An audit of coagulation screening in patients presenting to the emergency department for potential stroke thrombolysis

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.

Point-of-care coagulation testing for reducing in-hospital delay in thrombolysis

Background:

The confirmation of prothrombin time international normalized ratio by a central laboratory often delays intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

Objectives:

We investigated the feasibility, reliability, and usefulness of point-of-care determination of prothrombin time international normalized ratio for stroke thrombolysis.

Methods:

Among 312 patients with ischemic stroke, 202 who arrived at the emergency room within 4.5 h of stroke onset were enrolled in the study. Patients with lost orders for point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio or central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (n = 47) were excluded. We compared international normalized ratio values and the time interval from arrival to the report of test results (door-to-international normalized ratio time) between point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio. In patients who underwent thrombolysis, we compared the time interval from arrival to thrombolysis (door-to-needle time) between the current study population and historic cohort at our center.

Results:

In the 155 patients included in the study, the median door-to-international normalized ratio time was 9.0 min (interquartile range, 5.0–12.0 min) for point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and 46.0 min (interquartile range, 38.0–55.0 min) for central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (p < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient between point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio and central laboratory testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was 0.975 (95% confidence interval: 0.966–0.982). Forty-nine of the 155 patients underwent intravenous thrombolysis. The door-to-needle time was significantly decreased after implementation of point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio (median, 23.0 min; interquartile range, 16.0–29.8 vs median, 46.0 min; interquartile range, 33.5–50.5 min).

Conclusion:

Utilization of point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was feasible in the management of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Point-of-care testing for the prothrombin time international normalized ratio was quick and reliable and had a pivotal role in expediting thrombolysis.

Thrombolysis in stroke patients: Comparability of point-of-care versus central laboratory international normalized ratio

BACKGROUND

In acute stroke patients, thrombolysis is one gold standard therapy option within the first four hours after the ischemic event. A contraindication for thrombolysis is an International Normalized Ratio (INR) value >1.7. Since time is brain, rapid and reliable INR results are fundamental. Aim was to compare INR values determined by central laboratory (CL) analyzer and Point-of-Care Testing(POCT)-device and to evaluate the quality of POCT performance in cases of potential therapeutic thrombolysis at a certified stroke unit.

METHODS

In 153 patients INR measurements using POCT-devices (HEMOCHRON Signature Elite®) were compared to INR measurements (BCS®XP) performed at the central laboratory. Outlier evaluation was performed regarding the critical thrombolysis cut-off.

RESULTS

Overall, we demonstrated a significant correlation (r = 0.809, p<0.0001) between both measurement methods. Mean value of the absolute difference between CL-INR and POCT-INR measurements was 0.23. In 95.4% of these cases, no differences regarding the critical cut-off (INR 1.7) were observed. POCT-INR values tended to be higher than the CL-INR values (p = 0.01). In 4.6% cases, a different value regarding thrombolysis cut-off was found. All patients were >75 years.

CONCLUSIONS

POCT-INR measurements based on our POCT concept are suitable to determine INR values in critical stroke patients. Nevertheless, outlier evaluation is mandatory.

Point-of-Care-Testing in Acute Stroke Management: An Unmet Need Ripe for Technological Harvest

Stroke, the second highest leading cause of death, is caused by an abrupt interruption of blood to the brain. Supply of blood needs to be promptly restored to salvage brain tissues from irreversible neuronal death. Existing assessment of stroke patients is based largely on detailed clinical evaluation that is complemented by neuroimaging methods. However, emerging data point to the potential use of blood-derived biomarkers in aiding clinical decision-making especially in the diagnosis of ischemic stroke, triaging patients for acute reperfusion therapies, and in informing stroke mechanisms and prognosis. The demand for newer techniques to deliver individualized information on-site for incorporation into a time-sensitive work-flow has become greater. In this review, we examine the roles of a portable and easy to use point-of-care-test (POCT) in shortening the time-to-treatment, classifying stroke subtypes and improving patient's outcome. We first examine the conventional stroke management workflow, then highlight situations where a bedside biomarker assessment might aid clinical decision-making. A novel stroke POCT approach is presented, which combines the use of quantitative and multiplex POCT platforms for the detection of specific stroke biomarkers, as well as data-mining tools to drive analytical processes. Further work is needed in the development of POCTs to fulfill an unmet need in acute stroke management.