An updated review and meta-analysis of screening tools for stroke in the emergency room and prehospital setting

Abstract

BackgroundStroke screening tools should have good diagnostic performance for early diagnosis and a proper therapeutic plan. This paper describes and compares various diagnostic tools used to identify stroke in emergency departments and prehospital setting. MethodsThe meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched until December 31, 2021, for studies published on stroke screening tools. These tools' diagnostic performance (sensitivity and specificity) was pooled using a bivariate random-effects model whenever appropriate. ResultsEleven screening tools for stroke were identified in 29 different studies. The various tools had a wide range of sensitivity and specificity in different studies. In the meta-analysis, the Cincinnati Pre-hospital Stroke Scale, Face Arm Speech Test, and Recognition of Stroke in the Emergency Room (ROSIER) had sensitivity (between 83 and 91%) but poor specificity (all below 64%). When comparing all the tools, ROSIER had the highest sensitivity 90.5%. Los Angeles Pre-hospital Stroke Screen performed best in terms of specificity 88.7% but had low sensitivity (73.9%). Melbourne Ambulance Stroke Screen had a balanced performance in terms of sensitivity (86%) and specificity (76%). Sensitivity analysis consisting of only prospective studies showed a similar range of sensitivity and specificity. ConclusionAll the stroke screening tools included in the review were comparable, but no clear superior screening tool could be identified. Simple screening tools like Cincinnati prehospital stroke scale (CPSS) have similar performance compared to more complex tools.