Presentation outside office hours does not negatively influence treatment times for reperfusion therapy for acute ischemic stroke

A. E. Groot, H. de Bruin, T. T.M. Nguyen, M. Kappelhof, F. de Beer, M. C. Visser, C. P. Zwetsloot, P. H.A. Halkes, J. de Kruijk, W. D.M. van der Meulen, T. C. van der Ree, V. I.H. Kwa, S. M. van Schaik, L. Hani, R. van den Berg, M. E.S. Sprengers, S. D. Roosendaal, B. J. Emmer, P. J. Nederkoorn, C. B.L.M. MajoieY. B.W.E.M. Roos, J. M. Coutinho*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review


Background: Treatment outside office hours has been associated with increased workflow times for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Limited data suggest that this “off-hours effect” also exists for endovascular treatment (EVT). We investigated this phenomenon in a well-organized acute stroke care region in the Netherlands. Methods: Retrospective, observational cohort study of consecutive patients with AIS who received reperfusion therapy in the Greater Amsterdam Area, consisting of 14 primary stroke centers and 1 comprehensive stroke center (IVT: 2009–2015, EVT: 2014–2017). Office hours were defined as presentation during weekdays between 8 AM and 5 PM, excluding National Festive days. Primary outcome was door-to-treatment time (door-to-needle [DNT] for IVT, door-to-groin [DGT] for EVT). For DGT, we used the door time of the first hospital. Other outcomes were in-hospital mortality, modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). We performed multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses and used multiple imputation to account for missing values. Results: In total, 59% (2450/4161) and 61% (239/395) of patients treated with IVT and EVT, respectively, presented outside office hours. Median DNT was minimally longer outside office hours (32 vs. 30 min, p = 0.024, adjusted difference 2.5 min, 95% CI 0.7–4.2). Presentation outside office hours was not associated with a longer DGT (median 130 min for both groups, adjusted difference 7.0 min, 95% CI − 4.2 to 18.1). Clinical outcome and sICH rate also did not differ. Conclusion: Presentation outside office hours did not lead to clinically relevant treatment delays for reperfusion therapy in patients with AIS.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)133-139
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Neurology
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2021

Cite this