Next Article in Journal
Accuracy of Tracking Devices’ Ability to Assess Exercise Energy Expenditure in Professional Female Soccer Players: Implications for Quantifying Energy Availability
Next Article in Special Issue
Cerebral Hemodynamics, Right-to-Left Shunt and White Matter Hyperintensities in Patients with Migraine with Aura, Young Stroke Patients and Controls
Previous Article in Journal
Self-Selected Walking Cadence after 16-Week Light-Intensity Physical Activity Intervention for Older Cancer Survivors
Previous Article in Special Issue
Carotid Artery Plaque Progression: Proposal of a New Predictive Score and Role of Carotid Intima-Media Thickness
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 19
Issue 8
10.3390/ijerph19084769
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Prehospital Management of Patients with Suspected Acute Stroke: A Retrospective Cohort Study

by
Natasza Blek
1,2,*,
Lukasz Szarpak
1,3,4 and
Jerzy Robert Ladny
3,5
1
Institute of Outcomes Research, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Medical Academy in Warsaw, 03-411 Warsaw, Poland
2
Department of Neurology, Wolski Hospital, 01-211 Warsaw, Poland
3
Research Unit, Polish Society of Disaster Medicine, 05-806 Warsaw, Poland
4
Research Unit, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Bialystok Oncology Center, 15-027 Bialystok, Poland
5
Department of Emergency Medicine, Bialystok Medical University, 15-026 Bialystok, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(8), 4769; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084769
Submission received: 26 February 2022 / Revised: 6 April 2022 / Accepted: 12 April 2022 / Published: 14 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Prevention and Treatment of Cerebrovascular Diseases)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS) can be successfully handled if it is noticed early in the prehospital setting and immediately diagnosed in the emergency department (ED). The coronavirus pandemic has altered the way health care is delivered and has had a profound impact on healthcare delivery. The effects could include prioritizing the prevention of COVID-19 spread, which could result in the discontinuation or deferral of non-COVID-19 care. We used the National Emergency Medical Service Command Support System, a register of medical interventions performed by emergency medical services (EMS) in Poland, to assess the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic across the Masovian Voivodeship on suspected stroke patients’ baseline characteristics, prehospital vital parameters, clinical and neurological status, emergency procedures performed on the prehospital phase and EMS processing times. Between 1 April 2019 and 30 April 2021, the study population included 18,922 adult suspected stroke patients who were treated by EMS teams, with 18,641 admitted to the emergency departments. The overall number of suspected stroke patients treated by EMS remained unchanged during COVID-19 compared to the pre-COVID-19 period; however, the average time from call to hospital admission increased by 15 min.

1. Introduction

Stroke is the second leading cause of death and the most common cause of long-term disability worldwide [1]. Additionally, Poland’s number of stroke patients is estimated to be between 60,000 and 90,000 per year [2]. However, between 2013 and 2018, figures from the National Health Fund show a 7.6 percent decline in the number of patients hospitalized for ischemic stroke (from 75,700 to 70,700) [3].
Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS) is successfully managed when it is recognized early in the prehospital setting and diagnosed promptly in the Emergency Department (ED). Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) has been recognized as an essential causal treatment for AIS to reopen a stenosed cerebral vessel and for which clinical benefit has been demonstrated in a time window of 4.5–9.0 h in numerous randomized controlled trials [4]. In addition, interventional catheter thrombectomy as an adjunct to IVT, used in cases of large vessel occlusion (LVO) in specialized neurovascular centers, is becoming increasingly important [5]. For functional outcomes after AIS, the time to recanalization is significant, as further brain tissue death threatens with each passing minute. For this reason, time management is of paramount importance in stroke care (“time is brain”) [6]. Given the proven high efficacy, however, still, too few patients have access to these forms of therapy; especially in rural regions, there is an underutilization of this patient group [7]. This is mainly due to delays in the prehospital phase, resulting in patients not reaching the clinic in time for causal treatment [8,9,10,11,12]. Therefore, the direction of treatment will depend on the correct prehospital diagnosis of the cause of the stroke. Thanks to prompt diagnosis, the implementation of appropriate procedures is crucial for a patient with a stroke, and time plays the most vital role here.
The pandemic of coronavirus disease has changed how health care is provided and has a significant impact on healthcare delivery. Effects may include prioritizing the prevention of the spread of COVID-19, which could lead to closing off or delaying non-COVID-19 care.
On 15 March 2020, the Polish Government declared the first limitations. Further measures were introduced on March 24, including the prohibition of non-essential travel, except work or home, SARS-CoV-2 monitoring operations, or “required day-to-day activities”.
On 20 March 2020, the Prime Minister announced an official outbreak in Poland. As a result, the Ministry of Health decided to transform 19 medical facilities into infectious hospitals—multi-specialized centers to provide patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections and significant comorbidities (e.g., COVID-19 patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke) [13].
Despite the hospital network organization, the pandemic has strongly affected the healthcare system’s balance and other facilities.
Guidelines on “Good practice in treating patients with suspected brain stroke for medical dispatchers and emergency medical services teams” were issued on 24 January 2019, by the Ministry of Health, in collaboration with State consultants in neurology and emergency medicine, to ensure proper prehospital treatment of suspected brain stroke and transportation to a specialist stroke unit [14].
Emergency medical services (EMS) are the initial point of contact for most stroke patients and are critical in the early detection of acute stroke. Immediate intervention of the rescue team should include examination of essential vital functions (pulse, respiration, blood pressure), measurement of glucose levels in capillary blood, and, if the patient’s state warrants it, administering basic medical life support to the patient (if applicable) [15].
The study’s initial objective was to analyze the diagnostic and therapeutic standards used in patients with cerebral stroke at the prehospital stage and the characteristics of stroke patients in general. However, because the COVID-19 pandemic occurred during the study, the objective was adjusted to include a comparison of pre- and post-pandemic cohorts. As a result, two time periods were investigated. We conducted this study to assess the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic across the Masovian Voivodeship on suspected stroke patients’ baseline characteristics, prehospital vital parameters, clinical and neurological status, emergency procedures performed in the prehospital phase, and EMS processing times.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of adult suspected stroke patients. Between 1 April 2019, and 30 April 2021, the study population included 18,922 adult suspected stroke patients who received prehospital care from EMS, of which 18,641 were admitted to the ED. Two time periods were investigated: 1 April 2019, to 31 March 2020 (pre-COVID-19) and 1 April 2020, to 31 March 2021 (COVID-19).
The statistics came from Poland’s largest voivodeship, the Masovian Voivodeship. The Masovian Voivodeship is Poland’s largest in terms of both territory and population. Additionally, it encompasses Poland’s capital, Warsaw. The region encompasses 35,579 km2. As of 31 December 2019, the district had a population of approximately 5.4 million. The voivodeship has 200 ground-based medical rescue teams stationed in 128 locations. Subjects were excluded if the information on age and basic vital parameters were missing.
Our work followed the STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) guidelines [16] and adhered to the Helsinki Declaration. The study was authorized by the Polish Society of Disaster Medicine’s Institutional Review Board (approval No. 10.03.2021.IRB).

2.2. Data Collection

Data were collected using the National Emergency Medical Service Command Support System, a register of ambulance dispatches and medical interventions done by emergency medical services (EMS) in Poland. Patients included in the study required an EMS dispatch due to neurological symptoms of cerebrovascular disease and had one of the following initial diagnoses—I60 (subarachnoid hemorrhage), I61 (intracerebral hemorrhage), I62 (other nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage), I63 (cerebral infarction), and I64 (stroke not classified as hemorrhagic or infarct) according to the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems revision 10 [17]. Following the collection of data from digital records, patients were de-identified. Gender, age, vital parameters, medical diagnosis, set of medical procedures performed, and medical treatment were all acquired from computerized medical records. The Polish healthcare system lacks a centralized, national stroke database. As a result, detailed information on the patients’ follow-ups was impossible to get. The analysis was limited to the prehospital management performed by the EMS crew and spans the time period from ambulance activation to patient transfer to the hospital’s emergency department.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed with the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 27.0 software (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Arithmetic means, medians, standard deviations, and range of variation (extreme values) were calculated for measurable variables. For qualitative variables, frequencies of occurrence (percentages) were calculated. All quantitative type variables studied were tested with the Shapiro–Wilk test to determine the type of distribution. Qualitative variables were compared between groups using the chi-square (χ2) test or Fisher exact method for small-sized samples. For the comparison of means, Welch’s t-test was used. An α = 0.05 level was used for all comparisons, and the resulting “p” values were rounded to 2 decimal places for statistically insignificant results and three decimal places for statistically significant results.

3. Results

From April 2020 to March 2021, medical emergency teams from the Mazovian region performed 386,764 patient encounters, of which 9544 were carried out on patients with suspected stroke, which constituted 2.47% of all EMS interventions in the pandemic period.
From April 2019 to March 2020, medical emergency teams from the Mazovian region performed 435,562 patient encounters, of which 9378 interventions were carried out on patients with suspected stroke—2.15% of all EMS interventions.

3.1. Baseline Characteristics

The overall baseline characteristics of our cohorts are presented in Table 1. Significant differences were found in sex, medical rescue team type, and scene. However, both groups were similar in terms of age, day, and day time of the intervention.

3.2. Vital Parameters and Clinical Status

There was no difference in preadmission vital parameters such as systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, blood oxygen saturation, and clinical scores of GCS and RTS between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods. The only difference was observed in the blood glucose level, which was increased during the pandemic period as presented in Table 2.

3.3. Emergency Procedures

Interestingly, statistically significant differences were observed regarding emergency procedures performed as summarized in Table 3.
Rates of peripheral vein cannulation dropped slightly during the pandemic period. On the contrary, rates of ECG, vital parameters, continuous monitoring, and oxygen therapy were increased.
In patients whose low blood pressure prompted the EMS head to initiate fluid therapy, 0.9% sodium chloride or polyelectrolyte fluid was administered. These activities were implemented in 8.5% of the patients in the pandemic period and 7.7% in the pre-pandemic period. In patients provided with qualified first aid by EMS members, drugs and other pharmaceuticals were administered orally/sublingually, intravenously, or inhaled. As far as the supply of agents influencing blood pressure is concerned, anti-hypertensive treatment was implemented in 8% of the patients in the pandemic period and 8.4% in the pre-pandemic period. Types of pharmaceuticals used are presented in Table 4.
The types of pharmaceuticals used to lower blood pressure are shown in Table 5 below.

3.4. Neurological Evaluation

This part of the analysis, shown in Table 6, covers the neurological symptoms faced by emergency medical teams during the examination and initial diagnosis. During the pandemic period, more patients presented bilateral miosis and poorer verbal response in GCS scores. Syncope on onset was less frequently witnessed.

3.5. Prehospital Time Intervals

As seen in Table 7, all prehospital time intervals were considerably delayed during the pandemic period. For example, the median time between call and contact with the patient was 3 min longer, whereas the period between contact and hospital admission was around 7 min longer.

4. Discussion

This study examines changes in the prehospital management of adult patients with acute stroke symptoms who utilized EMS in the Masovian Voivodeship prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In the first article published on neurological complications in COVID-19, Liu et al. reported six cases of acute cerebrovascular disease in their cohort of 214 patients in a retrospective case series study from Wuhan, China [18]. There is evidence that SARS-CoV-2 induces substantial systemic inflammation and increases thrombotic risk. Given the overwhelming data linking COVID-19 with thromboembolic events, it is reasonable to predict that stroke incidence would increase on the eve of a pandemic [19,20,21,22]. Oppositely, there could be associated factors that potentially reduce stroke incidence. Research published in The Lancet Neurology indicates that polluted air is one of the significant risk factors for stroke; therefore, a reduction could be potentially protective against stroke [23]. A striking reduction in pollution has been reported in multiple countries during the pandemic secondary to lockdown [24,25].
In our study, the overall number of suspected stroke patients treated with EMS during COVID-19 remained stable compared to the pre-COVID-19 period, while the average time from call to hospital admission increased by 15 min.
The COVID-19 epidemic has several consequences for stroke care, including a worldwide drop in stroke and cerebrovascular admissions [26]. However, the nation’s estimated number of acute stroke admissions has varied during the pandemic. In some countries, the estimated number of acute stroke admissions dropped by 50% and even 80% [27]. Numerous investigations have also established that individuals presenting with minor strokes and TIAs have experienced a drop during the epidemic [28,29]. In a smaller number of studies, the number of EMS referrals of stroke codes remained consistent throughout the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown [30,31].
Previous studies have presented possible explanations for the decline in acute stroke presentations. Most acute stroke patients with subtle symptoms stated that their delay in seeking medical attention was due to the fear of viral infection and transmission, given that SARS-CoV-2 is exceptionally infectious [32,33]. Fewer mild stroke or TIA admissions may be a social consequence of several reasons, including increased social isolation resulting in the absence of onset witnesses in cases of patients with resolving symptoms [34] as stroke symptoms are typically noted by another family member, friend, or community member prior to the patient recognizing them. This could also explain that syncope on onset was less frequently witnessed, and relatively more patients presented bilateral miosis and poorer verbal response in GCS scores, which could be the result of onset to contact delays and more severe clinical conditions of patients.
We observed a significant increase in blood glucose levels regarding patients’ vital parameters. This could be ascribed to weight increase, decreased physical activity, stress, and, in both types of diabetes, delayed diagnosis during lockdown and pandemic settings [35,36,37].
Interestingly, statistically significant differences were observed regarding emergency procedures performed. For example, rates of peripheral vein cannulation dropped slightly during the Pandemic period. On the contrary, rates of ECG, vital parameters continuous monitoring, and oxygen therapy were increased. This could indicate that crews were less likely to execute some standard procedures due to infectious concerns, but the patients were at a greater degree of acuity during the transfer. Unfortunately, the supply of anti-hypertensive drugs was unjustified in many cases as guidelines for prehospital management of stroke from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association and the European Stroke Organization (ESO) state that even when systolic blood pressure is near 185 mmHg, which can increase door to needle time, paramedics’ immediate prehospital anti-hypertensive care poses a risk of unexpected decreases in blood pressure; as a result, elevated blood pressure care during the prehospital period should be avoided [15,38].
The causes for the increased prehospital delays remain unknown. Interestingly, a significant decrease in the number of EMS missions following the start of the COVID-19 outbreak was observed. Despite this, the EMS workload has increased—this could be due to increased hospital handover time, taking into account ED procedures for patients with a suspected infection, or as a result of higher ambulance decontamination demands [39]. Additionally, the requirement for thorough respiratory examination, COVID-19 screening, and the use of personal protective equipment may lengthen prehospital care duration [40].

