Point-of-care versus central laboratory testing of INR in acute stroke

The role of viscoelastic hemostatic assays for postpartum hemorrhage management and bedside intrapartum care

Viscoelastic hemostatic assays are point-of-care devices that assess coagulation and fibrinolysis in whole blood samples. These technologies provide numeric and visual information of clot initiation, clot strength, and clot lysis under low-shear conditions, and have been used in a variety of clinical settings and subpopulations, including trauma, cardiac surgery, and obstetrics. Emerging data indicate that these devices are useful for detecting important coagulation defects during major postpartum hemorrhage (especially low plasma fibrinogen concentration [hypofibrinogenemia]) and informing clinical decision-making for blood product use. Data from observational studies suggest that, compared with traditional formulaic approaches to transfusion management, targeted or goal-directed transfusion approaches using data from viscoelastic hemostatic assays are associated with reduced hemorrhage-related morbidity and lower blood product requirement. Viscoelastic hemostatic assays can also be used to identify and treat coagulation defects in patients with inherited or acquired coagulation disorders, such as factor XI deficiency or immune-mediated thrombocytopenia, and to assess hemostatic profiles of patients prescribed anticoagulant medications to mitigate the risk of epidural hematoma after neuraxial anesthesia and postpartum hemorrhage after delivery.

Reducing Laboratory Turnaround Time in Patients With Acute Stroke and the Lack of Impact on Time to Reperfusion Therapy

CONTEXT.—

Timely reperfusion improves the recovery of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Laboratory results are crucial to guide treatment decisions in patients when abnormal laboratory tests are suspected.

OBJECTIVE.—

To implement a new laboratory workflow for acute stroke patients and compare laboratory turnaround time (TAT) preimplementation and postimplementation.

DESIGN.—

We conducted a retrospective pre-post intervention study of patients with suspected acute stroke during the 4-month periods before and after the implementation of a new laboratory workflow process. The improvement process included relocating the specimen registration site, laboratory notification before specimen arrival, a color-coding system on tubes, timing at all processes, and eliminating the smear review if platelets were normal. TATs of the laboratory and door-to-clinical intervention times before and after the improvement process were compared.

RESULTS.—

Postintervention, median specimen transportation time decreased from 11 (interquartile range [IQR], 8.4-16.4) to 9 minutes (IQR, 6.3-12.8), P < .001. The intralaboratory and total TATs of complete blood cell count, coagulation tests, and creatinine significantly decreased (P < .001 for all). Blood drawn-to-laboratory reported time decreased from 43 (IQR, 36.0-51.5) to 33 minutes (IQR, 29.2-35.8, P < .001). However, door-to-needle time for thrombolysis and door-to-puncture time and door-to-recanalization time for mechanical thrombectomy were not statistically different (P = .11, .69, and .50, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS.—

The new laboratory workflow significantly decreased transportation time, TAT of individual tests, and the blood drawn-to-laboratory reported time. However, the time to treatment of acute ischemic stroke patients was not different between preimplementation and postimplementation.

In-hospital acute stroke workflow in acute stroke - Systems-based approaches

Clinical outcomes of acute ischaemic stroke patients have significantly improved with the advent of reperfusion therapy. However, time continues to be a critical factor. Reducing treatment delays by improving workflows can improve the efficacy of acute reperfusion therapy. Systems-based approaches have improved in-hospital temporal parameters, maximizing the utility of reperfusion therapies and improving clinical benefit to patients. However, studies aimed at optimizing and hence reducing treatment delays in emergency department (ED) settings are limited. The aim of this article is to discuss existing systems-based approaches to optimize ED acute stroke workflows and its value in reducing treatment delays and identify gaps in existing workflows that need optimization. Identifying gaps in acute stroke workflow, variations in processes and challenges in implementation, in the in-hospital settings, is essential for systems-based interventions to be effective in delivering improved outcomes for patients with acute ischaemic stroke.

Mobile Stroke Units: Bringing Treatment to the Patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Mobile stroke units (MSUs) have revolutionized emergency stroke care by delivering pre-hospital thrombolysis faster than conventional ambulance transport and in-hospital treatment. This review discusses the history of MSUs technological development, current operations and research, cost-effectiveness, and future directions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple prospective and retrospective studies have shown that MSUs deliver acute ischemic stroke treatment with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (IV r-tPA) approximately 30 min faster than conventional care. The 90-day modified Rankin Scores for patients who received IV r-tPA on the MSU compared to conventional care were not statistically different in the PHANTOM-S study. Two German studies suggest that the MSU model is cost-effective by reducing disability and improving adjusted quality-life years post-stroke. The ongoing BEST-MSU trial will be the first multicenter, randomized controlled study that will shed light on MSUs' impact on long-term neurologic outcomes and cost-effectiveness. MSUs are effective in reducing treatment times in acute ischemic stroke without increasing adverse events. MSUs could potentially improve treatment times in large vessel occlusion and intracranial hemorrhage. Further studies are needed to assess functional outcomes and cost-effectiveness. Clinical trials are ongoing internationally.

Comparison of the use of comprehensive point-of-care test panel to conventional laboratory process in emergency department

BACKGROUND

In this study, we hypothesized that point of care testing (POCT) would reduce length of stay (LOS) in emergency department (ED) when compared to central laboratory testing and be a factor in patient discharge destination.

METHODS

A single centre observational study was performed in ED non-ambulatory patients. Blood testing was performed either with POC instruments for blood gases and chemistry panel, full blood count, and CRP, or at central laboratory, or as a combination of both. Blood draw and POCTs were performed by experienced nurses.

RESULTS

During the 4-week study period, 1759 patients underwent sample testing (POCT: n = 160, central lab: n = 951; both n = 648). Median waiting time for blood sampling was 19 min less in POCT than central laboratory (0:52 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0:46-1:02) vs. 1:11 (95% CI 1:05-1:14), p < 0.001). POCT results were available faster in both discharge groups, as expected. When imaging was not required, patients in POCT group were discharged home 55 min faster (4:57 (95% CI 3:59-6:17) vs. 5:52 (95% CI 5:21-6:35), p = 0.012) and 1 h 22 min faster when imaging was performed (5:48 (95% CI 5:26-6:18) vs. 7:10 (95% CI 6:47-8:26), p = 0.010). Similar reduction in sampling time and LOS was not seen among those admitted to hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

POCT shortened the laboratory process and made results available faster than the central lab. This allowed patients to be discharged home quicker. Thus, with proper training and education of the ED care team, POCT can be used as an effective tool for improving patient flow.