Cited by 16Acute Myocardial Infarction ResearchCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationAcute Ischemic Stroke Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Determinants of pre-hospital pharmacological intervention and its association with outcome in acute myocardial infarction

Open access
Strandmark, Rasmus, Herlitz, Johan, Axelsson, Christer, Claesson, Andreas, Bremer, Anders, Karlsson, Thomas, Jimenez-Herrera, Maria, Ravn-Fischer, Annica·2015·Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was a) To identify predictors of the use of aspirin in the pre-hospital setting in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and b) To analyze whether the use of any of the recommended medications was associated with outcome. METHODS: All patients with a final diagnosis of AMI, transported by the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and admitted to the coronary care unit at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden, in 2009-2011, were included. RESULTS: 1,726 patients were included. 58 % received aspirin by the EMS. Ischemic heart disease (IHD) was suspected in 84 %. Among patients who did not receive aspirin IHD was still suspected in 67 %. Among patients in whom IHD was suspected, and who were not on chronic treatment with aspirin the following predicted its pre-hospital use: a) age (odds ratio 0.98; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.96-0.99); b) a history of myocardial infarction (2.21; 1.21-4.04); c) priority given by EMS (8.07; 5.42-12.02); d) ST-elevation on ECG on admission to hospital (2.22; 1.50-3.29); e) oxygen saturation > 90 % (3.37; 1.81-6.27). After adjusting for confounders among patients who were not on chronic aspirin, only nitroglycerin of the recommended medications was associated with a reduced risk of death within 1 year (hazard ratio 0.40; 95 % CI 0.23-0.70). CONCLUSIONS: Less than six out of ten patients with AMI received pre-hospital aspirin. Five clinical factors were independently associated with the pre-hospital administration of aspirin. This suggests that the decision to treat is multifactorial, and it highlights the lack of accurate diagnostic tools in the pre-hospital environment. Nitroglycerin was independently associated with a reduced risk of death, suggesting that we select the use for a low-risk cohort.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13049-015-0188-x

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prehospital aspirin administration by non-physician healthcare professionals to patients with suspected ACS/AMI is associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality compared with no prehospital aspirin administration (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.99).

    “Prehospital aspirin administration was associated with significantly lower 30-day and 1-year mortality compared with aspirin administration after arrival at hospital, with odds ratios (OR) of 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35–0.99) and 0.47 (95% CI 0.36–0.62), respectively.”

    From Prehospital Administration of Aspirin and Nitroglycerin for Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome ― A Systematic Review ― (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Results section reports lower one-year mortality among patients given prehospital aspirin than among those not given it (10.1% versus 18.6%; p = 0.009). Our copy does not report the claimed 30-day odds ratio of 0.59 (95% CI 0.35–0.99), nor does that result compare prehospital aspirin with aspirin given after hospital arrival. The Abstract’s Results also state that, after adjustment, only nitroglycerin was associated with reduced one-year mortality. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Prehospital nitroglycerin administration by non-physician healthcare professionals to patients with suspected ACS/AMI is associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality compared with no prehospital nitroglycerin administration (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.24-0.50).

    “Prehospital nitroglycerin administration was also associated with significantly lower 30-day and 1-year mortality compared with no prehospital administration (OR 0.34 [95% CI 0.24–0.50] and 0.38 [95% CI 0.29–0.50], respectively).”

    From Prehospital Administration of Aspirin and Nitroglycerin for Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome ― A Systematic Review ― (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Discussion (Predictors of death; page not provided) reports that prehospital nitrate use was associated with a reduced risk of death after adjustment for confounders. The cited paper does not report the claimed 30-day mortality OR of 0.34 (95% CI 0.24–0.50); its Abstract (Results; page not provided) instead reports a one-year hazard ratio of 0.40 (95% CI 0.23–0.70) among patients not on chronic aspirin. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Prehospital aspirin administration by non-physician healthcare professionals to patients with suspected ACS/AMI is associated with significantly lower 1-year mortality compared with no prehospital aspirin administration (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36-0.62).

    “Prehospital aspirin administration was associated with significantly lower 30-day and 1-year mortality compared with aspirin administration after arrival at hospital, with odds ratios (OR) of 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35–0.99) and 0.47 (95% CI 0.36–0.62), respectively.”

    From Prehospital Administration of Aspirin and Nitroglycerin for Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome ― A Systematic Review ― (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Results section reports lower one-year mortality among patients given prehospital aspirin than among those not given it (10.1% versus 18.6%; p = 0.009). It does not report the claimed odds ratio of 0.47, a comparison specifically with aspirin given after hospital arrival, or the cited 30-day result. The Results also state that, after adjustment for confounders, only nitroglycerin was associated with reduced one-year mortality. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Prehospital nitroglycerin administration by non-physician healthcare professionals to patients with suspected ACS/AMI is associated with significantly lower 1-year mortality compared with no prehospital nitroglycerin administration (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29-0.50).

    “Prehospital nitroglycerin administration was also associated with significantly lower 30-day and 1-year mortality compared with no prehospital administration (OR 0.34 [95% CI 0.24–0.50] and 0.38 [95% CI 0.29–0.50], respectively).”

    From Prehospital Administration of Aspirin and Nitroglycerin for Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome ― A Systematic Review ― (2022) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Discussion (‘Predictors of death’) reports that prehospital nitrate use was associated with a reduced risk of death after adjustment for confounders. But the reported one-year estimate is a hazard ratio of 0.40 (95% CI 0.23–0.70) among patients not on chronic aspirin, not the claimed odds ratio of 0.38 (95% CI 0.29–0.50). The retrieved passages do not report the cited 30-day estimate. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • No RCTs were identified for aspirin; all 3 included citations were non-RCTs.

    “No RCTs were identified, and all 3 identified citations were non-RCTs.15–17”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Strandmark, R., Herlitz, J., Axelsson, C., Claesson, A., Bremer, A., Karlsson, T., Jimenez-Herrera, M., & Ravn-Fischer, A.
Affiliations
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
  • University of Borås (SE)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
Corresponding author
Strandmark, Rasmus
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
Published
2015-12
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
105-105
ISSN
1757-7241 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2181525576
Cited by
16
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Keywords
acute myocardial infarction, prehospital care, aspirin, emergency medical services, nitroglycerin, predictors of medication use, ischemic heart disease, ST-segment elevation, oxygen saturation, one-year mortality
MeSH terms
Clopidogrel, Adrenergic beta-Antagonists, Aged, Analgesics, Opioid, Anticoagulants, Aspirin, Electrocardiography, Emergency Medical Services, Female, Nitroglycerin, Humans, Male, Morphine, Myocardial Infarction, Oxygen, Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors, Sweden, Ticlopidine, Vasodilator Agents, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review