Limitations

Numerous limitations apply to this investigation. To begin, our study population included patients with the prehospital diagnosis of acute stroke; we did not confirm or follow whether they were ultimately diagnosed with stroke or a stroke mimic. Whether the diagnosis was verified, the same criteria should have been applied to patients experiencing acute stroke symptoms at the prehospital stage; consequently, this will not be a significant constraint in interpreting the results. Additionally, some patients may be missing, as we studied just the data provided by the EMS providers. Moreover, the time of symptom onset is critical in patients with acute stroke symptoms, but we did not include it since there were numerous missing data points on symptom onset in the records of EMS providers, making analysis impossible.

5. Conclusions

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using the National Emergency Medical Service Command Support System, a prospective register of medical interventions carried out by emergency medical services (EMS) in Poland to compare prehospital care delivered to suspected stroke patients during COVID-19 compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. When compared to the pre-COVID-19 period, the overall number of suspected stroke patients treated by EMS remained similar during COVID-19, but the average time from call to hospital admission increased by 15 min. Our findings lay the theoretical groundwork for the development of further guidelines to ensure adequate EMS for acute stroke, even in the event of an infectious disease outbreak.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.B.; methodology, N.B.; software, N.B.; validation, L.S. and J.R.L.; formal analysis, L.S.; data curation, N.B.; writing—original draft preparation, N.B.; writing—review and editing, N.B., L.S. and J.R.L.; visualization, N.B.; supervision, J.R.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Polish Society of Disaster Medicine’s Institutional Review Board (approval No. 10.03.2021.IRB).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was waived for patients because the study was a retrospective analysis of previously collected data that did not contain personal patient information at the time the data were submitted.

