Author:
Kwong Jonathan L.,Ross Garry,Turner Linda,Olynyk Chris,Cheskes Sheldon,Thurston Adam,Verbeek P. Richard
Abstract
AbstractObjectiveLimited evidence supports primary care paramedic (PCP) direct transport of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The goal of this study was to evaluate an urban-based PCP STEMI bypass guideline.MethodsWe reviewed consecutive Toronto Paramedic Services call reports between April 7, 2015, and May 31, 2016, regarding STEMI patients identified by PCPs. The primary outcome was patient assignment (stable versus unstable) according to guideline criteria. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of PCP-transported patients who had an indication for an advanced care intervention (ACI) or who received an ACI when PCPs rendezvoused with an advanced care paramedic (ACP). Lastly, we reviewed prehospital outcomes of cardiac arrest patients and calculated the difference in transport intervals between direct PCP bypass and a PCI-centre and predicted transport interval to the closest emergency department (ED).ResultsOf 361 patients, 232 were PCP transports and 129 were ACP-rendezvous transports. There was a significant difference in the distribution of stable and unstable patients between PCPs and ACPs (p<0.001). For PCP patients, 21/232 (9.1%) had indications for an ACI, whereas 34/129 (26.4%) ACP patients received an ACI. Eleven patients experienced cardiac arrest; 10 were successfully resuscitated (5 of these by PCPs). The median difference between direct PCP bypass and a PCI-centre versus transport to the closest ED was 5.53 minutes (IQR=6.71).ConclusionsWe found a significant difference in the distribution of stable and unstable patients and fewer patients with indications for an ACI in PCP patients. This PCP STEMI bypass guideline appears feasible.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC