“Suddens”与“FAST”两种脑卒中识别方法的比较
网络出版日期: 2015-08-27
Comparison of two stroke recognition methods “Suddens” and “FAST”
Online published: 2015-08-27
目的 比较“Suddens”和“FAST”两种脑卒中识别方法对脑卒中及短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)警示症状的识别能力。方法 收集连续住院的脑卒中/TIA病例,从病历记录中获取患者的初始症状信息。 结果 共收集1 877例脑卒中/TIA患者,其中0.5%患者的初始症状不能归类于“Suddens”,而19.6%患者的初始症状不能归类于“FAST”。“Suddens”能识别所有脑梗死,但1.8%的TIA、1.1%的脑出血(ICH)和1.2%的蛛网膜下腔出血(SAH)不能识别。“FAST”不能识别7.3%的脑梗死、12.7%的TIA、23.5%的ICH和94.5%的SAH。结论 “FAST”可识别绝大多数脑卒中/TIA,但识别能力不如“Suddens”。“FAST”对脑梗死及TIA的识别能力优于ICH,对SAH的识别能力很差。
唐艳 , 杨娟 , 何兰英 , 等 . “Suddens”与“FAST”两种脑卒中识别方法的比较[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版), 2015 , 35(7) : 1040 . DOI: 11.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2015.07.020
Objective To compare the capability of two stroke recognition methods “Suddens” and “FAST” for identifying warning signs of stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA). Methods Cases of stroke/TIA that were consecutively admitted in hospital were selected. The initial symptoms of patients were obtained from medical records. Results A total of 1 877 patients with stroke/TIA were collected and initial symptoms of 19.6% of them could not be included in “FAST”, while initial symptoms of 0.5% of them could not be included in the “Suddens”. “Suddens” identified all ischemic stroke and missed 1.8% of TIA, 1.1% of the intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), and 1.2% of the subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). “FAST” missed 7.3% of the ischemic stroke, 12.7% of the TIA, 23.5% of the ICH, and 94.5% of the SAH. Conclusion “FAST” can identify most stroke/TIA, but the recognition ability is inferior to “Suddens”. The recognition ability of “FAST” towards ischemic stroke and TIA is better than that towards ICH and the recognition ability towards SAH is very poor.
Key words: stroke; warning signs; identification capability
/
〈 |
|
〉 |