Characteristics and outcome of patients with acute chest pain in relation to the use of ambulances in an urban and a rural area

Outcomes in Emergency Department Patients with Dyspnea versus Chest Pain: A Retrospective Consecutive Cohort Study

Dyspnea and chest pain are major and important causes of contact at the emergency department (ED). Dyspnea is associated with high morbidity and mortality, but data on characteristics and outcomes compared with chest pain in the ED are limited. This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with contact causes of dyspnea or chest pain at two Swedish EDs from 2010 to 2014. Hospital admittance, ED revisits, and mortality were analyzed using multivariable regression models, adjusted for ED and markers of disease severity (age, sex, centre, Charlson comorbidity index, c-reactive protein, troponin T, and arrival by ambulance). 29,291 patients (mean age 58.3 years; 48.9% women) with dyspnea (n = 8,812) or chest pain (n = 20,479) were included. Dyspnea patients were older than patients with chest pain (64 vs. 56 years, p < 0.001) and had more comorbidity and higher average blood troponin T and c-reactive protein levels. Dyspnea patients also had higher hospitalization rates (48% vs. 30%; adjOR (95% CI) 2.1–2.3), including the intensive care unit (1.4% vs. 0.1%; adjOR 6.9–15.9), and more ED revisits (11% vs. 7%; adjOR 1.2–1.7) in 30 days. Dyspnea patients had five-fold increased mortality compared to those with chest pain; hazard ratio (HR) 5.1 (4.8–5.4), adjusted for markers of disease severity, the mortality was two-fold higher, HR 2.2 (2.0–2.4). Compared with chest pain patients, ED dyspnea patients are older, have more comorbidity, and have worse outcomes in terms of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality.

Factors Impacting Patient Outcomes Associated with Use of Emergency Medical Services Operating in Urban Versus Rural Areas: A Systematic Review

The goal of this systematic review was to examine the existing literature base regarding the factors impacting patient outcomes associated with use of emergency medical services (EMS) operating in urban versus rural areas. A specific subfocus on low and lower-middle-income countries was planned but acknowledged in advance as being potentially limited by a lack of available data. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed during the preparation of this systematic review. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EBSCO (Elton B. Stephens Company) host, Web of Science, ProQuest, Embase, and Scopus was conducted through May 2018. To appraise the quality of the included papers, the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklists (CASP) were used. Thirty-one relevant and appropriate studies were identified; however, only one study from a low or lower-middle-income country was located. The research indicated that EMS in urban areas are more likely to have shorter prehospital times, response times, on-scene times, and transport times when compared to EMS operating in rural areas. Additionally, urban patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or trauma were found to have higher survival rates than rural patients. EMS in urban areas were generally associated with improved performance measures in key areas and associated higher survival rates than those in rural areas. These findings indicate that reducing key differences between rural and urban settings is a key factor in improving trauma patient survival rates. More research in rural areas is required to better understand the factors which can predict these differences and underpin improvements. The lack of research in this area is particularly evident in low- and lower-middle-income countries.

The Early Chain of Care in Patients with Bacteraemia with the Emphasis on the Prehospital Setting

Purpose

There is a lack of knowledge about the early phase of severe infection. This report describes the early chain of care in bacteraemia as follows: (a) compare patients who were and were not transported by the Emergency Medical Services (EMS); (b) describe various aspects of the EMS chain; and (c) describe factors of importance for the delay to the start of intravenous antibiotics. It was hypothesized that, for patients with suspected sepsis judged by the EMS clinician, the delay until the onset of antibiotic treatment would be shorter.

Basic Procedures

All patients in the Municipality of Gothenburg (Sweden) with a positive blood culture, when assessed at the Laboratory of Bacteriology in the Municipality of Gothenburg, from February 1 through April 30, 2012 took part in the survey.

Main Findings/Results

In all, 696 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Their mean age was 76 years and 52% were men. Of all patients, 308 (44%) had been in contact with the EMS and/or the emergency department (ED). Of these 308 patients, 232 (75%) were transported by the EMS and 188 (61%) had “true pathogens” in blood cultures. Patients who were transported by the EMS were older, included more men, and suffered from more severe symptoms and signs.

The EMS nurse suspected sepsis in only six percent of the cases. These patients had a delay from arrival at hospital until the start of antibiotics of one hour and 19 minutes versus three hours and 21 minutes among the remaining patients (P =.0006). The corresponding figures for cases with “true pathogens” were one hour and 19 minutes versus three hours and 15 minutes (P =.009).

