• Katelyn Butler, Christine Price, Kaitlin Rzasa, and Jazmyn LeMay.
• Department of Pharmacy, Morton Plant Hospital, Clearwater, Florida, United States. Electronic address: Katelyn.Butler@baycare.org.
• Am J Emerg Med. 2024 Oct 2; 86: 788278-82.

IntroductionIntravenous thrombolysis remains the primary treatment for acute ischemic stroke (AIS); however, administration is time sensitive. Teleneurology services have increased in popularity in recent years due to their ability to aid in triaging patients with neurological conditions. Teleneurology services were implemented at this comprehensive stroke center, in August 2023 to aid in streamlining the administration of tenecteplase in AIS patients. Currently, there are no studies assessing whether the implementation of teleneurology services at a comprehensive stroke center influences tenecteplase door-to-needle time. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the difference in door-to-needle times when tenecteplase is administered with versus without a teleneurology consult.MethodsThis was an institutional review board approved, retrospective cohort study conducted at a single comprehensive stroke center. Adult patients who presented to the emergency department between January 1st, 2022 and April 1st, 2023 were included if they received tenecteplase for the treatment of AIS. The primary outcome was door-to-needle time, defined as the moment the patient first enters the door of the emergency department to the moment the IV bolus of fibrinolytic is administered. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients with door-to-needle time within 45 min, neurological improvement at 24 h and discharge, and rate of hemorrhagic conversion.ResultsA total of 93 patients were included with 43 patients in the pre-teleneurology group and 50 patients in the post-teleneurology group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between both treatment groups. The median door-to-needle time was significantly reduced in the post-teleneurology group (49 minutes [IQR, 40.0-70.0] preintervention vs. 34.5 minutes [IQR, 23.8-43.0] postintervention, p < 0.01). For secondary outcomes, the post-teleneurology group had more patients with a door-to-needle time within 45 minutes (44.2% vs. 80.0%, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in early neurological improvement (58.1% vs. 54.0%), neurological improvement at discharge (60.5% vs. 62.0%), or hemorrhagic conversion (7.0% vs. 12.0%).ConclusionAmong patients who received tenecteplase for the treatment of AIS, there was a significant reduction in door-to-needle time with the use of teleneurology services. There was no difference in neurological improvement or rate of hemorrhagic conversion.Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

5 keywords...

hide…