Luiz Antonio Nasi

Influence of implementation of a chest pain unit on acute coronary syndrome outcomes.

BACKGROUND Different strategies have been described to increase promptness and efficiency in the assessment and management of patients with acute chest pain and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to evaluate the results of implementing a Chest Pain Unit (CPU) to assist patients with ACS, and to determine its impact on quality of health care indexes and clinical outcomes. METHODS A study was conducted with a prospective cohort of patients admitted to the ED with a chief complaint of acute chest pain or suspected ACS at two different time periods: before (n = 663) and after (n = 450) introducing a CPU as part of the ED. Quality-of-care indexes analyzed in this study were adherence to a critical pathway, length of hospital stay, and hospital mortality. RESULTS There was increased adherence to a critical pathway during the CPU period compared to the period with no designated CPU area, including compliance with prescribing aspirin, beta-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, and performing coronary angiography in high-risk patients. After adjustment to baseline characteristics, admissions to a CPU resulted in a 65% reduction in mortality (odds ratio 0.35; 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.88; p = 0.03). There was no difference in median length of hospital stay, 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 4-12) before CPU and 6 days (IQR 4-11) after introducing the CPU (p = 0.10). CONCLUSION In the scenario of a crowded ED, implementation of a CPU was associated with greater adherence to a critical pathway for patients with ACS, with a concomitant reduction in mortality rates.

Early mobilization in ischemic stroke: a pilot randomized trial of safety and feasibility in a public hospital in Brazil.

Background: The effect of early mobilization after acute stroke is still unclear, although some studies have suggested improvement in outcomes. We conducted a randomized, single-blind, controlled trial seeking to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and benefit of early mobilization for patients with acute ischemic stroke treated in a public teaching hospital in Southern Brazil. This report presents the feasibility and safety findings for the pilot phase of this trial. Methods: The primary outcomes were time to first mobilization, total duration of mobilization, complications during early mobilization, falls within 3 months, mortality within 3 months, and medical complications of immobility. We included adult patients with CT- or MRI-confirmed ischemic stroke within 48 h of symptom onset who were admitted from March to November 2012 to the acute vascular unit or general emergency unit of a large urban emergency department (ED) at the Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre. The severity of the neurological deficit on admission was assessed by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). The NIHSS and modified Rankin Scale (mRS, functional outcome) scores were assessed on day 14 or at discharge as well as at 3 months. Activities of daily living (ADL) were measured with the modified Barthel Index (mBI) at 3 months. Results: Thirty-seven patients (mean age 65 years, mean NIHSS score 11) were randomly allocated to an intervention group (IG) or a control group (CG). The IG received earlier (p = 0.001) and more frequent (p < 0.0001) mobilization than the CG. Of the 19 patients in the CG, only 5 (26%) underwent a physical therapy program during hospitalization. No complications (symptomatic hypotension or worsening of neurological symptoms) were observed in association with early mobilization. The rates of complications of immobility (pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, and deep vein thrombosis) and mortality were similar in the two groups. No statistically significant differences in functional independence, disability, or ADL (mBI ≥85) were observed between the groups at the 3-month follow-up. Conclusions: This pilot trial conducted at a public hospital in Brazil suggests that early mobilization after acute ischemic stroke is safe and feasible. Despite some challenges and limitations, early mobilization was successfully implemented, even in the setting of a large, complex ED, and without complications. Patients from the IG were mobilized much earlier than controls receiving the standard care provided in most Brazilian hospitals.

Abstract TP314: Comparison of Patient-centered Outcome Measures of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurements (ICHOM) Between Private and Public Healthcare System in Brazil

Introduction: An international experts panel was assembled to create a standard set of outcome measures for use in both low and high-income countries. Additionally, the panel intended to represent the most relevant outcomes for subsequent cost-effectiveness analysis. For implementing the tool, it was necessary to make it feasible in different healthcare systems. The objective of this study was to implement and compare the ICHOM outcome measures between two different stroke centers: a university public hospital and a private hospital. Methods: the medical data of all patients with stroke diagnosis consecutively admitted in the two hospitals were registered. ICHOM outcomes in the 3-month follow-up were measured by interviews in person, by phone or by e-mail, and the results were compared between the hospitals. Results: 90-day outcome measurements were available for 328 patients (169 in the private hospital and 159 in the public), corresponding to 87% of the patients admitted with stroke diagnosis in these hospitals. The mean age was 68 years in the private vs. 65 in the public, with a mean NIHSS of 7, and 90% had ischemic strokes (18% received IV thrombolysis in the private setting vs. 16% in the public). Public hospital inpatients had a greater number of comorbidities. The mortality rate was 14% in both hospitals, and functional independence (mRS 0-2) occurred in 51% of private setting patients and 39% of the public. The greater proportion of patients needing help for dressing or toileting, as well as having language issues, was in the public setting. Better outcomes were measured in the private hospital regarding the resumption of the social role (64% vs 40%), satisfaction with social activities (65% vs 57%) and good quality of life (66% vs 57%). In both hospitals, 34% had access to physiotherapy after hospital discharge. Conclusions: In patients with acute stroke from private and public hospitals the thrombolysis eligibility are similar, without increasing the mortality rates in the public setting. However, better functional outcomes were found in private patients, probably due to less comorbidities, better prevention and post-discharge rehabilitation care.