| Source: |
Ali, M, Dekker, L, Daems, J D, Ali, M, van Zwet, E W, Steyerberg, E W, Duvekot, M H C, Nguyen, T T M, Moudrous, W, van de Wijdeven, R M, Visser, M C, de Laat, K F, Kerkhoff, H, van den Wijngaard, I R, Dippel, D W J, Roozenbeek, B, Kruyt, N D, Wermer, M J H, Aerden, L A M, Alblas, K C L, Bakker, J, van Belle, E, Bevelander, T, Bosch, J, Buijck, B, Dofferhoff-Vermeulen, T, van Doormaal, P J, Dorresteijn, K R I S, Duijndam, D, van Eijkelenburg, R P J, van Es, A C .... |
| Description: |
BACKGROUND: Differences in clinical presentation of acute ischemic stroke between men and women may affect prehospital identification of anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (aLVO). We assessed sex differences in diagnostic performance of 8 prehospital scales to detect aLVO. METHODS: We analyzed pooled individual patient data from 2 prospective cohort studies (LPSS [Leiden Prehospital Stroke Study] and PRESTO [Prehospital Triage of Patients With Suspected Stroke Study]) conducted in the Netherlands between 2018 and 2019, including consecutive patients ≥18 years suspected of acute stroke who presented within 6 hours after symptom onset. Ambulance paramedics assessed clinical items from 8 prehospital aLVO detection scales: Los Angeles Motor Scale, Rapid Arterial Occlusion Evaluation, Cincinnati Stroke Triage Assessment Tool, Cincinnati Prehospital Stroke Scale, Prehospital Acute Stroke Severity, gaze-face-arm-speech-time, Conveniently Grasped Field Assessment Stroke Triage, and Face-Arm-Speech-Time Plus Severe Arm or Leg Motor Deficit. We assessed the diagnostic performance of these scales for identifying aLVO at prespecified cut points for men and women. RESULTS: Of 2358 patients with suspected stroke (median age, 73 years; 47% women), 231 (10%) had aLVO (100/1114 [9%] women and 131/1244 [11%] men). The area under the curve of the scales ranged from 0.70 (95% CI, 0.65-0.75) to 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73-0.82) in women versus 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64-0.73) to 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71-0.79) in men. Positive predictive values ranged from 0.23 (95% CI, 0.20-0.27) to 0.29 (95% CI, 0.26-0.31) in women versus 0.29 (95% CI, 0.24-0.33) to 0.37 (95% CI, 0.32-0.43) in men. Negative predictive values were similar (0.95 [95% CI, 0.94-0.96] to 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97-0.98] in women versus 0.94 [95% CI, 0.93-0.95] to 0.96 [95% CI, 0.94-0.97] in men). Sensitivity of the scales was slightly higher in women than in men (0.53 [95% CI, 0.43-0.63] to 0.76 [95% CI, 0.68-0.84] versus 0.49 [95% CI, 0.40-0.57] to 0.63 [95% CI, 0.55-0.73]), whereas ... |