Predictors of transportation delay in patients with suspected ST-elevation-myocardial infarction in the VIENNA-STEMI network

Abstract

Objective The emergency medical service (EMS) provides rapid pre-hospital diagnosis and transportation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) systems of care. Aim of the study was to assess temporal and regional characteristics of EMS-related delays in a metropolitan STEMI network. Methods Patient call-to-arrival of EMS at site (call-to-site), transportation time from site to hospital (site-to-door), call-todoor, patient's location, month, weekday, and hour of EMS activation were recorded in 4751 patients referred to a tertiary center with suspicion of STEMI. Results Median call-to-site, site-to-door, and call-to-door times were 9 (7-12), 39 (31-48), and 49 (41-59) minutes, respectively. The shortest transportation times were noted between 08:00 and 16:00 and in general on Sundays. They were significantly prolonged between midnight and 04:00, whereby the longest difference did not exceed 4 min in median. Patient's site of call had a major impact on transportation times, which were shorter in Central and Western districts as compared to Southern and Eastern districts of Vienna (p < 0.001 between-group difference for call-to-site, site-to-door, and call-to-door). After multivariable adjustment, patient's site of call was an independent predictor of call-to-site delay (p < 0.001). Moreover, age and hour of EMS activation were the strongest predictors of call-to-site, site-to-door, and call-to-door delays (p < 0.05). Conclusion In our Viennese STEMI network, the strongest determinants of pre-hospital EMS-related transportation delays were patient's site of call, patient's age, and hour of EMS activation. Due to the significant but small median time delays, which are within the guideline-recommended time intervals, no impact on clinical outcome can be expected.

COVID-19 sends STEMI to quarantine!?

“…In Iran, 24/7 primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as the standard treatment strategy for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) [3][4][5][6][7] was launched in September 2015 to achieve a fair distribution of healthcare resources. Currently, 49 general and heart hospitals provide these services, with 48 915 patients having undergone primary PCI thus far.…”

Multivessel versus culprit-only PCI in STEMI patients with multivessel disease: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

“…Early revascularization of the infarct-related artery is crucial to reduce myocardial damage and preserve myocardial function and the detrimental effects of treatment delay have been shown in many studies [ 17 , 18 ]. Single-stage multivessel PCI in STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock was not recommended in earlier STEMI guidelines based on adverse outcome with multivessel PCI reported by observational studies [ 4 , 19 – 21 ].…”

Medical emergency team interventions in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in Poland in 2018

“…The dispatch priority code 2 causes a significant delay in reaching patients' location by METs and, consequently, results in the delayed restoration of coronary artery patency. 22 Clawson et al 23 showed that the dispatch priority code strongly influences the delay in the initiation of reperfusion therapy in patients with ACSs.…”