Simulation-based training improves process times in acute stroke care (STREAM)
Ferdinand O Bohmann,Katharina Gruber,Natalia Kurka,Laurent M Willems,Eva Herrmann,Richard du Mesnil de Rochemont,Peter Scholz,Heike Rai,Philipp Zickler,Michael Ertl,Ansgar Berlis,Sven Poli,Annerose Mengel,Peter Ringleb,Simon Nagel,Johannes Pfaff,Frank A Wollenweber,Lars Kellert,Moriz Herzberg,Luzie Koehler,Karl Georg Haeusler,Anna Alegiani,Charlotte Schubert,Caspar Brekenfeld,Christopher E J Doppler,Özgür A Onur,Christoph Kabbasch,Tanja Manser,Helmuth Steinmetz,Waltraud Pfeilschifter,STREAM Trial investigators
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.15093
Abstract:Background: The objective of the STREAM Trial was to evaluate the effect of simulation training on process times in acute stroke care. Methods: The multicenter prospective interventional STREAM Trial was conducted between 10/2017 and 04/2019 at seven tertiary care neurocenters in Germany with a pre- and post-interventional observation phase. We recorded patient characteristics, acute stroke care process times, stroke team composition and simulation experience for consecutive direct-to-center patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular therapy (EVT). The intervention consisted of a composite intervention centered around stroke-specific in situ simulation training. Primary outcome measure was the 'door-to-needle' time (DTN) for IVT. Secondary outcome measures included process times of EVT and measures taken to streamline the pre-existing treatment algorithm. Results: The effect of the STREAM intervention on the process times of all acute stroke operations was neutral. However, secondary analyses showed a DTN reduction of 5 min from 38 min pre-intervention (interquartile range [IQR] 25-43 min) to 33 min (IQR 23-39 min, p = 0.03) post-intervention achieved by simulation-experienced stroke teams. Concerning EVT, we found significantly shorter door-to-groin times in patients who were treated by teams with simulation experience as compared to simulation-naive teams in the post-interventional phase (-21 min, simulation-naive: 95 min, IQR 69-111 vs. simulation-experienced: 74 min, IQR 51-92, p = 0.04). Conclusion: An intervention combining workflow refinement and simulation-based stroke team training has the potential to improve process times in acute stroke care.