A systematic review of stroke recognition instruments in hospital and prehospital settings

被引:59
|
作者
Rudd, Matthew [1 ,2 ]
Buck, Deborah [1 ]
Ford, Gary A. [3 ]
Price, Christopher I. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Newcastle Univ, Inst Neurosci, Stroke Res Grp, 3-4 Claremont Terrace, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE2 4AE, Tyne & Wear, England
[2] Wansbeck Gen Hosp, Northumbria Healthcare NHS Fdn Trust, Ashington, Northd, England
[3] Univ Oxford, Div Med Sci, Oxford, England
关键词
DIAGNOSTIC-ACCURACY; EMERGENCY; IDENTIFICATION; VALIDATION; SCALE; CARE; SENSITIVITY; OUTCOMES; SCORES; TOOL;
D O I
10.1136/emermed-2015-205197
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Background We undertook a systematic review of all published stroke identification instruments to describe their performance characteristics when used prospectively in any clinical setting. Methods A search strategy was applied to Medline and Embase for material published prior to 10 August 2015. Two authors independently screened titles, and abstracts as necessary. Data including clinical setting, reported sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value were extracted independently by two reviewers. Results 5622 references were screened by title and or abstract. 18 papers and 3 conference abstracts were included after full text review. 7 instruments were identified; Face Arm Speech Test (FAST), Recognition of Stroke in the Emergency Room (ROSIER), Los Angeles Prehospital Stroke Screen (LAPSS), Melbourne Ambulance Stroke Scale (MASS), Ontario Prehospital Stroke Screening tool (OPSS), Medic Prehospital Assessment for Code Stroke (MedPACS) and Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (CPSS). Cohorts varied between 50 and 1225 individuals, with 17.5% to 92% subsequently receiving a stroke diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity for the same instrument varied across clinical settings. Studies varied in terms of quality, scoring 1331/36 points using modified Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies checklist. There was considerable variation in the detail reported about patient demographics, characteristics of false-negative patients and service context. Prevalence of instrument detectable stroke varied between cohorts and over time. CPSS and the similar FAST test generally report the highest level of sensitivity, with more complex instruments such as LAPSS reporting higher specificity at the cost of lower detection rates. Conclusions Available data do not allow a strong recommendation to be made about the superiority of a stroke recognition instrument. Choice of instrument depends on intended purpose, and the consequences of a false-negative or false-positive result.
引用
收藏
页码:818 / 822
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Portable stroke detection devices: a systematic scoping review of prehospital applications
    Susmita Chennareddy
    Roshini Kalagara
    Colton Smith
    Stavros Matsoukas
    Abhiraj Bhimani
    John Liang
    Steven Shapiro
    Reade De Leacy
    Maxim Mokin
    Johanna T. Fifi
    J Mocco
    Christopher P. Kellner
    BMC Emergency Medicine, 22
  • [22] Portable stroke detection devices: a systematic scoping review of prehospital applications
    Chennareddy, Susmita
    Kalagara, Roshini
    Smith, Colton
    Matsoukas, Stavros
    Bhimani, Abhiraj
    Liang, John
    Shapiro, Steven
    De Leacy, Reade
    Mokin, Maxim
    Fifi, Johanna T.
    Mocco, J.
    Kellner, Christopher P.
    BMC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [23] Early stroke recognition: A prehospital stroke scale.
    Kothari, R
    Hall, K
    Broderick, J
    Brott, T
    STROKE, 1996, 27 (01) : 34 - 34
  • [24] Systematic Review of Hospital Readmissions in Stroke Patients
    Rao, Ahsan
    Barrow, Emily
    Vuik, Sabine
    Darzi, Ara
    Aylin, Paul
    STROKE RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2016, 2016
  • [25] Organization and costs of stroke care in outpatient settings: Systematic review
    Lucas-Noll, Jorgina
    Lleixa-Fortuno, Mar
    Queralt-Tomas, Lluisa
    Panisello-Tafalla, Anna
    Carles-Lavila, Misericordia
    Clua-Espuny, Jose L.
    ATENCION PRIMARIA, 2023, 55 (03):
  • [26] A comprehensive review of prehospital and in-hospital delay times in acute stroke care
    Evenson, K. R.
    Foraker, R. E.
    Morris, D. L.
    Rosamond, W. D.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STROKE, 2009, 4 (03) : 187 - 199
  • [27] A systematic review of the implementation outcome instruments used in healthcare settings and their measurement properties
    Boufkhed, Sabah
    Khadjesari, Zarnie
    Vitoratou, Silia
    Schatte, Laura
    Ziemann, Alexandra
    Daskalopoulou, Christina
    Uglik-Marucha, Eleonora
    Sevdalis, Nick
    Hull, Louise
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2019, 14
  • [28] Detecting Delirium: A Systematic Review of Identification Instruments for Non-ICU Settings
    Helfand, Benjamin K. I.
    D'Aquila, Madeline L.
    Tabloski, Patricia
    Erickson, Kristen
    Yue, Jirong
    Fong, Tamara G.
    Hshieh, Tammy T.
    Metzger, Eran D.
    Schmitt, Eva M.
    Boudreaux, Edwin D.
    Inouye, Sharon K.
    Jones, Richard N.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 2021, 69 (02) : 547 - 555
  • [29] Medication Errors in Saudi Arabian Hospital Settings: A Systematic Review
    Tobaiqy, Mansour
    MacLure, Katie
    MEDICINA-LITHUANIA, 2024, 60 (09):
  • [30] Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Inpatient Hospital Settings: A Systematic Review
    Wagner, Brittin
    Filice, Gregory A.
    Drekonja, Dimitri
    Greer, Nancy
    MacDonald, Roderick
    Rutks, Indulis
    Butler, Mary
    Wilt, Timothy J.
    INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2014, 35 (10): : 1209 - 1228