3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Clinician's Perception of Practice Changes for Stroke During the COVID-19 Pandemic : Perception of Practice Changes for Stroke During COVID-19

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Approach to acute cerebrovascular disease management has evolved in the past few months to accommodate the rising needs of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. In this study, we investigated the changes in practices and policies related to stroke care through an online survey.

          Methods

          A 12 question, cross-sectional survey targeting practitioners involved in acute stroke care in the US was distributed electronically through national society surveys, social media and personal communication.

          Results

          Respondants from 39 states completed 206 surveys with the majority (82.5%) from comprehensive stroke centers. Approximately half stated some change in transport practices with 14 (7%) reporting significant reduction in transfers. Common strategies to limit healthcare provider exposure included using personal protective equipment (PPE) for all patients (127; 63.5%) as well as limiting the number of practitioners in the room (129; 64.5%). Most respondents (81%) noted an overall decrease in stroke volume. Many (34%) felt that the outcome or care of acute stroke patients had been impacted by COVID-19. This was associated with a change in hospital transport guidelines (OR 1.325, P=0.047, 95% CI: 1.004-1.748), change in eligibility criteria for IV-tPA or mechanical thrombectomy (MT) (OR 3.146, P=0.052, 95% CI: 0.988- 10.017), and modified admission practices for post IV-tPA or MT patients (OR 2.141, P=0.023, 95% CI: 1.110-4.132).

          Conclusion

          Our study highlights a change in practices and polices related to acute stroke management in response to COVID-19 which are variable among institutions. There is also a reported reduction in stroke volume across hospitals. Amongst these changes, updates in hospital transport guidelines and practices related to IV-tPA and MT may affect the perceived care and outcome of acute stroke patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

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

          Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak on ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction Care in Hong Kong, China

          Acute ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a disease of high mortality and morbidity, and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the typical recommended therapy. 1,2 Systems of care have been established to expedite PPCI workflow to minimize ischemic time from symptom onset to definitive treatment in the catheterization laboratory. Little is known about the impact of public health emergencies like a community outbreak of infectious disease on STEMI systems of care. Since December 2019, the emergence of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, has evolved into a regional epidemic, including in Hong Kong, a city in Southern China. We describe the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on STEMI care in Hong Kong through a handful of recent cases of patients with STEMI who underwent PPCI at a single center. We included patients with STEMI admitted via the Accident and Emergency Department and in whom PPCI was performed. We focus on the time period since January 25, 2020, when hospitals in the city started to institute emergency infection protocols to contain COVID-19. This required hospitals to suspend all nonessential visits and adjust clinical in-patient and out-patient services. Indications for PPCI were according to the international guidelines. 1,2 Study exclusion criteria included inpatient STEMI (n=1), STEMI with unknown symptom onset time (n=3), and cardiac arrest patients (n=2). Our hospital has offered 24/7 PPCI service to all eligible patients presenting with acute STEMI since 2010 per standard Accident and Emergency Department protocol. When STEMI is diagnosed, a PPCI team is activated after cardiology evaluation. Data on key time points in STEMI care are recorded in a clinical registry. Symptom-onset-to-first-medical-contact time is defined as the time from patient-reported chest discomfort onset time to the time of first medical contact. Door-to-device time is defined as the time from Accident and Emergency Department arrival to successful wire crossing time during PPCI. Catheterization laboratory arrival-to-device time is defined as the time from patient arrival in the catheterization laboratory to successful wire crossing time. From January 25, 2020, to February 10, 2020, we observed changes in time components of STEMI care among the aggregate group of 7 consecutive patients who underwent PPCI. We compared these with data from 108 patients with STEMI treated with PPCI in the prior year from February 1, 2018, to January 31, 2019 (N=108). These 7 patients did not suffer from COVID-19 infection, and 6 out of 7 presented to our hospital during regular work hours (8 am–8 pm weekdays, excluding public holidays). The Table shows numerically longer median times in all components when compared with historical data from the prior year. The largest time difference was in the time from symptom onset to first medical contact. Table. Time Components of STEMI Care Before and After COVID-19 Outbreak The extent to which a community outbreak of infection like COVID-19 stresses other parts of healthcare system like STEMI care is largely unknown. Contemporary COVID-19 infection affects respiratory tract and is capable of human-to-human transmission presumably via droplets. 3,4 Given these concerns, Hong Kong hospitals implemented stringent infection control measures starting in late January 2020, including but not limited to universal masking, full personal protective equipment (N95 respirator, goggles/face shield, isolated gown, disposable gloves) for aerosol-generating procedures, frequent environmental disinfection, suspension of ward visit, volunteer service, and clinical attachment. Of course, these protocols are essential for limiting the spread of infections like COVID-19 but also may impact healthcare systems in unexpected ways. Most visibly, we found large delays in the small number of patients with STEMI seeking medical help after institution of these infection control measures. It is understandable that people are reluctant to go to a hospital during the COVID-19 outbreak, which explains the potential delays in seeking care. Another concern that we are unable to evaluate is whether some patients with STEMI did not seek care at all. Delays in seeking care or not seeking care could have a detrimental impact on outcomes. We also found delays in evaluating patients with STEMI after hospital arrival that could be explained by several reasons. For example, catheterization laboratories generally have positive pressure ventilation so COVID-19 infection inside these rooms can theoretically cause widespread contamination of the surrounding environment. Precautions such as detailed travel and contact history, symptomatology, and chest X-ray, therefore, are taken before transferring patients to the catheterization laboratory at our hospital. Although these are essential measures for containing COVID-19 infection, this could increase delays in diagnosis, staff activation and transfer if healthcare systems are not prepared. Similarly, even after patients arrived in the catheterization laboratory, staff may need more time to wear protective gear to prepare the patients and interventional cardiologists may not be used to performing PPCI while in full protective gear, leading to longer treatment. This is a preliminary report, and our study should be considered in the context of the following limitations. We describe a single hospital’s experience in STEMI care after instituting emergency infection protocols in a handful of patients. It is possible that patients and staff improve over time as their experiences with these measures mature. Although we cannot make meaningful statistical complications, our description allows for an early examination into how public health emergencies can indirectly affect unrelated hospital areas. In modern society, infectious agents like the COVID-19 outbreak can spread quickly and evolve into a pandemic. Hospitals not only need to consider methods for containing and treating these infections but how infection outbreaks may affect systems of care beyond the immediate infection. Acknowledgment We would like to thank all healthcare workers who have sacrificed themselves in the current coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak. Disclosures None.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Collateral Effect of Covid-19 on Stroke Evaluation in the United States

