Informing Utstein-style reporting guidelines for prehospital thrombolysis: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rural Australians with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) face higher mortality rates due to limited access to specialised cardiac services. Paramedic-administered prehospital thrombolysis (PHT) has emerged as an alternative to primary percutaneous intervention (pPCI) for patients facing barriers or delays to cardiac care. There is variability in PHT practices among Australian ambulance services, lacking standardised definitions and outcome measures. The aim of this scoping review was to identify quality indicators and influencing factors associated with outcomes for patients receiving PHT. METHODS: A systematic search of literature in SCOPUS and Academic Search Complete, CINAHL and Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition databases via EBSCO (Health) was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Peer-reviewed studies from the past decade were screened using search criteria relevant to prehospital thrombolysis and quality indicators. Data extraction was performed and themed using five domains from the Utstein-style template commonly known for standardised prehospital cardiac arrest reporting. RESULTS: After removing duplicates, the search yielded 3596 articles with 28 empirical studies meeting inclusion criteria for the review. These were primarily retrospective cohort studies performed in Australia, Canada and the United States. The scoping review identified 24 clinical quality indicators and factors related to Emergency Medical Service (EMS) systems, AMI recognition and ambulance dispatch, patient variables, PHT processes and patient outcomes. These findings correlate to the Donabedian structure-process-outcome quality of care model and have utility to inform future PHT reporting guidelines for jurisdictional ambulance services. CONCLUSIONS: Given the variability in prehospital practice across Australian ambulance services, standardised reporting on quality indicators for PHT is needed. The Utstein-style template used to report data on pre-hospital cardiac arrest, trauma and airway management could be used for quality improvement in PHT. This review presents 24 quality indicators representing system, recognition and response, patient, process, and outcomes related to PHT. These results could be used to inform a future Delphi study and Utstein-like reporting guideline for prehospital thrombolysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".