Skip to main content Accessibility help

Evaluation of a primary care paramedic STEMI bypass guideline

  • Jonathan L. Kwong (a1), Garry Ross (a2), Linda Turner (a2), Chris Olynyk (a3), Sheldon Cheskes (a4) (a2), Adam Thurston (a3) and P. Richard Verbeek (a2) (a5)...



Limited evidence supports primary care paramedic (PCP) direct transport of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The goal of this study was to evaluate an urban-based PCP STEMI bypass guideline.


We reviewed consecutive Toronto Paramedic Services call reports between April 7, 2015, and May 31, 2016, regarding STEMI patients identified by PCPs. The primary outcome was patient assignment (stable versus unstable) according to guideline criteria. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of PCP-transported patients who had an indication for an advanced care intervention (ACI) or who received an ACI when PCPs rendezvoused with an advanced care paramedic (ACP). Lastly, we reviewed prehospital outcomes of cardiac arrest patients and calculated the difference in transport intervals between direct PCP bypass and a PCI-centre and predicted transport interval to the closest emergency department (ED).


Of 361 patients, 232 were PCP transports and 129 were ACP-rendezvous transports. There was a significant difference in the distribution of stable and unstable patients between PCPs and ACPs (p<0.001). For PCP patients, 21/232 (9.1%) had indications for an ACI, whereas 34/129 (26.4%) ACP patients received an ACI. Eleven patients experienced cardiac arrest; 10 were successfully resuscitated (5 of these by PCPs). The median difference between direct PCP bypass and a PCI-centre versus transport to the closest ED was 5.53 minutes (IQR=6.71).


We found a significant difference in the distribution of stable and unstable patients and fewer patients with indications for an ACI in PCP patients. This PCP STEMI bypass guideline appears feasible.


Il existe peu de données étayant le transport direct, par les ambulanciers paramédicaux - soins primaires (PSP), de patients ayant subi un infarctus du myocarde avec sus-décalage du segment ST (STEMI) vers un centre en vue d’une intervention coronarienne percutanée (ICP).


L’étude visait à évaluer une directive sur le transport direct, par les PSP, de patients ayant subi un STEMI vers un centre d’ICP, en milieu urbain.


Nous avons passé en revue tous les rapports d’appels consécutifs, reçus par les Toronto Paramedic Services, entre le 7 avril 2015 et le 31 mai 2016, sur des patients ayant subi un STEMI reconnu par les PSP. Le principal critère d’évaluation était l’état du patient (stable ou instable) selon les critères de la directive. Le critère secondaire, lui, consistait en la proportion de patients transportés par les PSP et ayant une indication d’intervention en soins avancés (ISA) ou ayant subi une ISA au lieu de rencontre avec l’ambulancier paramédical - soins avancés (PSA). Enfin, nous avons examiné les résultats des arrêts cardiaques en phase préhospitalière, et calculé les écarts de temps entre le transport direct de patients, par les PSP, vers un centre d’ICP et le temps prévu de transport de patients vers le service des urgences (SU) le plus près.


Sur 361 patients, 232 ont été transportés par des PSP et 129, transportés vers un lieu de rencontre avec un PSA. Il y avait un écart significatif dans la répartition des patients stables et des patients instables entre les PSP et les PSA (p<0,001). Parmi les patients transportés par les PSP, 21/232 (9,1 %) avaient une indication d’ISA contre 34/129 (26,4 %) pour les patients transportés par les PSA et soumis à une ISA. Par ailleurs, 11 patients ont fait un arrêt cardiaque et 10 ont été réanimés, dont 5 par les PSP. L’écart médian du temps écoulé entre le transport direct de patients, par les PSP, vers un centre d’ICP et le transport de patients vers le SU le plus près était de 5,53 minutes (écart interquartile=6,71).


Un écart significatif a été relevé dans la répartition des patients stables et des patients instables, et il y avait moins de patients ayant une indication d’ISA chez les patients transportés par les PSP. La directive sur le transport direct, par les PSP, de patients ayant subi un STEMI vers un centre spécialisé semble donc applicable.


Corresponding author

Correspondence to: Dr. P. Richard Verbeek, Sunnybrook Centre for Prehospital Medicine, 77 Brown’s Line, Suite 100, Toronto, ON M8W 3S2; Email:


Hide All
1. O’Connor, RE, Al Ali, AS, Brady, WJ, et al. Part 9: acute coronary syndrome: 2015 American Heart Association guidelines update for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation 2015;132(Suppl 2):S483-S500.
2. O’Gara, PT, Kushner, FG, Ascheim, DD, et al. 2013. ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2013(61):e78-e140.
3. Drennan, IR, Verbeek, PR. The role of EMS in regionalized systems of care. CJEM 2015;17:468-474.
4. Sørensen, JT, Mæng, M. Regional systems-of-care for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Coron Artery Dis 2015;26:713-722.
5. Cheskes, S, Turner, L, Foggett, R, et al. Paramedic contact to balloon in less than 90 minutes: a successful strategy for STEMI bypass to primary PCI in a Canadian emergency medical system. Prehosp Emerg Care 2011;15:490-498.
6. Le May, MR, So, DY, Dionne, R, et al. A citywide guideline for primary PCI in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2008;358:231-240.
7. O’Connor, RE, Brady, W, Brooks, SC, et al. Part 10: acute coronary syndromes: 2010 American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation 2010;122(Suppl 3):S787-S817.
8. Ross, G, Alsayed, T, Turner, L, et al. Assessment of the safety and effectiveness of emergency department STEMI bypass by defibrillation-only emergency medical technicians/primary care paramedics. Prehosp Emerg Care 2015;19:191-201.
9. Cantor, WJ, Hoogeveen, P, Robert, A, et al. Prehospital diagnosis and triage of ST-elevation myocardial infarction by paramedics without advanced care training. Am Heart J 2012;164:201-206.
10. Ryan, D, Craig, AM, Turner, L, et al. Clinical events and treatment in prehospital patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Prehosp Emerg Care 2013;17:181-186.
11. De Luca, G, Suryapranata, H, Ottervanger, JP, et al. Time delay to treatment and mortality in primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: every minute of delay counts. Circulation 2004;109:1223-1225.
12. Cone, DC, Lee, CH, Van Gelder, C. EMS activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory is associated with process improvements in the care of myocardial infarction patients. Prehosp Emerg Care 2013;17:293-298.
13. LeMay, MR, Wells, GA, So, DY, et al. Reduction in mortality as a result of direct transport from the field to a receiving center for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:1223-1230.
14. Cardiac Care Network of Ontario (CCN). Available at: (accessed 18 October 2016).
15. Koeth, O, Nibbe, L, Arntz, HR, et al. for the PREMIR Investigators. Fate of patient with prehospital resuscitation for ST-elevation myocardial infarction and a high rate of reperfusion therapy. Am J Cardiol 2012;109:1733-1737.
16. Tanguay, A, Dallair, R, Hebert, D, et al. Rural patient access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention centers is improved by a novel integrated telemedicine prehospital system. J Emerg Med 2016;49:657-664.
17. Osei-Ampofo, M, Cheskes, S, Byers, A, et al. A novel approach to improve time to first shock in prehospital STEMI complicated by ventricular fibrillation. Prehosp Emerg Care 2016;20:278-282.
18. McNamara, RL, Wang, Y, Herrin, J, et al. for the NRMI Investigators. Effect of door-to-balloon time on mortality in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:2180-2186.



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed