ABSTRACT
Superior hypogastric nerve block (SHNB) has potential to reduce pain following uterine artery embolization (UAE). However, existing studies are limited by design, sample size, or conflicting results. A systematic review of the literature was performed. Outcomes included technical success, time to complete SHNB, time under fluoroscopy, procedure time, time to recovery, needle repositioning, same-day discharge, readmission, pain, analgesic consumption, and adverse events. Of 15 included studies, the same-day discharge rate was 98.8%, and readmission rate was 6.9%. The mean pain score was 3.4 in patients who received SHNB compared to 4.3 among controls. Of patients who received SHNB, 46.7% did not require further pain medication. Major adverse events occurred in 0.4% of patients. Early clinical studies suggest that SHNB appears to reduce pain and analgesic consumption in patients undergoing UAE. Additional randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.
Subject(s)
Leiomyoma , Nerve Block , Uterine Artery Embolization , Uterine Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Uterine Artery Embolization/adverse effects , Uterine Artery Embolization/methods , Uterine Neoplasms/therapy , Leiomyoma/therapy , Nerve Block/adverse effects , Nerve Block/methods , Pain/etiology , Analgesics , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Emergency dispatchers represent the first point of contact for patients activating an acute stroke response. Accurate dispatcher stroke recognition is associated with faster emergency medical services response time; however, stroke is often unrecognized during initial emergency calls. Stroke screening tools such as the Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale have been shown to improve on-scene stroke recognition and thus have been proposed as a means to improve dispatcher accuracy. We conducted a systematic review of the accuracy of emergency dispatcher stroke recognition when employing stroke screening tools. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases to identify studies of dispatcher stroke recognition accuracy. Those that specifically reported dispatcher utilization of any validated stroke screening tools in isolation or in the context of a comprehensive screening algorithm such as the Medical Priority Dispatch System (MPDS) were potentially eligible. Studies that reported data sufficient for calculation of dispatcher sensitivity or positive predictive value (PPV) using a hospital-based stroke/transient ischemic attack diagnosis as the reference standard were included. Two independent reviewers determined study eligibility, assessed quality using the QUADAS 2 instrument, and abstracted data. RESULTS: We identified 1,413 potential studies; 54 underwent full text review. Three retrospective and 4 prospective cohort studies enrolling a total of 16,382 patients met the inclusion criteria. Stroke screening tools included MPDS (n = 4), Face Arm Speech Time (n = 2), and a novel screening algorithm developed after analysis of emergency calls for stroke (n = 1). Regardless of the screening tool employed, dispatcher stroke recognition sensitivity was suboptimal (5 studies, range 41-83%) as was the PPV (7 studies, range 42-68%). Primary study limitations included application of variable reference standards and questions regarding exclusion of subjects. No studies directly compared stroke screening algorithms and no studies specifically examined stroke recognition among potential candidates for acute stroke therapies. CONCLUSION: Even when utilizing a stroke screening tool, the accuracy of stroke recognition by emergency dispatchers was suboptimal. More research is needed to identify the causes of poor dispatcher stroke recognition and should focus on potential candidates for time-dependent stroke treatment.
