Background and Purpose-Prehospital activation of in-hospital stroke response hastens treatment but depends on accurate emergency medical services (EMS) stroke recognition. We sought to measure EMS stroke recognition accuracy and identify clinical factors associated with correct stroke identification. Methods-Using EMS and hospital records, we assembled a cohort of EMS-transported suspect, confirmed, or missed ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack cases. The sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) for EMS stroke recognition were calculated using the hospital discharge diagnosis as the gold standard. We used multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine the association between Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale use and EMS stroke recognition. Results-During a 12-month period, 441 EMS-transported patients were enrolled; of which, 371 (84.1%) were EMSsuspected strokes and 70 (15.9%) were EMS-missed strokes. Overall, 264 cases (59.9%) were confirmed as either ischemic stroke (n=186) or transient ischemic attack (n=78). The sensitivity of EMS stroke recognition was 73.5% (95% confidence interval, 67.7-78.7), and PPV was 52.3% (95% confidence interval, 47.1-57.5). Sensitivity (84.7% versus 30.9%; P<0.0001) and PPV (56.2% versus 30.4%; P=0.0004) were higher among cases with Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale documentation. In multivariate analysis, Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale documentation was independently associated with EMS sensitivity (odds ratio, 12.0; 95% confidence interval, 5.7-25.5) and PPV (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-4.7). Conclusions-EMS providers recognized 3 quarters of the patients with ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack;however, half of EMS-suspected strokes were false positives. Documentation of a Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale was associated with higher EMS stroke recognition sensitivity and PPV.

Background and Purpose— Recognition of stroke symptoms and hospital prenotification by emergency medical services (EMS) facilitate rapid stroke treatment; however, one-third of patients with stroke are unrecognized by EMS. To promote stroke recognition and quality measure compliant prehospital stroke care, we deployed a 30-minute online EMS educational module coupled with a performance feedback system in a single Michigan county. Methods— During a 24-month study period, a registry of consecutive EMS-transported suspected or unrecognized stroke cases was utilized to perform an interrupted time series analysis of the impact of the EMS education and feedback intervention. For each agency, we compared EMS stroke recognition and quality measure compliance rates, as well as emergency department performance and hospital outcomes during 12 preintervention months with performance in the remaining study months. Results— A total of 1805 EMS-transported cases met inclusion criteria; 1235 (68.4%) of these had ischemic or hemorrhagic strokes or transient ischemic attacks. There were no trends toward improvement in any outcome before the intervention. After the intervention, the EMS stroke recognition rate increased from 63.8% to 69.5% ( P =0.037). Prenotification increased from 60.9% to 77.3% ( P <0.001). Among patients with ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack, there was a trend toward higher rates of tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator) delivery (13.9%–17.7%; P =0.096) and a significant increase in tPA delivery within 45 minutes (5.7%–8.9%; P =0.042) after intervention. However, improvements in EMS recognition were limited to the first 3 months following intervention. Conclusions— A brief educational intervention was associated with improved EMS stroke recognition, hospital prenotification, and faster tPA delivery. Gains were primarily observed immediately following education and were not sustained through provision of performance feedback to paramedics.

No abstract