ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A1392 STROKE RECOGNITION AND DISPATCH PRIORITY IN AN EMERGENCY MEDICAL DISPATCH CENTER

Abstract Background and aims Accurate stroke recognition by emergency dispatch centers is crucial for timely treatment. Previous studies report a sensitivity of 40%-70% for stroke recognition, based on assigned dispatch protocol. However, dispatch priority, regardless of whether the call was classified as stroke, may be a more relevant outcome measure as this directly determines response speed and time to treatment. We aimed to evaluate how often confirmed stroke patients received the highest dispatch priority in the Dutch healthcare setting. Methods We collected data from ambulance ride logs and health records for all hospital-confirmed stroke patients in 2023 who were primarily transported by ambulance to Albert Schweitzer Hospital, the Netherlands, and triaged by the dispatch center Zuid-Holland Zuid. Patients last-seen-well >24 hours were excluded. We calculated the proportion of confirmed stroke patients with a direct call to 112 who received A1 priority dispatch (“lights and sirens”) and assessed the protocol code assigned by the dispatch center. Results We included 197 stroke patients for whom 112 was called. The proportion of A1 dispatch priority was 94.4% (95% CI:[91.2%-97.6%]). Stroke protocol code was assigned to 140 (71.1%) patients. All patients who were assigned a stroke protocol code received A1 priority. Among non-stroke protocols, 46 patients (80.7%) received A1 priority and 11 (19.3%) received lower priority. Conclusions In the Dutch healthcare setting, most confirmed stroke patients receive the highest dispatch priority, despite that nearly 30% are not categorized as stroke. Efforts should focus on ensuring that patients receive the correct dispatch priority rather than the correct dispatch protocol. Conflict of interest Peter van Hulst: nothing to disclose, Peter de Kruijter: nothing to disclose, Henk Kerkhoff: nothing to disclose, Daniel Bos: nothing to disclose, Hester Lingsma: nothing to disclose, Bob Roozenbeek: nothing to disclose

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Stroke Journal
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/esj/aakag023.666
Primary Topic
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A1392 STROKE RECOGNITION AND DISPATCH PRIORITY IN AN EMERGENCY MEDICAL DISPATCH CENTER

Henk Kerkhoff, Peter de Kruijter, Daniel Bos, Hester Lingsma et al.
European Stroke Journal
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
article

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A1392 STROKE RECOGNITION AND DISPATCH PRIORITY IN AN EMERGENCY MEDICAL DISPATCH CENTER

Henk Kerkhoff, Peter de Kruijter, Daniel Bos, Hester Lingsma, Peter van Hulst, Bob Roozenbeek
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims Accurate stroke recognition by emergency dispatch centers is crucial for timely treatment. Previous studies report a sensitivity of 40%-70% for stroke recognition, based on assigned dispatch protocol. However, dispatch priority, regardless of whether the call was classified as stroke, may be a more relevant outcome measure as this directly determines response speed and time to treatment. We aimed to evaluate how often confirmed stroke patients received the highest dispatch priority in the Dutch healthcare setting. Methods We collected data from ambulance ride logs and health records for all hospital-confirmed stroke patients in 2023 who were primarily transported by ambulance to Albert Schweitzer Hospital, the Netherlands, and triaged by the dispatch center Zuid-Holland Zuid. Patients last-seen-well >24 hours were excluded. We calculated the proportion of confirmed stroke patients with a direct call to 112 who received A1 priority dispatch (“lights and sirens”) and assessed the protocol code assigned by the dispatch center. Results We included 197 stroke patients for whom 112 was called. The proportion of A1 dispatch priority was 94.4% (95% CI:[91.2%-97.6%]). Stroke protocol code was assigned to 140 (71.1%) patients. All patients who were assigned a stroke protocol code received A1 priority. Among non-stroke protocols, 46 patients (80.7%) received A1 priority and 11 (19.3%) received lower priority. Conclusions In the Dutch healthcare setting, most confirmed stroke patients receive the highest dispatch priority, despite that nearly 30% are not categorized as stroke. Efforts should focus on ensuring that patients receive the correct dispatch priority rather than the correct dispatch protocol. Conflict of interest Peter van Hulst: nothing to disclose, Peter de Kruijter: nothing to disclose, Henk Kerkhoff: nothing to disclose, Daniel Bos: nothing to disclose, Hester Lingsma: nothing to disclose, Bob Roozenbeek: nothing to disclose

European Stroke JournalVol. 11(Supplement_1)
Albert Schweitzer Hospital (GA), Harvard University (US), Erasmus MC (NL), Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis (NL), GGD Zuid Limburg (NL), KU Leuven (BE)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.