Is prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction warranted in the urban setting? The case against.
This paper forms the second part of the debate on prehospital thrombolysis (PHT). It is argued that large scale studies have failed to show a benefit for PHT, even when the time saved over conventional treatment was considerably greater than would be the case in the UK urban setting. In practice, a relatively small proportion of the total population receiving thrombolysis would receive PHT. Other strategies to reduce time to thrombolysis can benefit all patients and are likely to be more cost effective and safer.
Accident and Emergency Department, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. danielstephenson@yahoo.com
D T
DT
Stephenson
J W
JW
Wardrope
S W
SW
Goodacre
D004632:Emergency Medical Services; D004739:England; D006801:Humans; D009203:Myocardial Infarction / Q000188:drug therapy*; D015912:Thrombolytic Therapy; D013995:Time; D019037:Urban Health Services