Safety and Feasibility of an Emergency Department-to-Outpatient Pathway for Patients With TIA and Nondisabling Stroke.


Journal

Neurology. Clinical practice
ISSN: 2163-0402
Titre abrégé: Neurol Clin Pract
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101577149

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Historique:
received: 14 12 2022
accepted: 28 08 2023
pmc-release: 01 12 2024
medline: 13 10 2023
pubmed: 13 10 2023
entrez: 13 10 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Evaluation of transient ischemic attack/nondisabling ischemic strokes (TIA/NDS) in the emergency department (ED) contributes to capacity issues and increasing health care expenditures, especially high-cost duplicative imaging. As an institutional quality improvement project, we developed a novel pathway to evaluate patients with TIA/NDS in the ED using a core set of laboratory tests and CT-based neuroimaging. Patients identified as 'low risk' through a safety checklist were discharged and scheduled for prompt outpatient tests and stroke clinic follow-up. In this prespecified analysis designed to assess feasibility and safety, we abstracted data from patients consecutively enrolled in the first 6 months. We compared data from 106 patients with TIA/NDS enrolled in the new pathway from April through September 2020 (age 67.9 years, 45% female), against 55 unmatched historical controls with TIA encountered from April 2016 through March 2017 (age 68.3 years, 47% female). Both groups had similar median NIHSS scores (pathway and control 0) and ABCD Our TIA/NDS pathway, implemented during the initial outbreak of COVID-19, seems feasible and safe, with significant positive impact on ED throughput and ED-based high-cost duplicative imaging. The safety checklist and option of virtual telehealth follow-up are novel features. Broader adoption of such pathways has important implications for value-based health care.

Sections du résumé

Background and Objectives UNASSIGNED
Evaluation of transient ischemic attack/nondisabling ischemic strokes (TIA/NDS) in the emergency department (ED) contributes to capacity issues and increasing health care expenditures, especially high-cost duplicative imaging.
Methods UNASSIGNED
As an institutional quality improvement project, we developed a novel pathway to evaluate patients with TIA/NDS in the ED using a core set of laboratory tests and CT-based neuroimaging. Patients identified as 'low risk' through a safety checklist were discharged and scheduled for prompt outpatient tests and stroke clinic follow-up. In this prespecified analysis designed to assess feasibility and safety, we abstracted data from patients consecutively enrolled in the first 6 months.
Results UNASSIGNED
We compared data from 106 patients with TIA/NDS enrolled in the new pathway from April through September 2020 (age 67.9 years, 45% female), against 55 unmatched historical controls with TIA encountered from April 2016 through March 2017 (age 68.3 years, 47% female). Both groups had similar median NIHSS scores (pathway and control 0) and ABCD
Discussion UNASSIGNED
Our TIA/NDS pathway, implemented during the initial outbreak of COVID-19, seems feasible and safe, with significant positive impact on ED throughput and ED-based high-cost duplicative imaging. The safety checklist and option of virtual telehealth follow-up are novel features. Broader adoption of such pathways has important implications for value-based health care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37829551
doi: 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200209
pii: CPJ-2023-000328
pmc: PMC10567120
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e200209

Informations de copyright

© 2023 American Academy of Neurology.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors report no relevant disclosures. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp.TAKE-HOME POINTS→ TIA/NDS require urgent evaluation, which can result in ED capacity issues and growing health care expenditures.→ We developed a pathway to accurately stratify patients with low-risk TIA/NDS presenting to the ED who could be discharged home with rapid outpatient follow-up using a set of standard clinical and imaging criteria.→ Feasibility was documented by the high rates of outpatient test completion, rapid outpatient follow-up, and low loss to follow-up rates. Safety was documented by low 90-day recurrent TIA/stroke rates and ED revisit/hospital admission rates.→ This pathway decreased ED LOS and high-cost duplicative imaging, which has the potential to reduce ED capacity and hospital expenditures.→ The safety checklist, utilization dashboard, and virtual telehealth follow-up are novel features.

Références

N Engl J Med. 2013 Jul 4;369(1):11-9
pubmed: 23803136
Stroke. 2003 Aug;34(8):e138-40
pubmed: 12855835
Front Neurol Neurosci. 2014;33:41-68
pubmed: 24157556
Stroke. 2010 Sep;41(9):1907-13
pubmed: 20634480
Stroke. 2013 Jun;44(6):1601-5
pubmed: 23632974
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1985 Sep;48(9):902-5
pubmed: 4045484
Lancet Neurol. 2007 Nov;6(11):953-60
pubmed: 17928270
CMAJ Open. 2022 Oct 04;10(4):E865-E871
pubmed: 36195342
Stroke. 2018 Mar;49(3):e46-e110
pubmed: 29367334
Stroke. 2005 Apr;36(4):720-3
pubmed: 15731465
Am J Emerg Med. 2018 Oct;36(10):1870-1873
pubmed: 30107968
Acad Emerg Med. 2006 Jun;13(6):666-72
pubmed: 16609106
Neurohospitalist. 2021 Apr;11(2):107-113
pubmed: 33791052
Neurohospitalist. 2022 Jan;12(1):38-47
pubmed: 34950385
Stroke Res Treat. 2021 Feb 25;2021:8845898
pubmed: 33708373
Arch Intern Med. 2007 Dec 10;167(22):2417-22
pubmed: 18071162
Am J Emerg Med. 2013 Sep;31(9):1349-51
pubmed: 23906624
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1432-42
pubmed: 17928046
JAMA. 2000 Dec 13;284(22):2901-6
pubmed: 11147987
Am J Emerg Med. 2013 Mar;31(3):516-9
pubmed: 23380097
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jul 19;379(3):215-225
pubmed: 29766750
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jul 16;383(3):207-217
pubmed: 32668111
JAMA Neurol. 2016 May 1;73(5):572-8
pubmed: 26998948
Stroke. 2006 Jul;37(7):1710-4
pubmed: 16763186
Neurology. 2011 Dec 13;77(24):2082-8
pubmed: 22094477
Ann Emerg Med. 2019 Oct;74(4):562-571
pubmed: 31326206
Intern Emerg Med. 2015 Mar;10(2):171-5
pubmed: 25446540
CMAJ. 2022 Oct 11;194(39):E1352-E1353
pubmed: 36220171
Acad Emerg Med. 2009 Jan;16(1):1-10
pubmed: 19007346
Stroke. 2021 Jul;52(7):e364-e467
pubmed: 34024117
J Am Coll Radiol. 2021 Jun;18(6):820-833
pubmed: 33387454
Neurol Clin Pract. 2015 Feb;5(1):58-66
pubmed: 29443173

Auteurs

Alexis Roy (A)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Anirudh Sreekrishnan (A)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Erica Camargo Faye (E)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Scott Silverman (S)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Kori S Zachrison (KS)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Andrea M Harriott (AM)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Marcelo Matiello (M)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Giovanna S Manzano (GS)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Mrinalini Prasanna (M)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Simona Nedelcu (S)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Aneesh B Singhal (AB)

Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Classifications MeSH