patients from the emergency department (ED) with confirmed culprit lesions from January 2016 to December 2018. We measured door-to-ECG (DTE) time and ECG-to-activation (ETA) time. We examined the first ED ECGs to determine whether automated interpretation labeled ''STEMI,'' and they met classic STEMI criteria, STEMI-equivalents, or rules for subtle occlusion. ECG analysis was performed by two emergency physicians blinded to clinical scenario, automated interpretation, and angiographic outcome. Results: There were 177 code STEMIs with culprit lesions, with a median DTE time of 9.0 min and a median ETA time of 16.0 min. Automated interpretation labeled 55.4% of first ECGs ''STEMI'' (ETA 6.5 min) and 44.6% not ''STEMI'' (ETA 66 min, p < 0.0001). Of first ECGs, 63.8% met classic STEMI criteria (ETA 8.0 min), 8.5% had STEMI-equivalents (ETA 32.0 min, p = 0.0026), 16.4% had subtle occlusions (ETA 89.0 min, p = 0.045), and 11.3% had no diagnostic sign of occlusion (ETA 68.0 min, p = 0.20). Conclusions: STEMI criteria missed more than one-third of occlusions on first ECG, but most had STEMI-equivalents or rules for subtle occlusion. ETA time can serve as a quality metric for emergency physicians to promote new ECG insights and assess quality improvement initiatives.
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) reperfusion delays despite reduced emergency department (ED) volumes. However, little is known about ED contributions to these delays. We sought to measure STEMI delays and ED quality benchmarks over the course of the first two waves of the pandemic.
Study
This study was a multi-centre, retrospective chart review from two urban, academic medical centres. We obtained ED volumes, COVID-19 tests and COVID-19 cases from the hospital databases and ED Code STEMIs with culprit lesions from the cath lab. We measured door-to-ECG (DTE) time and ECG-to-Activation (ETA) time during the phases of the pandemic in our jurisdiction: pre-first wave (Jan-Mar 2020), first wave (Apr-June 2020), post-first wave (July-Nov 2020), and second wave (Dec 2020 to Feb 2021). We calculated median DTE and ETA times and compared them to the 2019 baseline using Wilcox rank-sum test. We calculated the percentages of DTE ≤10 min and of ETA ≤10 min and compared them to baseline using chi-square test. We also utilized Statistical Process Control (SPC) Xbar-R charts to assess for special cause variation.
Results
COVID-19 cases began during the pre-wave phase, but there was no change in ED volumes or STEMI quality metrics. During the first wave ED volumes fell by 40%, DTE tripled (10.0 to 29.5 min,
p
= 0.016), ETA doubled (8.5 to 17.0 min,
p
= 0.04), and percentages for both DTE ≤10 min and ETA ≤10 min fell by three-quarters (each from more than 50%, to both 12.5%, both
p
< 0.05). After the first wave all STEMI quality benchmarks returned to baseline and did not significantly change during the second wave. A brief period of special cause variation was noted for DTE during the first wave.
Conclusions
Both DTE and ETA metrics worsened during the first wave of the pandemic, revealing how it negatively impacted the triage and diagnosis of STEMI patients. But these normalized after the first wave and were unaffected by the second wave, indicating that nurses and physicians adapted to the pandemic to maintain STEMI quality of care. DTE and ETA metrics can help EDs identify delays to reperfusion during the pandemic and beyond.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.