• Prehosp Emerg Care · Jul 2013

    Multicenter Study

    Assessing the validity of the cincinnati prehospital stroke scale and the medic prehospital assessment for code stroke in an urban emergency medical services agency.

    • Jonathan R Studnek, Andrew Asimos, Jodi Dodds, and Doug Swanson.
    • NREMT-P, Mecklenburg EMS Agency, 4525 Statesville Road, Charlotte, NC 28269, USA. jonst@medic911.com
    • Prehosp Emerg Care. 2013 Jul 1;17(3):348-53.

    ObjectivesThe primary objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of two prehospital stroke screens in correctly classifying patients suspected of having a stroke. Secondarily, differences in the sensitivity and specificity of the two screening tools were assessed.MethodsWe performed a retrospective assessment of the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale (CPSS) and the Medic Prehospital Assessment for Code Stroke (Med PACS) between March 1, 2011, and September 30, 2011, in a single emergency medical services (EMS) agency with seven local hospitals all classified as stroke-capable. We obtained data for this analysis from the EMS electronic patient care reports (ePCRs) and the Get With The Guidelines(-)Stroke (GWTG-S) registries maintained by the two local health care systems by matching on patient identifiers. The Med PACS was developed specifically for the EMS agency under study by a local team of neurologists, emergency physicians, and paramedics. All of the physical assessment elements of the CPSS were included within the Med PACS. Two additional physical assessment items, gaze and leg motor function, were included in the Med PACS. We classified patients as CPSS-positive or -negative and Med PACS-positive or -negative if any one of the physical assessment findings was present. We determined the presence of a hospital discharge diagnosis of stroke from GWTG-S. We calculated sensitivity and specificity with resultant 95% confidence intervals.ResultsWe enrolled 416 patients in this study, of whom 186 (44.7%) were diagnosed with a stroke. The Med PACS scale demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.742 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.672-0.802), while the sensitivity for the CPSS was 0.790 (95% CI 0.723-0.845). The sensitivity of the CPSS was significantly higher than that of the Med PACS, with a difference of 0.048 (95% CI 0.009-0.088; p = 0.011). The specificities of these two scales were low, Med PACS 0.326 (95% CI 0.267-0.391) vs. CPSS 0.239 (95% CI 0.187-0.300), and the specificity of the Med PACS was significantly higher compared with the CPSS, with a difference in specificity of 0.086 (95% CI 0.042-0.131), p < 0.001.ConclusionThe two stroke scales under study demonstrated low sensitivity and specificity, with each scale performing marginally better in one of the two metrics assessed.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…