Abstract P32: Advanced Practice Provider-Based Acute Stroke Protocol Performs Well Compared to a Resident-Based Protocol

Abstract

Introduction: The administration of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IVtPA) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is typically done by neurology resident physicians at academic stroke centers. We sought to compare the performance of an advanced practice provider (APP)-based IVtPA protocol to a resident-based protocol. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of Emergency Room (ER) acute stroke codes from January 1, 2018 to January 1, 2019 that received AIS reperfusion therapy, including IVtPA or mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Inpatient AIS were excluded. During this timeframe, 5 acute stroke-trained nurse practitioners covered the daytime shifts for acute stroke codes on a rotating basis (during the hours of 7:00 am -4:00 pm, Monday through Friday). The neurology residents continued to cover all other stroke code shifts. We collected data on baseline demographics, initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), door to needle (DTN) time, and door to groin puncture (DTG) time. Statistical analyses were performed using JMP software package (version 14). All tests were 2-sided, and a P value was considered significant at <0.05. Results: Among 322 AIS case who received acute reperfusion therapy, 133 (41.4%) received IVtPA, 200 (62.3%) received MT, and 11 (3.4%) received both. Among the 133 IVtPA patients, there was no difference in age (62.2 vs 59.9, p 0.56) or mean initial NIHSS (7.7 vs 8.2, p 0.75) when comparing the APP-based protocol to the resident-based protocol group, but patients seen by the APP were more likely to be male (78.3 vs 42.7%, p 0.0015). Compared to the resident-based protocol, the APP-based protocol had faster mean DTN times (38.9 vs 54.7 minutes, p 0.0374) and were more likely to have final diagnosis of stroke (95.7% vs 70%, p 0.0034). Among the 200 MT patients, the DTG time showed a trend for faster times for the APP-based protocol, although this was not significant (60.5 vs 76.5, p 0.0083). Conclusion: At our academic comprehensive stroke center, APP driven acute stroke code protocols perform as well as resident-based protocols in terms of time to reperfusion therapy.