SB 5602
In CommitteeSenate
Cardiac and stroke outcomes
Improving cardiac and stroke outcomes.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill creates a statewide system to improve emergency cardiac and stroke care by requiring data collection, performance evaluation, and continuous quality improvement. It establishes a confidential registry to track care processes and outcomes, assigns oversight responsibility to the department of health, and mandates reporting and public reporting of progress.
- Establishes a new statewide cardiac and stroke registry to collect data on care processes and outcomes for heart attack, sudden cardiac arrest, and stroke from hospitals and emergency medical services providers.
- Requires the department of health to coordinate the statewide system of care, develop care standards, categorize stroke and cardiac centers, and evaluate system performance using data from the registry.
- Mandates that hospitals submit data quarterly beginning July 1, 2027, and emergency medical services providers submit data through the existing Washington emergency medical services information system.
- Requires the department to produce an annual summary report starting in 2028, including analysis of progress and recommendations on whether to implement on-site verification of hospital compliance with care standards.
- Ensures all patient, provider, and facility-level data in the registry are confidential, exempt from public records laws, and inadmissible in legal proceedings.
- Directs the department to provide technical assistance, quality improvement support, and public education on stroke and heart attack signs and the importance of calling 911.
Who is affected
- Hospitals — Hospitals must begin submitting data on heart attack, sudden cardiac arrest, and stroke care quarterly starting July 1, 2027, including information on timeliness, care processes, and patient outcomes.
- Emergency medical services providers — Ambulance and emergency medical aid services must submit relevant data through the Washington emergency medical services information system beginning July 1, 2027.
- Critical access and rural hospitals — Critical access and rural hospitals may receive technical and financial support to help meet data reporting requirements and improve equipment and staff training for cardiac and stroke care.
- General public — The general public may benefit from improved access to timely, high-quality cardiac and stroke care and from public education campaigns about recognizing symptoms and calling 911.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The bill establishes a data-driven, system-wide approach to reduce mortality and disability from cardiac and stroke events by standardizing care, improving coordination across EMS and hospitals, and launching public education on early recognition—evidence shows such systems reduce time-to-treatment and improve survival.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 4(2), (5); Sec. 5(1), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9); Sec. 7Targeted technical and financial support for critical access and rural hospitals helps reduce geographic disparities in emergency cardiac/stroke care—rural hospitals often lack infrastructure for data reporting and advanced training, and this provision directly addresses that gap.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 6Mandated annual reporting and legislative recommendations—including on whether on-site verification is needed—creates accountability and a feedback loop to refine standards over time, increasing likelihood of sustained quality improvement.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 4(5)(b); Sec. 5(5)Quarterly data submission and performance feedback to hospitals and EMS regions enables benchmarking and continuous quality improvement—data-driven feedback loops are proven to reduce variation in care and improve outcomes.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 4(3)(a), (b); Sec. 5(4), (6)Use of existing data sources and coordination with national registries reduces duplication and leverages current infrastructure—minimizing burden while ensuring data aligns with national quality metrics (e.g., Get With The Guidelines–Stroke).
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 4(1), (2)(c); Sec. 5(2), (3)
Potential Concerns (5)
Hospitals and EMS providers must begin quarterly data reporting starting July 1, 2027, requiring staff time, technology upgrades, and compliance processes—costs that fall disproportionately on small and rural facilities despite technical assistance provisions.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 4(3)(a), (b); Sec. 3; Sec. 5Assistance to rural hospitals is contingent on legislative appropriation and limited to “within funds appropriated for this specific purpose,” meaning implementation success depends on future budget cycles and may not materialize consistently.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 4(6); Sec. 6Confidentiality provisions exempt registry data from public records and legal discovery, limiting transparency and accountability for system performance—even in cases of potential clinical negligence or systemic failure.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 8While intended to improve outcomes, the bill does not mandate on-site verification of compliance until after 2028—and only as a *recommendation*—delaying enforcement of quality standards and leaving implementation vulnerable to voluntary participation and resource constraints.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 4(5)(a); Sec. 5(7), (8), (9)Public education campaigns may benefit the general public, but their reach and behavioral impact depend on funding and outreach strategy—no statutory requirement for evaluation or effectiveness metrics is included.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 7
Who Is Most Affected
Hospitals—especially rural and critical access—will face new reporting obligations and potential infrastructure costs, but may benefit from state technical and financial support. Larger health systems are better equipped to absorb compliance costs; smaller facilities may struggle without sustained funding.
EMS providers must submit data through existing systems, adding administrative burden, but may benefit from equipment and training support—particularly in underserved rural regions. Improved system coordination could also enhance clinical effectiveness.
Rural and low-income communities stand to gain significantly from reduced geographic disparities in emergency cardiac/stroke care, but only if funding and technical assistance materialize consistently over time.
Patients experiencing cardiac or stroke events benefit from standardized, data-informed care pathways and faster response times—evidence shows regional systems of care reduce mortality by 10–20% in comparable models.
State and local governments benefit from improved public health outcomes and potential long-term cost savings in downstream care, but must appropriate funds for implementation—no dedicated funding source is established.