            To the Editor: The effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on medical care for conditions other than Covid-19 has been difficult to quantify. 1 Any decrease in care for patients with acute conditions such as ischemic stroke may be consequential because timely treatment may decrease the incidence of disability. 2-4 We used the numbers of patients in a commercial neuroimaging database associated with the RAPID software platform (iSchemaView) as a surrogate for the quantity of care that hospitals provided to patients with acute ischemic stroke. This software system is typically used to select patients who may benefit from endovascular thrombectomy by identifying occlusions of major brain arteries or regions of the brain with potentially reversible ischemia that have not become infarcted. 5 Imaging data with demographic information are uploaded in real time to a data repository. The vendor of RAPID was not involved in the analysis or interpretation of the data or the writing of this letter. The first author serves on the medical advisory board of the vendor, and the last author is a consultant to the vendor. No confidentiality agreements related to this analysis are in place between the authors and this company. We had access to data on 231,753 patients who underwent imaging processed with RAPID software in 856 hospitals in the United States from July 1, 2019 through April 27, 2020. The daily counts of unique patients who underwent imaging decreased in March 2020 (Figure 1). We therefore chose to compare the mean daily counts per hospital of patients in the RAPID system in an ostensibly prepandemic 29-day epoch from February 1, 2020, through February 29, 2020, with the mean daily counts per hospital of patients in a 14-day epoch during the early pandemic, from March 26, 2020, through April 8, 2020. During the prepandemic epoch, the numbers of patients per hospital who underwent imaging were similar to the baseline numbers immediately before the prepandemic epoch. The nadir of the daily counts after the first case of Covid-19 was reported in the United States occurred during the 14-day epoch. The number of patients who underwent imaging decreased by 39%, from 1.18 patients per day per hospital in the prepandemic epoch to 0.72 patients per day per hospital in the early-pandemic epoch (see Figs. S1 and S2 in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). An apparent increase in the number of patients who underwent imaging after the early-pandemic epoch warrants further investigation. The decrease in the use of stroke imaging from the prepandemic epoch to the early-pandemic epoch was seen across all age, sex, and stroke severity subgroups (Table S1); this suggests a decrease in the number of evaluations both in patients with severe strokes and in nonelderly patients who may have been at low risk for Covid-19 complications. Decreases in the numbers of patients who underwent stroke imaging were seen in most states and across a range of hospital volumes (Fig. S3 and Table S2). These decreases suggest that differences in regional incidences of Covid-19 were not the primary cause of decreased use of stroke imaging. Our analysis has limitations. We used a surrogate for the amount of care provided, and the database, which pertains predominantly to patients who were under consideration for endovascular thrombectomy at designated stroke centers, may not reflect the care provided at other hospitals. We found that the collateral effect of Covid-19 was a decrease of approximately 39% in the numbers of patients who received evaluations for acute stroke between two recent epochs in U.S. hospitals.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              The Baffling Case of Ischemic Stroke Disappearance from the Casualty Department in the COVID-19 Era

