Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 44, Issue 6 , Pages 577-585, December 2004

Emergency department crowding and thrombolysis delays in acute myocardial infarction

From the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Schull, Vermeulen, Morrison); the Clinical Epidemiology Unit (Schull) and Department of Emergency Services (Schull, Morrison), Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; the Department of Medicine (Schull, Morrison) and the Division of Cardiology (Daly), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and the Faculty of Medicine, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada (Slaughter)

Received 9 March 2004; received in revised form 11 May 2004; accepted 13 May 2004. published online 28 October 2004.

See editorial, p. 586.

Study objective

We estimate the effect of emergency department (ED) crowding on door-to-needle time for patients given intravenous thrombolysis for suspected acute myocardial infarction.

Methods

This was a retrospective observational study of patients thrombolyzed in the ED for suspected acute myocardial infarction in 1998 to 2000 in 25 community and teaching hospital EDs in Ontario. EDs located close together and sharing a common ambulance diversion system were grouped into networks consisting of 2 to 5 hospitals each. At patient registration in an ED, the ambulance diversion status of all EDs in the network was determined. Network crowding was calculated as the percentage of EDs that were diverting ambulances on patient registration, categorized as none (0%), moderate (<60%), and high (≥60%). Door-to-needle time was defined as time from ED registration to drug administration. Multivariable quantile regression and logistic regression were carried out; covariates included age, sex, ECG characteristics, previous acute myocardial infarction, vital signs, time of presentation, and hospital type.

Results

A total of 3,452 thrombolysis patients were included: mean age was 62.9 years, and 73% were male patients. Overall median door-to-needle time was 43 minutes (interquartile ratio 27 to 80). Median door-to-needle time was 40, 45, and 47 minutes in conditions of none, moderate, and high network crowding, respectively (P<.001). The adjusted odds ratios for door-to-needle time delay (>30 minutes) and major delay (>60 minutes) were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 1.79) and 1.40 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.75), respectively, for high network crowding compared with none, and 1.21 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.63) and 1.06 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.29), respectively, for moderate crowding compared with none. In multivariate analyses, moderate and high crowding conditions were associated with increased median door-to-needle time (3.0 minutes [95% CI 0.1 to 6.0] and 5.8 minutes [95% CI 2.7 to 9.0], respectively).

Conclusion

ED crowding is associated with increased door-to-needle times for patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction and may represent a barrier to improving cardiac care in EDs.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Author contributions: MJS originated the hypothesis, designed the study, and had main responsibility for interpreting the results and writing the manuscript. MV helped design the study, conducted data analyses, and helped interpret the results and write the manuscript. GS collected data, organized a database, conducted data analyses, and edited the manuscript. LM helped design the study, interpret the results, and edit the manuscript. PD provided the MACSTRAK data and helped design the analysis, interpret the data, and edit the manuscript. MJS takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.

 Supported by a grant from the Peter Lougheed Medical Research Foundation. The MACSTRAK Project is supported by Hoffmann-La Roche Canada. None of these organizations was involved in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; or the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.

 Dr. Schull has a Career Award from The Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

 Reprints not available from the authors.

PII: S0196-0644(04)00523-2

doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.05.004

Refers to erratum:

  • Corrections

    Annals of Emergency Medicine January 2005 (Vol. 45, Issue 1, Page 84)

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 44, Issue 6 , Pages 577-585, December 2004