Evidence Hub

A randomized controlled trial to reduce prehospital delay time in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS)

Mooney M, McKee G, Fealy G, O' Brien F, O'Donnell S, Moser D

The Journal of emergency medicine, 2014

1,944 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The literature suggests that people delay too long prior to attending emergency departments with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) symptoms. This delay is referred to as prehospital delay. Patient decision delay contributes most significantly to prehospital delay.

OBJECTIVES: Using a randomized controlled trial, we tested an educational intervention to reduce patient prehospital delay in ACS and promote appropriate responses to symptoms.

METHODS: Eligible patients who were admitted across five emergency departments (EDs) in Dublin were recruited to the study (n = 1944; control: 972, intervention: 972).

RESULTS: Median baseline prehospital delay times did not differ significantly between the groups at baseline (Mann-Whitney U, p = 0.34) (CONTROL: 4.28 h, 25(th) percentile = 1.71, 75(th) percentile = 17.37; Intervention 3.96 h, 25(th) percentile = 1.53, 75(th) percentile = 18.51). Both groups received usual in-hospital care. In addition, patients randomized to the intervention group received a 40-min individualized education session using motivational techniques. This was reinforced 1 month later by telephone. Of the 1944, 314 (16.2%) were readmitted with ACS symptoms: 177 (18.2%) and 137 (14.1%) of the intervention and control groups, respectively. Prehospital delay times were again measured. Median delay time was significantly lower in the intervention compared to the control group (1.7 h vs. 7.1 h; p ≤ 0.001). Appropriately, those in the intervention group reported…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 1,944 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free