Conclusion

Among patients with bacteraemia, 75% used the EMS, and these patients were older, included more men, and suffered from more severe symptoms and signs. The EMS nurse suspected sepsis in six percent of cases. Regardless of whether or not patients with true pathogens were isolated, a suspicion of sepsis by the EMS clinician at the scene was associated with a shorter delay to the start of antibiotic treatment.

AxelssonC, HerlitzJ, KarlssonA, SjöbergH, Jiménez-HerreraM, BångA, JonssonA, BremerA, AnderssonH, GellerstedtM, LjungströmL. The early chain of care in patients with bacteraemia with the emphasis on the prehospital setting. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2016;31(3):272–277.

A Description of the Prehospital Phase of Aortic Dissection in Terms of Early Suspicion and Treatment

Purpose

Aortic dissection is difficult to detect in the early phase due to a variety of symptoms. This report describes the prehospital setting of aortic dissection in terms of symptoms, treatment, and suspicion by the Emergency Medical Service (EMS) staff.

Basic Procedures

All patients in the Municipality of Gothenburg, Sweden, who, in 2010 and 2011, had a hospital discharge diagnosis of aortic dissection (international classification of disease (ICD) I 71,0) were included. The exclusion criteria were: age < 18 years of age and having a planned operation. This was a retrospective, descriptive study based on patient records. In the statistical analyses, Fisher's exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used for analyses of dichotomous and continuous/ordered variables.

Main findings

Of 92 patients, 78% were transported to the hospital by the EMS. The most common symptom was pain (94%). Pain was intensive or very intensive in 89% of patients, with no significant difference in relation to the use of the EMS. Only 47% of those using the EMS were given pain relief with narcotic analgesics. Only 12% were free from pain on admission to the hospital. A suspicion of aortic dissection was reported by the EMS staff in only 17% of cases. The most common preliminary diagnosis at the dispatch center (31%) and by EMS clinicians (52%) was chest pain or angina pectoris. In all, 79% of patients were discharged alive from the hospital (75% of those that used the EMS and 95% of those that did not).

Conclusion

Among patients who were hospitalized due to aortic dissection in Gothenburg, 78% used the EMS. Despite severe pain in the majority of patients, fewer than half received narcotic analgesics, and only 12% were free from pain on admission to the hospital. In fewer than one-in-five patients was a suspicion of aortic dissection reported by the EMS staff.

AxelssonC, KarlssonT, PandeK, WigertzK, ÖrtenwallP, NordanstigJ, HerlitzJ. A description of the prehospital phase of aortic dissection in terms of early suspicion and treatment. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015;30(2):1-8.

Comparison of outcomes of ambulance users and nonusers in ST elevation myocardial infarction

In a systematic province-wide evaluation of care and outcomes of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), we sought to examine whether a previously documented association between ambulance use and outcome remains after control for clinical risk factors. All 82 acute care hospitals in Quebec (Canada) that treated at least 30 acute myocardial infarctions annually participated in a 6-month evaluation in 2008 to 2009. Medical record librarians abstracted hospital chart data for consecutive patients with a discharge diagnosis of myocardial infarction who presented with characteristic symptoms and met a priori study criteria for STEMI. Linkage to administrative databases provided outcome data (to 1 year) and co-morbidities. Of 1,956 patients, 1,222 (62.5%) arrived by ambulance. Compared with nonusers of an ambulance, users were older, more often women, and more likely to have co-morbidities, low systolic pressure, abnormal heart rate, and a higher Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction risk index at presentation. Ambulance users were less likely to receive fibrinolysis or to be sent for primary angioplasty (78.5% vs 83.2% for nonusers, p = 0.01), although if they did, treatment delays were shorter (p <0.001). The 1-year mortality rate was 18.7% versus 7.1% for nonusers (p <0.001). Greater mortality persisted after adjusting for presenting risk factors, co-morbidities, reperfusion treatment, and symptom duration (hazard ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval 1.30 to 1.87). In conclusion, ambulance users with STEMI were older and sicker than nonusers. Mortality of users was substantially greater after adjustment for clinical risk factors, although they received faster reperfusion treatment overall.

Characteristics and outcome among patients who dial for the EMS due to chest pain

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to describe patients who called for the emergency medical service (EMS) due to chest discomfort, in relation to gender and age.

METHODS

All patients who called the emergency dispatch centre of western Sweden due to chest discomfort, between May 2009 and February 2010, were included. Initial evaluation, aetiology and outcome are described as recorded in the databases at the dispatch centre, the EMS systems and hospitals. Patients were divided into the following age groups: ≤50, 51-64 and ≥65 years.

