• Yi Te Tsai, RuoYu Li, Tun Jao, Chen Wen Fang, Yu Jen Hsiao, Chih Hung Tsai, and Kai Chieh Chang.
• Department of Neurology, National Taiwan University Hospital Yunlin Branch, Yunlin, Taiwan.
• J Formos Med Assoc. 2022 Jan 1; 121 (1 Pt 1): 187-192.

Background/PurposeFAST and Stroke-112 are two campaigns to reduce the emergency room arrival time of stroke patients. No study has compared the effectiveness of these campaigns. This study aimed to compare recalling capacity of people in these two campaigns.MethodsA prospective, open-label randomized study was conducted in 2019. Recall ability for the items of the two campaigns on the 5th and 30th days post-education was compared using non-parametric methods. Subject characteristics including age, education level, presence of stroke in co-residents, and habitual language were evaluated using multiple ordered logistic regression.ResultsThere were 202 participants in FAST group and 193 participants in Stroke-112 group who completed the study. No differences were observed between the two groups in recall ability, either on day 5 or day 30 after receiving education. For both campaigns, recall ability was better for signs in the face (FAST: 87.1%, Stroke-112: 86.5%) and the arm (FAST: 87.1%, Stroke-112: 88.1%) than for abnormality in speech (FAST: 78.7%, Stroke-112: 76.7%) on day 5. Recall ability on day 30 remained the same only for the arm item (FAST: 86.1%, Stroke-112: 88.6%). The recall ability was correlated to education level equal or more than 7 years in FAST group, and was inversely correlated to age and being a stroke patient in Stroke-112 group.ConclusionWe found no difference in recall ability between the 2 campaigns. Education level was associated with recallability of FAST, and age and stroke history were associated with recallability of Stroke-112.Copyright © 2021 Formosan Medical Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

13 keywords...

hide…