Logistical problems in prehospital thrombolysis.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 1623868.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
In this study we compared efficacy and safety of prehospital with in-hospital thrombolytic treatment with anistreplase in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Three-hundred and fifty patients with chest pain were screened for eligibility by the municipal ambulance staff and/or the general practitioner. Patients were included in the absence of contraindications and if the telephone-transmitted ECG showed AMI. In a 6 month period 16 patients (5%) were eligible, but only seven (2%) were randomized. Age over 70 years, duration of chest pain for longer than 4 h and logistic problems were the major factors responsible for the low inclusion rate. The mean time spent at home with and without the ECG procedure was 38 +/- 14 and 14 +/- 8 min, respectively (P less than 0.001). These results demonstrate that in a medium sized town prehospital delivery of intravenous thrombolytic therapy by paramedics and/or the general practitioner is not feasible, leads to unnecessary time delay and may therefore yield no clinical benefits.
Medical subject headings
- Anistreplase
- Emergency Medical Services
- Myocardial Infarction
- Thrombolytic Therapy