4.2 Article

Design, Application and Infield Validation of a Pre-Hospital Emergent Large Vessel Occlusion Screening Tool: Ventura Emergent Large Vessel Occlusion Score

Journal

JOURNAL OF STROKE & CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 728-734

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2018.11.014

Keywords

Acute ischemic stroke; emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO); endovascular treatment (EVT); pre-hospital screening tool

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The outcome of endovascular treatment for emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) is dependent on timely recanalization. To identify ELVO in the field, we present a simplified score, which has been applied and validated in the field by emergency medical services (EMS). Methods and Analysis: Ventura ELVO Scale (VES) comprise of 4 components: Eye Deviation, Aphasia, Neglect, and Obtundation with score range 0-4. The score of greater than or equal to 1 will be considered as ELVO positive. A positive VES along with positive Cincinnati scale prompts ELVO activation. EMS then notify to neurointervention protocol at the receiving stroke center. The performance of VES was evaluated retrospectively. For statistical analysis, SAS version 9.4 was used and Fisher's modelling was used for the comparative analysis. Results: Total 184 patients were included in the final analysis, 62 (33.7%) patients were called VES positive from the field. Out of 62, 36 (58%) patients had ELVO. The mean NIHSS on arrival was 16 in VES positive and 5 in VES negative patients. VES was 94.7% sensitive and 82.4% specific while the PPV and NPV of VES were 58.1% and 98.4%, respectively. It showed 84.9% accuracy. Conclusions: VES is an effective and simplified prehospital screening tool for detection of ELVO in the field. Its implementation can beat the target door to groin time to improve outcomes and in future it can be used for rerouting of ELVO patients to comprehensive stroke center.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available