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Feigin, V.L.; Stark, B.A.; Johnson, C.O.; Roth, G.A.; Bisignano, C.; Abady, G.G.; Abbasifard, M.; Abbasi-Kangevari, M.; Abd-Allah, F.; Abedi, V.; et al. Global, Regional, and National Burden of Stroke and Its Risk Factors, 1990–2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Neurol. 2021, 20, 795–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Raciborski, F.; Gujski, M. Udary Mózgu—Rosnący Problem w Starzejącym Się Społeczeństwie. 2016. Available online: http://spartanska.pl/wp-content/uploads/raport_udary-mózgu.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2022).
  3. Centrala Narodowego Funduszu Zdrowia. NFZ o Zdrowiu—Udar Niedokrwienny Mózgu. 2019. Available online: https://ezdrowie.gov.pl/pobierz/udar_niedokrwienny_mozgu_nfz_o_zdrowiu (accessed on 22 February 2022).
  4. Berge, E.; Whiteley, W.; Audebert, H.; de Marchis, G.M.; Fonseca, A.C.; Padiglioni, C.; Ossa, N.P.; Pérez de la Strbian, D.; Tsivgoulis, G.; Turc, G. European Stroke Organisation (ESO) Guidelines on Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischaemic Stroke. Eur. Stroke J. 2021, 6, I–LXII. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Campbell, B.C.V.; Donnan, G.A.; Lees, K.R.; Hacke, W.; Khatri, P.; Hill, M.D.; Goyal, M.; Mitchell, P.J.; Saver, J.L.; Diener, H.C.; et al. Endovascular Stent Thrombectomy: The New Standard of Care for Large Vessel Ischaemic Stroke. Lancet Neurol. 2015, 14, 846–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Saver, J.L. Time Is Brain—Quantified. Stroke 2006, 37, 263–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Yan, Y.; Hu, K.; Alcock, S.; Ghrooda, E.; Trivedi, A.; McEachern, J.; Kaderali, Z.; Shankar, J. Access to Endovascular Thrombectomy for Stroke in Rural Versus Urban Regions. Can. J. Neurol. Sci. 2022, 49, 70–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mosley, I.; Nicol, M.; Donnan, G.; Patrick, I.; Kerr, F.; Dewey, H. The Impact of Ambulance Practice on Acute Stroke Care. Stroke 2007, 38, 2765–2770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  9. Heemskerk, J.L.; Domingo, R.A.; Tawk, R.G.; Vivas-Buitrago, T.G.; Huang, J.F.; Rogers, A.; Quinones-Hinojosa, A.; Abode-Iyamah, K.; Freeman, W.D. Time Is Brain: Prehospital Emergency Medical Services Response Times for Suspected Stroke and Effects of Prehospital Interventions. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2021, 96, 1446–1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dickson, R.; Nedelcut, A.; Nedelcut, M.M.P. Stop Stroke: A Brief Report on Door-to-Needle Times and Performance after Implementing an Acute Care Coordination Medical Application and Implications to Emergency Medical Services. Prehosp. Disaster Med. 2017, 32, 343–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Ebinger, M.; Winter, B.; Wendt, M.; Weber, J.E.; Waldschmidt, C.; Rozanski, M.; Kunz, A.; Koch, P.; Kellner, P.A.; Gierhake, D.; et al. Effect of the Use of Ambulance-Based Thrombolysis on Time to Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2014, 311, 1622–1631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Li, T.; Cushman, J.T.; Shah, M.N.; Kelly, A.G.; Rich, D.Q.; Jones, C.M.C. Prehospital Time Intervals and Management of Ischemic Stroke Patients. Am. J. Emerg. Med. 2021, 42, 127–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Król, Z.; Szymanski, P.; Bochnia, A.; Abramowicz, E.; Płachta, A.; Rzeplinski, R.; Sługocki, M.; Nowak, B.; Zaczynski, A.; Kozłowski, K.; et al. Transformation of a Large Multi-Speciality Hospital into a Dedicated COVID-19 Centre during the Coronavirus Pandemic. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 2020, 27, 201–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ryglewicz, D.; Ładny, J. Dobre Praktyki Postępowania z Pacjentem z Podejrzeniem Udaru Mózgu; Ministerstwo Zdrowia: Warsaw, Poland, 2018.
