Abstract

Background and Purpose: With increasing use of endovascular therapy (EVT), physician attitudes towards intravenous alteplase in EVT-eligible patients may be changing. We explored current intravenous alteplase treatment practices of physicians and compared how their current treatment practice differs to an assumed ideal environment. Methods: In an international multidisciplinary survey, 607 physicians involved in acute stroke care were randomly assigned 10 of 22 case-scenarios, among them 14 with guideline-based recommendation for intravenous alteplase treatment, and asked how they would treat the patient: A) under their current local resources and B) under assumed ideal conditions, i.e. with no external restraints. Answer options were 1) anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy, 2) EVT, 3) EVT plus intravenous alteplase and 4) intravenous alteplase . Decision rates were calculated and clustered multivariable regression analysis was performed to determine adjusted measures of effect size. Results: Physicians favored intravenous alteplase in 82.0% (85.0% in level 1A scenarios and 76.5% in level 2B scenarios) under current local resources and in 79.3% (82.4% in level 1A scenarios and 73.7% in level 2B scenarios) under assumed ideal conditions (difference between current and ideal rates: p<0.001 respectively). This discrepancy was driven by physicians who favored EVT alone rather than EVT in combination with intravenous alteplase . Interventional neuroradiologists favored dropping intravenous alteplase most often (6.28%), and this specialty was associated with greater odds of dropping intravenous alteplase (OR 1.97, p=.041). Conclusion: Participants of this survey currently favoured treating slightly more patients with intravenous alteplase than they would like to treat in an ideal environment.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call