Assessment of chest pain onset and out-of-hospital delay using standardized interview questions: the REACT Pilot Study. Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment (REACT) Study Group

OBJECTIVE: To determine the consistency of responses to a standardized 2-part key question (Key-Q) about acute symptom onset in patients presenting with chest pain when measured using alternative questions (Qs) about symptom perception and decisions to seek treatment. METHODS: A structured patient interview was performed at 3 university teaching hospitals and 1 community hospital. Convenience samples of adult patients presenting to these EDs with chest pain were asked specific questions related to their symptoms and recognition of illness. Information obtained included the 2-part Key-Q: What are the symptoms that brought you here today? and When did those symptoms start? The alternative Qs (in order of use) were as follows: Q1 = When did your very first symptom or sensation begin? ; Q2 = When did your symptoms lead you to think something was wrong or that you were ill? ; Q3 = When did your symptoms become serious enough for you to seek medical care? ; and Q4 = When did you actually call 9-1-1/emergency medical services (EMS) or go to the hospital? The documented ED arrival time, demographic variables, and whether the patient arrived by ambulance were obtained from the medical record. Patients also were queried regarding potential barriers to seeking medical care and their cardiac risk factors. RESULTS: Of the 135 patients surveyed, 9 were unsure of the date and time of symptom onset. For the 126 patients with analyzable data, the mean (+/- SD) patient age was 62 +/- 16 years, and 59% were male. The general sequence of events reported from acute symptom onset until hospital care was Q1/Key-Q--\u3eQ2--\u3eQ3--\u3eQ4--\u3eED arrival. The median differences and interquartile ranges (IQRs) in minutes between Q times and the Key-Q response were: Q1 = 0 (0-0); Q2 = 30 (0-210); Q3 = 140 (30-720); Q4 = 265 (90-1,215); and ED arrival = 340 (120-1,230). The interval from the Key-Q response until calling 9-1-1/EMS or going to the hospital was shorter for those who used an ambulance and for those who did not consult a physician first. The interval from the Key-Q response until considering symptoms to be serious was shorter for those with a family history of heart disease, but longer for non-white patients. CONCLUSION: The Key-Q elicited a response recalled near the time of first symptoms and generally before the patient had concluded something was wrong or that he or she was ill. Measurement of the out-of-hospital delay in chest pain patients using the Key-Q appears promising

National Variation in EMS Response and Antiepileptic Medication Administration for Children with Seizures in the Prehospital Setting

Background and Objectives: Prehospital Advanced Life Support (ALS) is important to improve patient outcomes in children with seizures, yet data is limited regarding national prehospital variation in ALS response for these children. We aimed to determine the variation in ALS response and prehospital administration of antiepileptic medication for children with seizures across the United States.Methods: We analyzed children <19 years with 9-1-1 dispatch codes for seizure in the 2019 National Emergency Medical Services Information System dataset. We defined ALS response as ALS-paramedic, ALS-Advanced Emergency Medical Technician, or ALS-intermediate responses. We conducted regression analyses to identify associations between ALS response (primary outcome), antiepileptic administration (secondary outcome) and age, gender, location, and US census regions.Results: Of 147,821 pediatric calls for seizures, 88% received ALS responses. Receipt of ALS response was associated with urbanicity, with wilderness (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.44, 0.39-0.49) and rural (aOR 0.80, 0.75-0.84) locations less likely to have ALS responses than urban areas. Of 129,733 emergency medical service (EMS) activations with an ALS responder’s impression of seizure, antiepileptic medications were administered in 9%. Medication administration was independently associated with age (aOR 1.008, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.005-1.010) and gender (aOR 1.22, 95%CI 1.18-1.27), with females receiving medications more than males. Of the 11,698 children who received antiepileptic medications, midazolam was the most commonly used (83%).Conclusion: The majority of children in the US receive ALS responses for seizures. Although medications are infrequently administered, the majority who received medications had midazolam given, which is the current standard of care. Further research should determine the proportion of children who are continuing to seize upon EMS arrival and would most benefit from immediate treatment. [West J Emerg Med. 2023;24(4)1–9.

