• Kyu Chul Shin, Hye Sun Lee, Joon Min Park, Hyun-Chel Joo, Young-Guk Ko, Incheol Park, and Min Joung Kim.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
• Yonsei Med. J. 2016 May 1; 57 (3): 626634626-34.

PurposeAcute aortic diseases, such as aortic dissection and aortic aneurysm, can be life-threatening vascular conditions. In this study, we compared outcomes before and after the implementation of a critical pathway (CP) for patients with acute aortic disease at the emergency department (ED).Materials And MethodsThis was a retrospective observational cohort study. The CP was composed of two phases: PRE-AORTA for early diagnosis and AORTA for prompt treatment. We compared patients who were diagnosed with acute aortic disease between pre-period (January 2010 to December 2011) and post-period (July 2012 to June 2014).ResultsNinety-four and 104 patients were diagnosed with acute aortic disease in the pre- and post-periods, respectively. After the implementation of the CP, 38.7% of acute aortic disease cases were diagnosed via PRE-AORTA. The door-to-CT time was reduced more in PRE-AORTA-activated patients [71.0 (61.0, 115.0) min vs. 113.0 (56.0, 170.5) min; p=0.026]. During the post-period, more patients received emergency intervention than during the pre-period (22.3% vs. 36.5%; p=0.029). Time until emergency intervention was reduced in patients, who visited the ED directly, from 378.0 (302.0, 489.0) min in the pre-period to 200.0 (170.0, 299.0) min in the post-period (p=0.001). The number of patients who died in the ED declined from 11 to 4 from the pre-period to the post-period. Hospital mortality decreased from 26.6% to 14.4% in the post-period (p=0.033).ConclusionAfter the implementation of a CP for patients with acute aortic disease, more patients received emergency intervention within a shorter time, resulting in improved hospital mortality.

39 keywords...

hide…