Paramedic recognition of posterior circulation stroke: a vignette and focus group study.

Shane Devlin, Gerard Bury
{"title":"Paramedic recognition of posterior circulation stroke: a vignette and focus group study.","authors":"Shane Devlin, Gerard Bury","doi":"10.29045/14784726.2023.9.8.2.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The main pre-hospital screening tool used for stroke in Ireland and the United Kingdom is the FAST (face, arms, speech, time) test. However, posterior circulation stroke (PCS) patients may be FAST negative on exam, presenting with sudden dizziness, headaches, visual problems, nausea and vomiting and balance/co-ordination problems. There is a lack of research into paramedic recognition of PCS, and this study sought to evaluate recognition rates among paramedics (Ps) and advanced paramedics (APs) in Ireland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional sequential exploratory design was chosen. An anonymous online survey was carried out, which informed focus group discussions. The survey contained six clinical vignettes, two of which were PCS presentations. Correct diagnosis, hospital destination and type of pre-alert were recorded. Focus groups were chaired by an independent moderator via Zoom. Recordings were transcribed and thematic analysis was carried out to create codes and themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and fifty-one staff members (91 Ps, 60 APs) completed the survey (response rate 40%). Of these, 67% did not recognise PCS symptoms and 77% did not choose to transport to a stroke unit. For those correctly suspecting PCS, 42% requested resus at the stroke unit and 18% requested resus in the local emergency department (ED). Two focus groups of four practitioners (n = 8) took place. Three main themes were created: (1) comfort levels with posterior stroke, with subthemes of recognition and personal experiences; (2) education, with subthemes of clinical practice guideline (CPG) issues and training issues; and (3) hospital factors, with subthemes of pre-alerting and disconnect between hospital and emergency medical services. Participants were uncomfortable with PCS recognition and bypassing their local ED. More training was called for, with a dedicated CPG. Relationships with hospital staff affected willingness to pre-alert.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this sample group, recognition of PCS and onward transfer to a stroke unit was low. Focus groups showed that practitioners were uncomfortable recognising PCS and bypassing a local ED without adequate training and a dedicated CPG. Relationships with hospital staff also affected pre-alert decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":72470,"journal":{"name":"British paramedic journal","volume":"8 2","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10477819/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British paramedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29045/14784726.2023.9.8.2.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The main pre-hospital screening tool used for stroke in Ireland and the United Kingdom is the FAST (face, arms, speech, time) test. However, posterior circulation stroke (PCS) patients may be FAST negative on exam, presenting with sudden dizziness, headaches, visual problems, nausea and vomiting and balance/co-ordination problems. There is a lack of research into paramedic recognition of PCS, and this study sought to evaluate recognition rates among paramedics (Ps) and advanced paramedics (APs) in Ireland.

Methods: A cross-sectional sequential exploratory design was chosen. An anonymous online survey was carried out, which informed focus group discussions. The survey contained six clinical vignettes, two of which were PCS presentations. Correct diagnosis, hospital destination and type of pre-alert were recorded. Focus groups were chaired by an independent moderator via Zoom. Recordings were transcribed and thematic analysis was carried out to create codes and themes.

Results: One hundred and fifty-one staff members (91 Ps, 60 APs) completed the survey (response rate 40%). Of these, 67% did not recognise PCS symptoms and 77% did not choose to transport to a stroke unit. For those correctly suspecting PCS, 42% requested resus at the stroke unit and 18% requested resus in the local emergency department (ED). Two focus groups of four practitioners (n = 8) took place. Three main themes were created: (1) comfort levels with posterior stroke, with subthemes of recognition and personal experiences; (2) education, with subthemes of clinical practice guideline (CPG) issues and training issues; and (3) hospital factors, with subthemes of pre-alerting and disconnect between hospital and emergency medical services. Participants were uncomfortable with PCS recognition and bypassing their local ED. More training was called for, with a dedicated CPG. Relationships with hospital staff affected willingness to pre-alert.

Conclusions: In this sample group, recognition of PCS and onward transfer to a stroke unit was low. Focus groups showed that practitioners were uncomfortable recognising PCS and bypassing a local ED without adequate training and a dedicated CPG. Relationships with hospital staff also affected pre-alert decisions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
辅助医务人员对后循环中风的识别:小故事和焦点小组研究。
导言:在爱尔兰和英国,院前脑卒中筛查的主要工具是 FAST(面部、手臂、语言、时间)测试。然而,后循环卒中(PCS)患者的检查结果可能为 FAST 阴性,表现为突然头晕、头痛、视力问题、恶心呕吐以及平衡/协调问题。目前缺乏对辅助医务人员识别 PCS 的研究,本研究旨在评估爱尔兰辅助医务人员(Ps)和高级辅助医务人员(APs)的识别率:方法:采用横断面顺序探索设计。研究采用了横断面顺序探索设计,进行了匿名在线调查,并为焦点小组讨论提供了信息。调查包含六个临床案例,其中两个是 PCS 演示。正确的诊断、住院目的地和预警报类型均被记录在案。焦点小组由一名独立主持人通过 Zoom 主持。对记录进行了转录,并进行了主题分析,以创建代码和主题:151 名工作人员(91 名 Ps,60 名 APs)完成了调查(回复率为 40%)。其中 67% 的人没有识别出 PCS 症状,77% 的人没有选择送往卒中单元。在正确怀疑 PCS 的患者中,42% 要求在卒中单元进行复苏,18% 要求在当地急诊科 (ED) 进行复苏。由四名从业人员(n = 8)组成的两个焦点小组进行了讨论。形成了三大主题:(1) 对后发卒中的舒适度,副主题为识别和个人经历;(2) 教育,副主题为临床实践指南(CPG)问题和培训问题;(3) 医院因素,副主题为预先警报和医院与急诊医疗服务脱节。与会者对 PCS 识别和绕过当地急诊室感到不安。他们呼吁开展更多培训,并制定专门的 CPG。与医院员工的关系影响了预先警报的意愿:在该样本组中,PCS 的识别率和转入卒中单元的比例较低。焦点小组讨论表明,如果没有足够的培训和专门的 CPG,医生很难识别 PCS 并绕过当地 ED。与医院员工的关系也影响了预警前的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A national perspective of ambulance clinicians' perceptions, experiences and decision-making processes when assessing older adults with a head injury: a mixed-methods study. A qualitative exploration of the views of paramedics regarding the use of dark humour. Chemsex: core knowledge for emergency medical service responders. Comparing telesimulation-based learning and e-learning as remote education delivery methods in pre-hospital practice. 'Endless variation on a theme': a document analysis of international and UK major trauma triage tools.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1