Patients with chest pain calling 9-1-1 or self-transporting to reach definitive care: which mode is quicker

OBJECTIVE: We examined differences in transport times for patients with chest pain who used private transportation compared with patients who used emergency medical services (EMS) to reach definitive medical care. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study with data used from the Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment (REACT) trial conducted in 20 US cities. Elapsed time to care was examined through the use of (1) decision to seek care to initial care (emergency department [ED] arrival versus EMS arrival on scene [n=1209]); (2) decision to ED arrival (for both groups [n=2388]); (3) time to thrombolytic therapy once admitted to the ED (for both groups [n=309]); and (4) decision to seek care to thrombolytic therapy (n=276). Elapsed travel times were ranked within Zip Codes and submitted to a nested analysis of variance model to determine if elapsed times were different between modes of transport. RESULTS: Private transportation (35 minutes) resulted in faster ED arrival than using EMS (39 minutes, P =.0014). However, if one considers EMS treatment to be initial care, calling 9-1-1 (6 minutes) resulted in much quicker care than patients using private transportation to the ED (32 minutes, P \u3c.001). Transport by EMS resulted in a shorter elapsed time to thrombolytic administration compared with patients using private transportation when considering ED door-to-needle time (32 vs 49 minutes, respectively [P \u3c.001]) or time from decision to seek care until administration of thrombolytic therapy (75 vs 92 minutes, respectively, [P =.042]). CONCLUSIONS: Although private transportation results in a faster trip to the ED, quicker care is obtained with the use of EMS

Demographic, belief, and situational factors influencing the decision to utilize emergency medical services among chest pain patients. Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment (REACT) study

BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence suggests that people value emergency medical services (EMS) but that they may not use the service when experiencing chest pain. This study evaluates this phenomenon and the factors associated with the failure to use EMS during a potential cardiac event. METHODS AND RESULTS: Baseline data were gathered from a randomized, controlled community trial (REACT) that was conducted in 20 US communities. A random-digit-dial survey documented bystander intentions to use EMS for cardiac symptoms in each community. An emergency department surveillance system documented the mode of transport among chest pain patients in each community and collected ancillary data, including situational factors surrounding the chest pain event. Logistic regression identified factors associated with failure to use EMS. A total of 962 community members responded to the phone survey, and data were collected on 875 chest pain emergency department arrivals. The mean proportion of community members intending to use EMS during a witnessed cardiac event was 89%; the mean proportion of patients observed using the service was 23%, with significant geographic differences (range, 10% to 48% use). After controlling for covariates, non-EMS users were more likely to try antacids/aspirin and call a doctor and were less likely to subscribe to (or participate in) an EMS prepayment plan. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that indecision, self-treatment, physician contact, and financial concerns may undermine a chest pain patient\u27s intention to use EMS

Missed opportunities to impact fast response to AMI symptoms

The potential for reducing cardiovascular disease mortality rates lies both in prevention and treatment. The earlier treatment is administered, the greater the benefit. Thus, duration of time from onset of symptoms of acute myocardial infarction to administration of treatment is important. One major factor contributing to failure to receive efficacious therapy is the delay time from acute myocardial infarction (AMI) symptom onset to hospital arrival. This paper examines the relationship of several factors with regard to intentions to seek care promptly for symptoms of AMI. A random-digit dialed telephone survey (n = 1294) was conducted in 20 communities located in 10 states. People who said they would wait until they were very sure that symptoms were a heart attack were older, reported their insurance did not pay for ambulance services, and reported less confidence in knowing signs and symptoms in themselves. When acknowledging symptoms of a heart attack, African-Americans and people with more than a high school education reported intention to act quickly. No measures of personal health history, nor interaction with primary care physicians or cardiologists were significantly related to intention to act fast. The study confirms the importance of attribution and perceived self-confidence in symptom recognition in care seeking. The lack of significant role of health history (i.e. those with chronic conditions or risk factors) and clinician contact highlights missed opportunities for health care providers to educate and encourage patients about their risk and appropriate action

Age and sex differences in presentation of symptoms among patients with acute coronary disease: the REACT Trial. Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment

BACKGROUND: There are few data on possible age and sex differences in presentation of symptoms for patients with acute coronary disease. OBJECTIVE: To investigate demographic differences in presentation of symptoms at the time of hospital presentation for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and unstable angina. METHODS: The medical records of patients who presented with chest pain and who also had diagnoses of AMI (n = 889) or unstable angina (n = 893) on discharge from 43 hospitals were reviewed as part of data collection activities of the Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment trial based in 10 pair-matched communities throughout the USA. RESULTS: Dyspnea (49%), arm pain (46%), sweating (35%), and nausea (33%) were commonly reported by men and women of all ages in addition to the presenting complaint of chest pain. After we had controlled for various characteristics through regression modeling, older persons with AMI were significantly less likely than were younger persons to complain of arm pain and sweating, and men were significantly less likely to report vomiting than were women. Among persons with unstable angina, arm pain and sweating were reported significantly less often by elderly patients. Nausea and back, neck, and jaw pain were more common complaints of women. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study suggest that there are differences between symptoms at presentation of men and women, and those in various age groups, hospitalized with acute coronary disease. Clinicians should be aware of these differences when diagnosing and managing patients suspected to have coronary heart disease