              Dear Editor, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is rapidly spreading worldwide, and the WHO declared the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak a pandemic on March 11, 2020 [1]. The outbreak has hit Europe and, as of March 27, 2020, Italy has the second largest number of confirmed cases, that is, a total of 86,498 cases according to the Istituto Superiore di Sanità and 9,134 deaths [2]. This health emergency issue has plunged the Italian health system into an unprecedented state of emergency, and many hospitals are now dedicated exclusively to COVID-19 assistance. We work at the Guglielmo da Saliceto Hospital in Piacenza, a city in northern Italy near Milan. Despite being a relatively small city, Piacenza and its province (about 280,000 inhabitants) are one of the epicenters of the Italian epidemic, listing 2,276 cases at the time of writing. This health emergency has revolutionized the hospital organization, and everything has changed for practicing clinicians in just a few weeks. For example, neurologists also contribute to the management and care of COVID-19 patients or have been “converted back” to operating as emergency physicians, as numerous colleagues have been infected. The question is: what can we say about the remaining non-COVID-19 pathologies? Let us take the ischemic stroke as an example: it seems to have almost disappeared from the Casualty Department! Over the past 5 years (2015-2019), the city of Piacenza has recorded an annual average of 612 new cases of ischemic stroke, with a monthly average of 51 cases, and 21% of them are large vessel occlusion (LVO). We investigated the monthly variance of ischemic stroke using the ANOVA test. Surprisingly, between February 21, 2020 (first SARS-CoV-2 patient recorded in Italy-in Codogno, a nearby city), and March 25, 2020, there were only 6 admissions from the Casualty Department for ischemic stroke (2 transient ischemic attacks, 1 cardioembolic LVO, and 3 lacunar stroke). What could we hypothesize for this observation? On March 8, 2020, the Italian government implemented extraordinary measures to limit viral transmission, including restricting the mobility of the general population. This strict measure was aimed at minimizing the likelihood that people who were already infected came into contact with noninfected ones. Moreover, the population was asked to refer to the Casualty Department only if really necessary. It is true that the significant reduction in currently registered strokes may well be attributable to fewer people going to the Casualty Department for fear of being infected. However, this can be true only for minor, non-disabling strokes. LVO strokes are always disabling (i.e., aphasia and/or hemiplegia), and it is impossible to avoid hospitalization in such a serious condition. Moreover, the point is that there may be an underestimation of the number of stroke, as when patients arrive in a Casualty Department with fever and respiratory distress, they take priority and the neurological deficit may, therefore, be overlooked. We wonder why these patients have almost disappeared. It is known that viral infections are associated with an increased risk of stroke, as described in influenza pneumonia [3], which is exactly the opposite of what we are currently observing. Could then the seasonal pattern of stroke occurrence and/or cytokine storm described in COVID-19 patients play a role in explaining these observations? It does not seem so. First, data on seasonal differences in stroke incidence are conflicting. Some studies have reported that ischemic stroke occurrence was significantly higher during spring and autumn than in summer [4, 5]. However, another study stated that there was a fairly even distribution of ischemic stroke over all 4 seasons [6] and a recent meta-analysis showed very little seasonal variation [7]. Also, our analysis of variance of the monthly number of ischemic stroke between 2015 and 2019 was not significant. Second, in COVID-19 affected patients, high levels of thrombosis and inflammation serum markers, such as D-dimer, fibrinogen, and C-reactive protein, have been reported, as well as increased levels of inflammatory cytokines (i.e., tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin [IL]-2R, and IL-6) [8]. All these laboratory findings, including the rise of IL-6, seem to be present also in patients with mild or moderate SARS-CoV-2 clinical manifestations, with no need for hospitalization [9]. So, why do COVID-19 patients not have an increased risk of developing ischemic stroke? One hypothesis could be related to the controversial role IL-6 plays in stroke. Indeed, although high IL-6 levels have been reported to have a negative effect on brain infarct volume and long-term outcome [10], conversely, in ischemic stroke, there is also experimental evidence that IL-6 has a protective effect and helps in the improvement of poststroke angiogenesis [11]. According to these observations, should a beneficial role of IL-6 in patients without other systemic complications be considered? Another interesting possible explanation is related to the presence of thrombocytopenia in COVID-19 patients, also in patients with mild symptoms [12]. Could the decreased platelet levels be involved in the reduction of LVO strokes? Furthermore, based on previous evidence, the burden of chronic persistent infections and/or past infections, rather than one single current infectious disease, seems to be associated with stroke risk [13]. Moreover, the extraordinary measures taken by the Italian government might have reduced the spread of seasonal flu and its unfavorable effect upon stroke incidence. Indeed, what may be true for influenza pneumonia (i.e., increased stroke risk) may not be true for SARS-CoV-2. The main limit of our remark is certainly the short observation period of just 1 month. The baffling case of ischemic stroke disappearance from the Casualty Department has yet to be resolved. Disclosure Statement The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Funding Sources This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. No financial support was provided for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Author Contributions Study concepts: N. Morelli, E. Rota, and C. Terracciano. Study design: N. Morelli, E. Rota, and M. Spallazzi. Data analysis/interpretation: N. Morelli, D. Zaino, P. Immovilli, and D. Colombi. Manuscript preparation and definition of intellectual content: N. Morelli, E. Rota, and C. Terracciano. Manuscript editing: N. Morelli and E. Rota. Manuscript revision/review: D. Guidetti and E. Michieletti.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis
                J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis
                Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases
                Published by Elsevier Inc.
                1052-3057
                1532-8511
                22 July 2020
                22 July 2020
                : 105179
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Neurology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
                [2 ]Department of Neurology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
                Author notes
                [* ] Corresponding Author: Tamara Strohm, MD
                Article
                S1052-3057(20)30597-8 105179
                10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105179
                7375301
                79e0aa43-f1d9-468c-b8a7-6ad5362d9377
                © 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 13 June 2020
                : 15 July 2020
                : 18 July 2020
                Categories
                Article

                acute ischemic stroke,stroke management,covid-19,quality and outcomes

                Comments

                Comment on this article