RESULTS

In all, 14,454 cases were enrolled. Equal proportions of men (64%) and women (63%) were given dispatch priority 1. The EMS clinicians gave priority 1 more frequently to men (16% versus 12%) and older individuals (10%, 15% and 14%, respective of age group). Men had a significantly higher frequency of central chest pain (83% versus 81%); circulatory compromise (34% versus 31%); ECG signs of ischaemia (17% versus 11%); a preliminary diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (40% versus 34%); a final diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (14% versus 9%) and any potentially life-threatening condition (18% versus 12%). Individuals aged ≥65 years were given a lower priority than individuals aged 51-64 years, despite poorer characteristics and outcome. In all, 78% of cases with a potentially life-threatening condition and 67% of cases that died within 30 days of enrolment received dispatch priority 1. Mortality at one year was 1%, 4% and 18% in each individual age group.

CONCLUSION

Men and the elderly were given a disproportionately low priority by the EMS.

The chain of survival for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights into the Middle East

Although coronary heart disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the Middle East (ME), not much is known about patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) from this region. The STEMI Chain of Survival can be used to target regional improvements in patient care. We tried to adopt a modified chain of survival for STEMI to highlight the challenges and difficulties and the possible solutions to improve the STEMI care in the Middle East based on the few data available.

Is pre-hospital treatment of chest pain optimal in acute coronary syndrome? The relief of both pain and anxiety is needed

BACKGROUND

Many patients who suffer from acute chest pain are transported by ambulance. It is not known how often treatment prior to hospital admission is optimal and how optimal pain-relieving treatment is defined. It is often difficult to delineate pain from anxiety.

AIM

To describe various aspects of chest pain in the pre-hospital setting with the emphasis on a) treatment and b) presumed acute coronary syndrome.

METHODS

In the literature search, we used PubMed and the appropriate key words. We included randomised clinical trials and observational studies.

RESULTS

Four types of drug appear to be preferred: 1) narcotic analgesics, 2) nitrates, 3) beta-blockers and 4) benzodiazepines. Among narcotic analgesics, morphine has been associated with the relief of pain at the expense of side-effects. Alfentanil was reported to produce more rapid pain relief. Nitrates have been associated with the relief of pain with few side-effects. Beta-blockers have been reported to increase the relief of pain when added to morphine. The combination of beta-blockers and morphine has been reported to be as effective as beta-blockers alone in pain relief, but this combination therapy was associated with more side-effects. Experience from anxiety-relieving drugs such as benzodiazepines is limited. It is not known how these 4 drugs should be combined. The results indicate that various pain-relieving treatments might modify the disease.

CONCLUSION

Our knowledge of the optimal treatment of chest pain and associated anxiety in the pre-hospital setting is insufficient. Recommendations from existing guidelines are limited. Large randomised clinical trials are warranted.

Early identification and delay to treatment in myocardial infarction and stroke: differences and similarities

Background

The two major complications of atherosclerosis are acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and acute ischemic stroke. Both are life-threatening conditions characterised by the abrupt cessation of blood flow to respective organs, resulting in an infarction. Depending on the extent of the infarction, loss of organ function varies considerably.

In both conditions, it is possible to limit the extent of infarction with early intervention. In both conditions, minutes count.

This article aims to describe differences and similarities with regard to the way patients, bystanders and health care providers act in the acute phase of the two diseases with the emphasis on the pre-hospital phase.

Method

A literature search was performed on the PubMed, Embase (Ovid SP) and Cochrane Library databases.

Results

In both conditions, symptoms vary considerably. Patients appear to suspect AMI more frequently than stroke and, in the former, there is a gender gap (men suspect AMI more frequently than women).

With regard to detection of AMI and stroke at dispatch centre and in Emergency Medical Service (EMS) there is room for improvement in both conditions. The use of EMS appears to be higher in stroke but the overall delay to hospital admission is shorter in AMI. In both conditions, the fast track concept has been shown to influence the delay to treatment considerably.

In terms of diagnostic evaluation by the EMS, more supported instruments are available in AMI than in stroke. Knowledge of the importance of early treatment has been reported to influence delays in both AMI and stroke.

Conclusion

Both in AMI and stroke minutes count and therefore the fast track concept has been introduced. Time to treatment still appears to be longer in stroke than in AMI. In the future improvement in the early detection as well as further shortening to start of treatment will be in focus in both conditions. A collaboration between cardiologists and neurologists and also between pre-hospital and in-hospital care might be fruitful.