To FAST or Not to FAST: SHOUT-FAST!

Is FAST Stroke Smart? Do the Content and Language used in Awareness Campaigns Describe the Experience of Stroke Symptoms?

Background

Public education campaigns for stroke are used worldwide. However, there are few published evaluations of such campaigns.

Aim

This cross-sectional study examined patient and bystander awareness of two Australian campaigns, ‘FAST’ (face, arm, speech, time) and ‘Signs of Stroke’, and evaluated the campaigns ability to identify stroke and to describe the symptom experience.

Methods

Interviews were conducted with either stroke patients or a key bystander for consecutive eligible cases admitted to two metropolitan hospitals between August 2006 and April 2008. Participants were asked to describe awareness of the FAST campaign, the symptoms experienced and to evaluate the symptom descriptions of Signs of Stroke against their own experience.

Results

A total of 100 patients and 70 bystanders were interviewed for 170 cases (71% of eligible cases). Only 12% of those interviewed were aware of the FAST campaign, and of these few (19%) were able to recall all FAST symptoms, with only one bystander using the FAST assessments to identify stroke. At least one FAST symptom was reported by 84% and one Signs of Stroke symptom by 100%. Less than half of those experiencing ‘weakness or paralysis’ thought this description exactly described their experience. Common descriptors of symptoms were: face or mouth droop or drop; trouble using, coordinating or moving arm, hand or leg; trouble walking or standing; numbness; and slurring or loss of speech.

Conclusion

Awareness of the FAST and Signs of Stroke campaigns was low, with poor recall and little use of the FAST assessments. Some symptom descriptions used in the campaign were not reflective of the symptom experience. The content and language of these campaigns could be improved to portray stroke symptoms more realistically.

Stroke: acute stroke receiving facilities and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Management of ischemic stroke is challenging. No prehospital treatment option exists, and the only approved pharmacologic therapy, that is, systemic thrombolysis, requires brain imaging and initiation of therapy within a narrow therapeutic window. This review provides an overview of recent efforts to optimize management of suspected stroke patients by reducing the interval from symptom onset to reperfusion therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is clear evidence that stroke patients have a favorable outcome when treated with thrombolysis in specialized stroke centers. Data from the European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study-III trial, coupled with improved patient selection by advanced imaging technologies will expand future therapeutic options. However, major obstacles remain in consistently translating scientific advances into clinical practice with only a small percentage of potentially eligible patients receiving thrombolysis. Integrated systems of prehospital management and clinical pathways are necessary to reduce this treatment gap.

SUMMARY

The dogma 'time is brain' is as relevant now as it was at the inauguration of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator for acute stroke treatment in 1996. Knowledge of stroke symptoms and treatment options by the public and first responders, along with integrated stroke systems of care are crucial to ensure rapid access to stroke expertise and treatment.