You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Emergency casebook
Abstracts selected through the 999 EMS research forum peer review process and presented orally and by poster at Ambex 2006

https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.2006.041574

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    004 MEASURING THE IMPACT OF A PREHOSPITAL THROMBOLYSIS PROGRAMME USING THE NATIONAL AMBULANCE OUTCOMES DATABASE: THE STAFFORDSHIRE EXPERIENCE

    T. Quinn1,2, D. Minard1, I. Snelling3, C. Wright4, R. Thayne1, C. Thomas1, A. Van Dellen1.1Staffordshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust, Stafford, UK; 2Coventry University, Coventry, UK; 3Shropshire and Staffordshire Cardiac Network, Stafford, UK; 4University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

    Background: Prehospital administration (PHT) of thrombolytic treatment has been shown to reduce all-cause mortality compared with hospital thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction, and has been introduced in England after publication of the National Service Framework for coronary heart disease.

    Objective: To compare the clinical course and outcome of patients receiving PHT and hospital thrombolysis, using data from the National Ambulance Outcomes Database, part of the national audit of myocardial infarction.

    Methods: Prospective observational study during the period March 2003 to January 2006.

    Results: Results are described in the table.

    Limitations: Patients with hospital thrombolysis were older and a higher proportion was women; more patients with hospital thrombolysis had left bundle branch block—all indicators of higher mortality risk. Data on baseline characteristics, such as prior myocardial infarction, smoking or medication, and use of adjunctive treatments including rescue angioplasty, were unavailable.

    Conclusion: These data suggest that PHT in routine practice seems to be as safe (diagnostic accuracy and intracranial haemorrhage rate) as hospital thrombolysis, and there is significantly lower unadjusted hospital mortality in the PHT group—but baseline characteristics differ. Access to a more comprehensive dataset than currently available to ambulance services is required to facilitate detailed analysis.

    View this table:
    • In this window
    • In a new window

    Abstract 4 Characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving HT and PHT (unadjusted data)

    005 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS AND EXPERIENCES OF HEART ATTACK, CARDIAC ARREST AND CARDIOPULMONARY RESUSCITATION IN LONDON

    R. T. Donohoe, K. Haefeli, F. Moore.Clinical Audit and Research Unit, London Ambulance Service NHS Trust, London, UK

    Background: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of mortality and a common cause of out-of-hospital cardiac …

    View Full Text