2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Headpulse measurement can reliably identify large‐vessel occlusion stroke in prehospital suspected stroke patients: Results from the EPISODE‐PS‐COVID study

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Large‐vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke represents one‐third of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in the United States but causes two‐thirds of poststroke dependence and >90% of poststroke mortality. Prehospital LVO stroke detection permits efficient emergency medical systems (EMS) transport to an endovascular thrombectomy (EVT)‐capable center. Our primary objective was to determine the feasibility of using a cranial accelerometry (CA) headset device for prehospital LVO stroke detection. Our secondary objective was development of an algorithm capable of distinguishing LVO stroke from other conditions.

          Methods

          We prospectively enrolled consecutive adult patients suspected of acute stroke from 11 study hospitals in four different U.S. geographical regions over a 21‐month period. Patients received device placement by prehospital EMS personnel. Headset data were matched with clinical data following informed consent. LVO stroke diagnosis was determined by medical chart review. The device was trained using device data and Los Angeles Motor Scale (LAMS) examination components. A binary threshold was selected for comparison of device performance to LAMS scores.

          Results

          A total of 594 subjects were enrolled, including 183 subjects who received the second‐generation device. Usable data were captured in 158 patients (86.3%). Study subjects were 53% female and 56% Black/African American, with median age 69 years. Twenty‐six (16.4%) patients had LVO and 132 (83.6%) were not LVO (not‐LVO AIS, 33; intracerebral hemorrhage, nine; stroke mimics, 90). COVID‐19 testing and positivity rates (10.6%) were not different between groups. We found a sensitivity of 38.5% and specificity of 82.7% for LAMS ≥ 4 in detecting LVO stroke versus a sensitivity of 84.6% ( p < 0.0015 for superiority) and specificity of 82.6% ( p = 0.81 for superiority) for the device algorithm (CA + LAMS).

          Conclusions

          Obtaining adequate recordings with a CA headset is highly feasible in the prehospital environment. Use of the device algorithm incorporating both CA and LAMS data for LVO detection resulted in significantly higher sensitivity without reduced specificity when compared to the use of LAMS alone.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials.

          In 2015, five randomised trials showed efficacy of endovascular thrombectomy over standard medical care in patients with acute ischaemic stroke caused by occlusion of arteries of the proximal anterior circulation. In this meta-analysis we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool individual patient data from these trials to address remaining questions about whether the therapy is efficacious across the diverse populations included.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Time to Treatment With Endovascular Thrombectomy and Outcomes From Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-analysis.

            Endovascular thrombectomy with second-generation devices is beneficial for patients with ischemic stroke due to intracranial large-vessel occlusions. Delineation of the association of treatment time with outcomes would help to guide implementation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predictive Values: Foundations, Pliabilities, and Pitfalls in Research and Practice

              Within the context of screening tests, it is important to avoid misconceptions about sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. In this article, therefore, foundations are first established concerning these metrics along with the first of several aspects of pliability that should be recognized in relation to those metrics. Clarification is then provided about the definitions of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values and why researchers and clinicians can misunderstand and misrepresent them. Arguments are made that sensitivity and specificity should usually be applied only in the context of describing a screening test’s attributes relative to a reference standard; that predictive values are more appropriate and informative in actual screening contexts, but that sensitivity and specificity can be used for screening decisions about individual people if they are extremely high; that predictive values need not always be high and might be used to advantage by adjusting the sensitivity and specificity of screening tests; that, in screening contexts, researchers should provide information about all four metrics and how they were derived; and that, where necessary, consumers of health research should have the skills to interpret those metrics effectively for maximum benefit to clients and the healthcare system.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Academic Emergency Medicine
                Academic Emergency Medicine
                Wiley
                1069-6563
                1553-2712
                April 21 2024
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Emergency Medicine Wayne State University School of Medicine Detroit Michigan USA
                [2 ] Department of Neurology University of California, Davis Sacramento California USA
                [3 ] Department of Radiology Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine Kalamazoo Michigan USA
                [4 ] Department of Medicine Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine Kalamazoo Michigan USA
                [5 ] Department of Emergency Medicine Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine Kalamazoo Michigan USA
                [6 ] Department of Emergency Medicine University of California San Francisco California USA
                [7 ] Department of Neurology California Pacific Medical Center San Francisco California USA
                [8 ] Department of Emergency Medicine Ascension St. Mary's Hospital Saginaw Michigan USA
                [9 ] MindRhythm, Inc. Cupertino California USA
                Article
                10.1111/acem.14919
                d257ad14-acd5-4500-837c-e3018f2e5871
                © 2024

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article