AT CRT 2017
WASHINGTON (FRONTLINE MEDICAL NEWS) – The interventional cardiology team at Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pa., reorganized their care for ST segment elevation MI (STEMI) in 2004 to improve their door-to-balloon angioplasty times. Their highly successful efforts soon streamlined the process, placing Geisinger in the top 10% nationally for low average door-to-balloon (DTB) times.
Then, Geisinger began to see their DTB times creep up.
After witnessing a 5- to 10-minute increase in DTB times for STEMI patients – whether picked up by ambulance, appearing in the emergency department (ED), or referred from neighboring hospitals – James Blankenship, MD , director of the division of cardiology, and fellow Geisinger researchers took on an institutional analysis, which was presented at CRT 2017 sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Institute at Washington Hospital Center.
Their analysis failed to identify a single explanation, but it did reinforce the importance of constantly reinvigorating processes, Dr. Blankenship said. And their analysis indicated that delays don’t necessarily translate into poorer outcomes.
One proposed explanation was that delays had been caused by an increased reliance on radial rather than femoral catheter access. Dr. Blankenship cited studies suggesting that radial access increases DTB times by 1 to 12 minutes. The proportion of percutaneous coronary interventions performed radially at Geisinger had risen from 2% to 85% over the time period that DTB times had risen.
“There is evidence of benefit from radial access, so even if it slows you down a few minutes, it may be worth doing,” Dr. Blankenship noted. However, when this variable was evaluated, the DTB times were, if anything, slightly faster with radial relative to femoral access.
Another theory was that the decision to provide fellows with a greater role in STEMI management had produced treatment delays. In the cath lab at Geisinger, the increased fellow participation “correlated perfectly” with the decline in DTB times, according to Dr. Blankenship. However, a close look at this variable failed to show any meaningful impact on DTB times.
Changes in process were also examined. For one example, a form must now be completed documenting airway assessment. However, Dr. Blankenship found that filling out this form only takes about a minute and could account for only a small part of the observed loss.
The most significant cause for the increased DTB times among STEMI patients presenting in the ED may well have been a 2012 change in the configuration of the hospital. Prior to 2012, the distance from the ED to the cath lab was less than 100 yards and a 1-minute walk. After the change in the configuration, the cath lab was approximately 7 minutes away, a change that “correlated somewhat” to a prolongation in DTB times.
Similarly, regional hospital STEMI referral patterns changed when a hospital in relatively close proximity opened a cath lab. Up until that time, most referrals had been a 5-minute helicopter transfer, according to Dr. Blankenship. Afterwards, some helicopter transfer times rose to 25 minutes.
Yet, no explanation seemed to be more important than simply ensuring that new staff understand and adhere to the processes. Recounting his experience with a “secret shopper” approach in which he called Geisinger posing as a referring physician to report a potential STEMI, he was disappointed to reach a staff member uncertain of the meaning of the term STEMI.
“STEMI systems need a lot of maintenance,” Dr. Blankenship said. He cautioned that staff changes are common and frequent, making it important to continually assess whether all the participants in delivering STEMI care understand their role.
Some published studies challenge the importance of small changes in DTB times as a predictor of STEMI survival, according to Dr. Blankenship, citing one national survey unable to link a reduction in DTB times with a change in in-hospital mortality ( N Engl J Med. 2013;369:901-09 ). However, he has been more convinced by those studies that do show a relationship. He cited one large study that found an 8% loss in the mortality benefit for each 10-minute delay in DTB ( Lancet. 2015;385:1114-22 ).
Rapid DTB times cannot be divorced from quality of care, Dr. Blankenship said. He cited an experience at one center in which an aggressive program for reducing DTB times led to an increase in mortality among false-positive patients. “It is okay to sacrifice time for quality.”
It was at the 2016 CRT meeting that Dr. Blankenship first provided data showing the decline in DTB times at his institution. At that time and prior to the more comprehensive evaluation of the reasons for the delay presented at this year’s meeting, he speculated that it may be just a question of fatigue from sustaining a rapid response posture over several years.
“My original observation, that after a while you just get tired, is probably still true,” he said.
