Volume 10 — September 05, 2013
Emergency Medical Services Capacity for Prehospital Stroke Care in North Carolina
|Stroke Care Capacity Scores|
|0–3 Points||4–6 Points||7–9 Points||10–12 Points|
|Overall, no. of systems||0||30||60||8|
|Estimated annual patient volume, no. of systems|
|County population density,a no. of systems|
Figure 1. Emergency Medical Services (EMS) stroke care capacity scores for 98 EMS systems responding to survey, overall and by patient volume and county population density, North Carolina, 2012. No system scored 0 to 3 points. County population density was categorized as metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural as defined by the US Office of Management and Budget (17).
|Survey Measure||EMS System Changes From 2001 to 2012|
|Changed from No to Yes||Stayed at Yes||Stayed at No||Changed from Yes to No|
|4 Basic educational topics were covereda||18||29||14||9|
|Thrombolytic therapy was covered as an educational topicb||17||28||14||10|
|Validated scale or screening tool was usedb||50||16||3||0|
|Policy to advance notify hospital existed||20||50||0||0|
Figure 2. Changes in selected stroke care capacity measures from 2001 to 2012 among 70 Emergency Medical Services systems, North Carolina. The 70 systems participated in surveys administered in 2001 and 2012. Basic education topics were stroke risk factors, signs and symptoms, pathophysiology, and scale or screening tool. Not included in basic topics was thrombolytic therapy. One system did not answer the question on thrombolytic therapy, and one did not answer the question on use of validated scale or screening tool.
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions.