The diagnostic value of the field assessment stroke triage as an emergency destination tool in identifying the obstruction of large cerebral vessels: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Nasiri-Valikboni Amirhossein,Baser Yazdan,Ramawad Hamzah Adel,Miri Reza,Yousefifard Mahmoud

Abstract

Objective: In this study, we investigate the diagnostic value of the field assessment stroke triage for emergency destination (FAST-ED) tool in the diagnosis of large vessels occlusion (LVO) in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We conducted a search in Medline (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases until the 21st of September 2022, as well as a manual search in Google and Google scholar to find related articles. Studies of diagnostic value in adult population were included. Screening, data collection and quality control of articles were done by two independent researchers. The data were entered and analyzed in STATA 17.0 statistical program. Results: The data from 30 articles were entered. The best cut-off points for FAST-ED were 3 or 4. The sensitivity and specificity of FAST-ED at cut-off points 3 were 0.77 (95% CI:0.73,0.80) and 0.76 (95% CI:0.72,0.80), respectively. These values ​​for cut-off point 4 were 0.72 (95% CI:0.65,0.78) and 0.79 (95% CI:0.75,0.82), respectively. Meta-regression showed that the sensitivity and specificity of FAST-ED performed by a neurologist was more accurate compared to emergency physician (P for sensitivity=0.01; P for specificity<0.001) and emergency medical technicians (P for sensitivity=0.03; P for specificity<0.001). Finally, it was found that the sensitivity of FAST-ED performed by the emergency physician and the emergency medical technician has no statistically significant difference (P=0.76). However, the specificity of FAST-ED reported by the emergency physician is significantly higher (P<0.001). The false negative rate of this tool at cut-off points 3 and 4 is 22.5% and 28.8%, respectively.  Conclusion: Although FAST-ED has an acceptable sensitivity in identifying LVO, its false negative rate varies between 22.5% and 28.8%. A percentage this high is unacceptable for a screening tool to aid in the diagnosis of strokes considering it has a high rate or morbidity and mortality. Therefore, it is recommended to use another diagnostic tool for the stroke screening.

Publisher

Knowledge E DMCC

Subject

Emergency Nursing,Emergency Medicine,Emergency Medical Services

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3