RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Barriers to intravenous (IV) tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) use in ischemic stroke include limited treatment experience of community physicians. Models of acute stroke care have been designed to address these limitations by providing community support. These include support by telephone or televideo, with or without subsequent transport to tertiary care centers. The authors describe the frequency, characteristics, and effect of community phone consultations to a 24/7 stroke "hotline" staffed by stroke physicians at an academic stroke center using such a model. METHODS: Twelve intervention hospitals participating in the INcreasing Stroke Treatment through Interventional behavior Change Tactics (INSTINCT) trial were provided a single-access number ("hotline") for expert consultation on tPA use. Experts consisted of stroke-trained physicians at an academic medical center. Hotline use was not mandated by the study protocol, nor was patient transfer required. Consultants were required to record all treatment questions in a Web-based log. All patients discussed over the hotline and/or treated with tPA in an INSTINCT hospital underwent multilevel chart review by trained nurse coordinators. Cases were linked to logged hotline calls, based on the time of treatment and the initial treating hospital. Physician adjudicators assessed appropriateness of tPA treatment, presence of deviation from standard guidelines, and treatment complications (intracranial hemorrhage [ICH], systemic hemorrhage, or death). RESULTS: Over 27 months, there were a total of 204 hotline calls regarding 116 patients. Ninety-one percent of calls were between 8 a.m. and midnight, and 77% of questions explored issues of eligibility for IV tPA, particularly for minor stroke or improving stroke (26%). A total of 243 patients were treated with IV tPA at the 12 intervention hospitals, 54 of which were following hotline consult. Seventy-six percent of hotline patients in whom tPA was recommended actually received tPA, while 2% of those in whom tPA was not recommended received the medication. There were no differences in protocol deviations (27.8% hotline group vs. 23.8% nonhotline group), incidence of symptomatic ICH (5.6% vs. 7.3%), or in-hospital mortality (5.6% vs. 13.2%). No medico-legal issues have been reported for any case in the study. CONCLUSIONS: Providing tPA decision-making support via telephone consult to community physicians is feasible and safe. Consultants may play a more prominent role in determining tPA ineligibility than acceptance. Future work should include a real-time survey of physician providers to ascertain such potential qualitative benefits of a stroke hotline.