  15. Kobayashi, A.; Czlonkowska, A.; Ford, G.A.; Fonseca, A.C.; Luijckx, G.J.; Korv, J.; de la Ossa, N.P.; Price, C.; Russell, D.; Tsiskaridze, A.; et al. European Academy of Neurology and European Stroke Organization Consensus Statement and Practical Guidance for Pre-Hospital Management of Stroke. Eur. J. Neurol. 2018, 25, 425–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Vandenbroucke, J.P.; Von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Pocock, S.J.; Poole, C.; Schlesselman, J.J.; Egger, M. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration. Epidemiology 2007, 18, 805–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. World Health Organization. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision ICD-10; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  18. Li, Y.; Li, M.; Wang, M.; Zhou, Y.; Chang, J.; Xian, Y.; Wang, D.; Mao, L.; Jin, H.; Hu, B. Acute Cerebrovascular Disease Following COVID-19: A Single Center, Retrospective, Observational Study. Stroke Vasc. Neurol. 2020, 5, 279–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lodigiani, C.; Iapichino, G.; Carenzo, L.; Cecconi, M.; Ferrazzi, P.; Sebastian, T.; Kucher, N.; Studt, J.D.; Sacco, C.; Alexia, B.; et al. Venous and Arterial Thromboembolic Complications in COVID-19 Patients Admitted to an Academic Hospital in Milan, Italy. Thromb. Res. 2020, 191, 9–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ribes, A.; Vardon-Bounes, F.; Mémier, V.; Poette, M.; Au-Duong, J.; Garcia, C.; Minville, V.; Sié, P.; Bura-Rivière, A.; Voisin, S.; et al. Thromboembolic Events and COVID-19. Adv. Biol. Regul. 2020, 77, 100735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kollias, A.; Kyriakoulis, K.G.; Dimakakos, E.; Poulakou, G.; Stergiou, G.S.; Syrigos, K. Thromboembolic Risk and Anticoagulant Therapy in COVID-19 Patients: Emerging Evidence and Call for Action. Br. J. Haematol. 2020, 189, 846–847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Tang, N.; Li, D.; Wang, X.; Sun, Z. Abnormal Coagulation Parameters Are Associated with Poor Prognosis in Patients with Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia. J. Thromb. Haemost. 2020, 18, 844–847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Johnson, C.O.; Nguyen, M.; Roth, G.A.; Nichols, E.; Alam, T.; Abate, D.; Abd-Allah, F.; Abdelalim, A.; Abraha, H.N.; Abu-Rmeileh, N.M.; et al. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019, 18, 439–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Bao, R.; Zhang, A. Does Lockdown Reduce Air Pollution? Evidence from 44 Cities in Northern China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 731, 139052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kumari, P.; Toshniwal, D. Impact of Lockdown on Air Quality over Major Cities across the Globe during COVID-19 Pandemic. Urban Clim. 2020, 34, 100719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Nogueira, R.G.; Abdalkader, M.; Qureshi, M.M.; Frankel, M.R.; Mansour, O.Y.; Yamagami, H.; Qiu, Z.; Farhoudi, M.; Siegler, J.E.; Yaghi, S.; et al. Global Impact of COVID-19 on Stroke Care. Int. J. Stroke 2021, 16, 573–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Markus, H.S.; Brainin, M. COVID-19 and Stroke—A Global World Stroke Organization Perspective. Int. J. Stroke 2020, 15, 361–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Teo, K.-C.; Leung, W.C.Y.; Wong, Y.-K.; Liu, R.K.C.; Chan, A.H.Y.; Choi, O.M.Y.; Kwok, W.-M.; Leung, K.-K.; Tse, M.-Y.; Cheung, R.T.F.; et al. Delays in Stroke Onset to Hospital Arrival Time during COVID-19. Stroke 2020, 51, 2228–2231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Diegoli, H.; Magalhães, P.S.C.; Martins, S.C.O.; Moro, C.H.C.; Franca, P.H.C.; Safanelli, J.; Nagel, V.; Venancio, V.G.; Liberato, R.B.; Longo, A.L. Decrease in Hospital Admissions for Transient Ischemic Attack, Mild, and Moderate Stroke during the COVID-19 Era. Stroke 2020, 51, 2315–2321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ikenberg, B.; Hemmer, B.; Dommasch, M.; Kanz, K.; Wunderlich, S.; Knier, B. Code Stroke Patient Referral by Emergency Medical Services during the Public COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2020, 29, 105175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Riera-López, N.; Fuentes, B.; de Donlebún, J.R.P. Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Stroke Code Activations in the Region of Madrid: A Retrospective Study. Medicine 2021, 100, e27634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rinkel, L.A.; Prick, J.C.M.; Slot, R.E.R.; Sombroek, N.M.A.; Burggraaff, J.; Groot, A.E.; Emmer, B.J.; Roos, Y.B.W.E.M.; Brouwer, M.C.; van den Berg-Vos, R.M.; et al. Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak on Acute Stroke Care. J. Neurol. 2021, 268, 403–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hoyer, C.; Ebert, A.; Huttner, H.B.; Puetz, V.; Kallmünzer, B.; Barlinn, K.; Haverkamp, C.; Harloff, A.; Brich, J.; Platten, M.; et al. Acute Stroke in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multicenter Study. Stroke 2020, 51, 2224–2227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Siegler, J.E.; Heslin, M.E.; Thau, L.; Smith, A.; Jovin, T.G. Falling Stroke Rates during COVID-19 Pandemic at a Comprehensive Stroke Center: Cover Title: Falling Stroke Rates during COVID-19. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2020, 29, 104953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Karatas, S.; Yesim, T.; Beysel, S. Impact of Lockdown COVID-19 on Metabolic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Healthy People. Prim. Care Diabetes 2021, 15, 424–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Ruiz-Roso, M.B.; Knott-Torcal, C.; Matilla-Escalante, D.C.; Garcimartín, A.; Sampedro-Nuñez, M.A.; Dávalos, A.; Marazuela, M. COVID-19 Lockdown and Changes of the Dietary Pattern and Physical Activity Habits in a Cohort of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Ruissen, M.M.; Regeer, H.; Landstra, C.P.; Schroijen, M.; Jazet, I.; Nijhoff, M.F.; Pijl, H.; Ballieux, B.E.P.B.; Dekkers, O.; Huisman, S.D.; et al. Increased Stress, Weight Gain and Less Exercise in Relation to Glycemic Control in People with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes during the COVID-19 Pandemic. BMJ Open Diabetes Res. Care 2021, 9, e002035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Powers, W.J.; Rabinstein, A.A.; Ackerson, T.; Adeoye, O.M.; Bambakidis, N.C.; Becker, K.; Biller, J.; Brown, M.; Demaerschalk, B.M.; Hoh, B.; et al. Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: 2019 Update to the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke a Guideline for Healthcare Professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke A. Stroke 2019, 50, e344–e418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Laukkanen, L.; Lahtinen, S.; Liisanantti, J.; Kaakinen, T.; Ehrola, A.; Raatiniemi, L. Early Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Social Restrictions on Ambulance Missions. Eur. J. Public Health 2021, 31, 1090–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Zhao, J.; Li, H.; Kung, D.; Fisher, M.; Shen, Y.; Liu, R. Impact of the COVID-19 Epidemic on Stroke Care and Potential Solutions. Stroke 2020, 51, 1996–2001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Baseline characteristics.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics.
Pandemic (n = 9544)Pre-Pandemic (n = 9378)npTest
Age—mean72.8 (±15.7)73.1 (±13.3)17,8180.21Welch
SexMale4043 (50%)3771 (48%)78140.023Chi2
Female4102 (50%)4111 (52%)8213
MRT typeB7012 (73%)6514 (69%)13,526<0.001Chi2
S2532 (27%)2864 (31%)5396
Scenehome8673 (91%)8125 (87%)16,798<0.001Chi2
public place650 (6.8%)1015 (11%)1665
in traffic42 (0.44%)51 (0.54%)93
workplace146 (1.5%)153 (1.6%)299
school7 (0.073%)11 (0.12%)18
farming25 (0.26%)23 (0.25%)48
DayMonday1359 (14%)1263 (13%)26220.29Chi2
Tuesday1516 (16%)1505 (16%)3021
Wednesday1372 (14%)1454 (16%)2826
Thursday1357 (14%)1337 (14%)2694
Friday1365 (14%)1319 (14%)2684
Saturday1309 (14%)1305 (14%)2614
Sunday1264 (13%)1195 (13%)2459
Daytimemorning5070 (53%)4955 (53%)10,0250.74Chi2
evening3219 (34%)3154 (34%)6373
night1255 (13%)1269 (14%)2524
Table
Table 2. Vital parameters and clinical status.
Table 2. Vital parameters and clinical status.
Pandemic (n = 9544)Pre-Pandemic (n = 9378)npTest
Diastolic blood pressure in mmHg, mean85.1 (±16.9)84.6 (±16.6)18,7480.037Welch
Systolic blood pressure in mmHg, mean152 (±32.5)152 (±32.4)18,7860.21Welch
Blood glucose in mg/dL, mean150 (±57.3)145 (±55.0)17,051<0.001Welch
Heart rate (/min), mean86.2 (±21.1)85.9 (±22.8)18,6980.32Welch
Respiratory rate, mean15.8 (±4.86)15.9 (±4.96)18,1720.16Welch
Blood oxygen saturation, mean95.3 (±5.34)95.4 (±5.02)18,5340.1Welch
RTS score, mean11.6 (±0.806)11.6 (±0.767)17,8310.082Welch
GCS, mean13.1 (±2.58)13.2 (±2.54)18,6040.069Welch
Table
Table 3. Emergency procedures.
Table 3. Emergency procedures.
Pandemic (n = 9544)Pre-Pandemic (n = 9378)npTest
ECG, nnot performed6674 (70%)6726 (72%)13,400<0.01Chi2
performed2870 (30%)2652 (28%)5522
IV cannulation, nnot performed1891 (20%)1571 (17%)3462<0.001Chi2
performed7653 (80%)7807 (83%)15,460
Vital parameters continuous monitoring, nnot performed4715 (49%)4908 (52%)9623<0.001Chi2
performed4829 (51%)4470 (48%)9299
Oxygen therapy, nnot performed8706 (91%)8642 (92%)17,3480.02Chi2
performed838 (8.8%)736 (7.8%)1574
Table
Table 4. Types of pharmaceuticals used.
Table 4. Types of pharmaceuticals used.
Pandemic (n = 9544)Pre-Pandemic (n = 9378)npTest
Antihypertensive treatmentnot initiated8742 (91.6%)8628 (92%)18,9220.31Chi2
initiated802 (8.4%)750 (8%)1552
Fluid therapynot initiated8732 (91.5%)8628 (92.3%)17,3860.053Chi2
initiated812 (8.5%)724 (7.7%)1536
Table
Table 5. Types of anti-hypertensive medication used.
Table 5. Types of anti-hypertensive medication used.
Pandemic (n = 802)Pre-Pandemic (n = 750)npTest
Captopril562 (70%)513 (68%)10750.47Chi2
Furosemide58 (7.2%)47 (6.3%)1050.45Chi2
Urapidil182 (23%)190 (25%)3720.22Chi2
Table
Table 6. Neurological evaluation.
Table 6. Neurological evaluation.
Pandemic (n = 9544)Pre-Pandemic (n = 9378)npTest
Localized weakness3589 (38%)3564 (38%)71530.57Chi2
Left-sided weakness1832 (19%)1891 (20%)37230.094Chi2
Right-sided weakness1732 (18%)1753 (19%)34850.33Chi2
Quadriplegia51 (0.53%)51 (0.54%)1020.93Chi2
Isolated left lower extremity weakness102 (1%)90 (1%)1920.45Chi2
Isolated right lower extremity weakness111 (1%)98 (1%)2090.44Chi2
Isolated left upper extremity weakness354 (4%)316 (3%)6700.2Chi2
Isolated right upper extremity weakness392 (4%)433 (5%)8250.086Chi2
Anisocoria92 (0.96%)109 (1.2%)2010.18Chi2
Bilateral miosis522 (5.5%)431 (4.6%)953<0.01Chi2
Pupillary light reflex absent151 (1.7%)127 (1.5%)2780.19Chi2
Aphasia3152 (33%)3002 (32%)61540.14Chi2
Convulsions296 (3.1%)275 (2.9%)5710.5Chi2
Meningeal signs142 (1.6%)140 (1.6%)2820.94Chi2
Vomiting596 (6.5%)534 (6%)11300.13Chi2
Syncope1482 (16%)1602 (18%)3084<0.01Chi2
Table
Table 7. Prehospital time intervals.
Table 7. Prehospital time intervals.
Pandemic (n = 9544)Pre-Pandemic (n = 9378)np
MeanMedian [Q25–75]MeanMedian [Q25–75]
Time from call to contact17.2 (±18.1)14.0 [9.00; 20.0]12.9 (±7.56)11.0 [8.00; 16.0]18,920<0.001
Time from contact to hospital admission52.2 (±30.8)45.0 [33.0; 63.0]41.4 (±18.6)38.0 [28.0; 51.0]18,641<0.001
Time from call to hospital admission69.9 (±38.4)61.0 [46.0; 83.0]54.7 (±21.7)51.0 [39.0; 66.0]18,641<0.001
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Blek, N.; Szarpak, L.; Ladny, J.R. Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Prehospital Management of Patients with Suspected Acute Stroke: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 4769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084769

AMA Style

Blek N, Szarpak L, Ladny JR. Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Prehospital Management of Patients with Suspected Acute Stroke: A Retrospective Cohort Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(8):4769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084769

Chicago/Turabian Style

Blek, Natasza, Lukasz Szarpak, and Jerzy Robert Ladny. 2022. "Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Prehospital Management of Patients with Suspected Acute Stroke: A Retrospective Cohort Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 8: 4769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084769

APA Style

Blek, N., Szarpak, L., & Ladny, J. R. (2022). Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Prehospital Management of Patients with Suspected Acute Stroke: A Retrospective Cohort Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(8), 4769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084769

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop