Derivation and evaluation of a termination of resuscitation clinical prediction rule for advanced life support providers

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to derive a new termination of resuscitation (TOR) clinical prediction rule for advanced life support paramedics (ALS) and to measure both its pronouncement rate and diagnostic test characteristics. Secondary aims included measuring the test characteristics of a previously derived and published basic life support termination of resuscitation (BLS TOR) clinical prediction rule [Morrison LJ, Visentin LM, Kiss A, et al. Validation of a rule for termination of resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med 2006;355(5):478-87] on the same cohort of patients for comparison purposes. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of adult cardiac arrests treated by ALS in rural and urban EMS systems participating in the OPALS study (data extracted from Phase III). A previous study for a basic life support termination of resuscitation (BLS TOR) clinical prediction rule proposed Termination of Resuscitation if the patient had no return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) before transport; no shock administered; EMS personnel did not witness the arrest [Morrison LJ, Visentin LM, Kiss A, et al. Validation of a rule for termination of resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med 2006;355(5):478-87]. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between these variables, additional Utstein variables, and the primary outcome of survival to hospital discharge. Diagnostic test characteristics were measured for both the ALS TOR and BLS TOR models on this derivation cohort. RESULTS: Four thousand six hundred and seventy-three cardiac arrest patients were included; 3098 (66%) were male, mean (S.D.) age 69 (15); 239 (5.1%; 95% CI 4.5-5.8) survived to hospital discharge; 3841 patients had no ROSC (82%) and of these only three survived (0.08%; 95% CI 0.02, 0.23). The final ALS TOR model associated with survival, included: ROSC (OR 260.9; 95% CI 96.3, 706.7), bystander witnessed (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.3, 3.1), bystander CPR (OR 2.8; 95% CI 1.9, 4.1), EMS witnessed (OR 12.3; 95% CI 7.1, 21.3) and shock prior to transport (OR 6.4; 95% CI 4.1, 10.1). A new ALS TOR clinical prediction rule based on these variables was 100% sensitive (95% CI 99.9-100) for survival and had 100% negative predictive value (95% CI 99.9-100) for death. Under the ALS TOR clinical prediction rule, 30% of patients would be pronounced in the field. The BLS TOR clinical prediction rule, was 100% sensitive (95% CI 99.9, 100), had 100% negative predictive value (95% CI 99.9-100) and the field pronouncement rate was 48%. CONCLUSION: Cardiac arrest patients may be considered for prehospital ALS TOR when there is no ROSC prior to transport, no shock delivered, no bystander CPR and the arrest was not witnessed by bystanders or EMS. A single EMS termination clinical prediction rule for all levels of providers would be optimal for EMS systems to implement. Prospective evaluation of the ALS TOR clinical prediction rule in the hands of ALS providers will be required before implementation.     

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: early in-hospital hypotension versus out-of-hospital factors in predicting in-hospital mortality among those surviving to hospital admission

Objective

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of in-hospital hypotension in patients surviving to admission after resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and compare it to that of traditional Utstein factors in predicting in-hospital mortality.

Methods

Single-center retrospective cohort of adult patients surviving to hospital admission after resuscitation from out-of-hospital sudden death between January 1, 2006 and October 31, 2009. Study variables included Utstein template data: age, sex, initial rhythm, witnessed or nonwitnessed arrest, presence or absence of bystander CPR, location of arrest, response time (time of 9-1-1 dispatch to first vehicle arrival), and hypotension (systolic pressure < 90 or mean arterial pressure < 60) within 24 h of ROSC. Univariate comparisons of categorical variables were performed and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare continuous variables. Multivariable logistic regression was then performed after inclusion of Utstein variables.

Results

73 patients met the inclusion criteria, and in-hospital mortality occurred in 54 (74%). On univariate analysis, in-hospital hypotension (OR = 3.5, 95%CI 1.1–10.0, p = 0.02), pre-hospital rhythm other than VF/VT (OR 4.3, 95%CI 1.4–13.3, p = 0.008), and an unwitnessed arrest (OR = 6.9, 95%CI 0.8–56.5, p = 0.04), were significant predictors of in-hospital mortality. On multivariable analysis, in-hospital hypotension (OR = 9.8, 95%CI 1.5, 63.0, p = 0.02), pre-hospital rhythm other than VT/VF (OR = 8.5, 95%CI 1.3–58.8, p = 0.03), and lack of bystander CPR (OR = 13.2, 95%CI 1.6–111, p = 0.02) remained statistically significant predictors of in-hospital mortality.

Conclusions

In-hospital hypotension was predictive of mortality, as was a pre-hospital nonshockable rhythm and lack of bystander CPR. In contrast, traditional pre-hospital risk factors: age, gender, public location of arrest, response time, and witnessed arrest, were not predictive.     

Epidemiology and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Rochester, New York

OBJECTIVE: To characterize out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and factors that affect survival in a medium sized city that uses system status management for dispatch. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all adult OHCA patients treated by EMS between 1998 and 2001 was conducted using Utstein definitions. The primary endpoint was 1-year survival. RESULTS: Of the 1177 patients who experienced OHCA during the study period, 539 (46%) met inclusion criteria. Age ranged from 18 to 98 years (median 67). The median call-response interval was 5 min (range 0-21), and 93% were 9 min or less. There was no significant difference in the median call-response intervals between call location zip (Post) codes (p=0.07). Twenty percent of experienced ROSC (95% CI 17-23), 7% survived more than 30 days (95% CI 5-9%), and 5% survived to 1 year (95% CI 3-7%). In bivariate analysis, first rhythm and bystander CPR affected survival to 1 year. There was no significant difference in survival between male (4%) and female (7%), black (4%) and white (6%), or witnessed (7%) and unwitnessed arrest (4%). Logistic regression identified younger age, CPR initiated by bystander (19%) or first responder (41%), and presenting rhythm of VF/VT (32%) as factors associated with survival to 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: This study finds a 5% survival to 1 year among OHCA patients in Rochester, NY. A presenting rhythm of VF/VT and bystander CPR were associated with increased survival.     

Improvements in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survival from 1998 to 2013

Objectives: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a major public health burden. Aggregate OHCA survival to hospital discharge has reportedly remained unchanged at 7.6% for almost 30 years from 1970 to 2008. We examined the trends in adult OHCA survival over a 16-year period from 1998 to 2013 within a single EMS agency. Methods: Observational cohort study of adult OHCA patients treated by Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue (TVF&R) from 1998 to 2013. This is an ALS first response fire agency that maintains an active Utstein style cardiac arrest registry and serves a population of approximately 450,000 in 9 incorporated cities in Oregon. Primary outcomes were survival to hospital discharge in all patients and in the subgroup with witnessed ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VF/VT). The impact of key covariates on survival was assessed using univariate logistic regression. These included patient factors (age and sex), event factors (location of arrest, witnessed status, and first recorded cardiac arrest rhythm), and EMS system factors (response time interval, bystander CPR, and non-EMS AED shock). We used multivariate logistic regression to examine the impact of year increment on survival after multiple imputation for missing data. Sensitivity analysis was performed with complete cases. Results: During the study period, 2,528 adult OHCA had attempted field resuscitation. The survival rate for treated cases increased from 6.7% to 18.2%, with witnessed VF/VT cases increasing from 14.3% to 31.4% from 1998 to 2013. Univariate analysis showed that younger age, male sex, public location of arrest, bystander or EMS witnessed event, initial rhythm of pulseless electrical activity (PEA) or VF/VT, bystander CPR, non-EMS AED shock, and a shorter EMS response time were independently associated with survival. After adjustment for covariates, the odds of survival increased by 9% (OR 1.09, 95%CI: 1.05–1.12) per year in all treated cases, and by 6% (OR 1.06, 95% 1.01–1.10) per year in witnessed VF/VT subgroups. Findings remained consistent on sensitivity analysis. Conclusions: Overall survival from treated OHCA has increased over the last 16 years in this community. These survival increases demonstrate that OHCA is a treatable condition that warrants further investigation and investment of resources.     

Predicting survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a return of spontaneous circulation (RO SC) on survival to hospital discharge as compared to other established predictors of survival. METHODS: A retrospective case review of all out-of-hospital primary cardiac arrests from 01 January, 1992 to 31 December 1994 was conducted. The relative values of age, race, gender, presenting cardiac rhythm, witnessed event, initiation of CPR by bystanders, response time intervals, and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in an Utstein-template database were tested as predictors of survival of patients who had suffered a cardiac arrest in the out-of-hospital setting. The ROSC was defined as return of spontaneous circulation prior to and present upon arrival at the emergency department. Predictors were evaluated for statistical significance using a logistic regression analysis (p < 0.05). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) were calculated. RESULTS: Of 832 patients with primary cardiac arrest, 153 (18.4%) had ROSC and 67 (8.1%) survived to hospital discharge. Comparing survivors to nonsurvivors, the mean values for age were 64 to 67 years, with 59.7% to 36.1% being witnessed, 35.8% to 23.9% having bystander CPR initiated, 88.1% to 48.4% having ventricular fibrillation (V-fib) and 82.1% to 64.0% having ROSC. An initial electrocardiographic rhythm of V-fib (p = 0.009; OR = 2.2; CI = 1.2-3.9), and ROSC (p < 0.0001; OR = 5.2; CI = 3.6-7.5) are statistically significant predictors of survival to hospital discharge. The PPV was 13.8% for V-fib and 35.9% for ROSC, and the NPV was 98.0% for V-fib and 98.2% for ROSC. CONCLUSION: Presenting V-fib and out-of-hospital ROSC are significant predictors of survival from cardiac arrest. Failure to obtain ROSC in the out-of-hospital setting strongly suggests consideration for terminating resuscitation efforts.     

CPR Training and CPR Performance: Do CPR‐trained Bystanders Perform CPR?

Objectives: To determine factors associated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) provision by CPR‐trained bystanders and to determine factors associated with CPR performance by trained bystanders. Methods: The authors performed a prospective, observational study (January 1997 to May 2003) of individuals who called 911 (bystanders) at the time of an out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest. A structured telephone interview of adult cardiac‐arrest bystanders was performed beginning two weeks after the incident. Elements gathered during interviews included bystander and patient demographics, identifying whether the bystander was CPR trained, when and by whom the CPR was performed, and describing the circumstances of the event. If CPR was not performed, we asked the bystanders why CPR was not performed. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for factors associated with CPR performance. Results: Of 868 cardiac arrests, 684 (78.1%) bystander interviews were completed. Of all bystanders interviewed, 69.6% were family members of the victims, 36.8% of the bystanders had more than a high‐school education, and 54.1% had been taught CPR at some time. In 21.2% of patients, the bystander immediately started CPR, and in 33.6% of cases, someone started CPR before the arrival of emergency medical services (EMS). Important overall predictors of CPR performance were the following: witnessed arrest (OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.4 to 3.8); bystander was CPR trained (OR = 6.6; 95% CI = 3.5 to 12.5); bystander had more than a high‐school education (OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.2 to 3.1), or arrest occurred in a public location (OR = 3.1; 95% CI = 1.7 to 5.8). These variables were significant predictors of CPR performance among CPR‐trained bystanders, as was CPR training within five years (OR = 4.5; 95% CI = 2.8 to 7.3). Common reasons that the CPR‐trained bystanders cited for not performing CPR were the following: 37.5% stated that they panicked, 9.1% perceived that they would not be able to do CPR correctly, and 1.1% thought that they would hurt the patient. Surprisingly, only 1.1% objected to performing mouth‐to‐mouth resuscitation. Conclusions: A minority of CPR‐trained bystanders performed CPR. CPR provision was more common in CPR‐trained bystanders with more than a high‐school education and when CPR training had been within five years. Previously espoused reasons for not doing CPR (mouth‐to‐mouth, infectious‐disease risk) were not the reasons that bystanders cited for not doing CPR. Further work is needed to maximize CPR provision after CPR training.     

Results of the first five years of the prehospital automatic external defibrillation project in Singapore in the "Utstein style"

In 1994, all emergency medical services (EMS) ambulance officers in Singapore were trained to perform pre-hospital defibrillation with semi-automated external defibrillators (AED). All non-traumatic cardiac arrest patients over 10 years old were included, excluding those who were obviously dead and children below 36 kg. The data were collected by the ambulance officers according to the Utstein guidelines. From 1 February 1994 to 31 January 1999; resuscitation was attempted in 968 non-trauma cardiac arrests. Fifteen percent of the cases were of non-cardiac origin. The overall survival rate was 40/968 (4.1%, 95% CI 2.9-5.6%). Of 968 patients, 22/136 (16.2%, 95% CI 10.4-23.5%), 18/622 (2.9%, 95% CI 1.7-4.5%) and 0/210 (0%, 95% CI 0-1.7%) survived in the EMS witnessed, bystander witnessed and un-witnessed groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Within the EMS witnessed group, those with an initial rhythm of VF/VT had a higher survival rate (30.6%) than those without VF/VT (4.1%). P < 0.001, OR = 10.3, 95% CI 2.9-36.9. Similarly, the VF/VT survival rate in the bystander witnessed group (4.5%) was higher than the non-VF/VT (1.0%) (P = 0.011, OR = 4.4, 95% CI 1.3-15.4). The survival rate of patients with bystander witnessed VF/VT arrest who received bystander CPR was 9.4% compared to 1.0% in those who did not (P = 0.037, OR = 4.4, 95% CI 1.01-20.1). Our survival rate of bystander witnessed VF/VT arrest is comparable to large metropolitan cities in the USA. The determinants of survival include EMS witnessed arrest and VF/VT arrest. Increased quantity and quality of bystander CPR rate may improve the outcome in bystander witnessed cardiac arrest.     

Examining the contextual effects of neighborhood on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and the provision of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Objective

To understand the association between neighborhood and individual characteristics in determining whether or not bystanders perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in cases of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).

Methods

Between October 1, 2005 to November 30, 2008, 1108 OHCA cases from Fulton County (Atlanta), GA, were eligible for bystander CPR. We conducted multi-level non-linear regression analysis and derived Empirical Bayes estimates for bystander CPR by census tract.

Results

279 (25%) cardiac arrest victims received bystander CPR. Provision of bystander CPR was significantly more common in witnessed events (odds ratio [OR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-2.22, p < 0.001) and those that occurred in public locations (OR 1.67; 95% CI 1.16-2.40, p < 0.001). Other individual-level characteristics were not significantly associated with bystander CPR. Cardiac arrests in the census tracts that rank in the highest income quintile, as compared to the lowest income quintile were much more likely (OR 4.98; 95% CI 1.65-15.04) to receive bystander CPR.

Conclusion

Cardiac arrest victims in the highest income census tracts were much more likely to receive bystander CPR than in the lowest income census tracts, even after controlling for individual and arrest characteristics. Low-income neighborhoods may be particularly appropriate targets for community-based CPR training and awareness efforts.     

Comparison of chest compression only and standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Singapore

OBJECTIVE: Chest compression only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CC-CPR) without ventilation has been proposed as an alternative to standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for bystanders. However, there has been controversy regarding the relative effectiveness of both of these techniques. We aim to compare the outcomes of cardiac arrest patients in the cardiac arrest and resuscitation epidemiology study who either received CC-CPR, standard CPR or no bystander CPR. METHODS: This prospective cohort study involved all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients attended to by emergency medical service (EMS) providers in a large urban centre. The data analyses were conducted secondarily on these collected data. The technique of bystander CPR was reported by paramedics who arrived at the scene. RESULTS: From 1 October 2001 to 14 October 2004, 2428 patients were enrolled into the study. Of these, 255 were EMS-witnessed arrests and were excluded. 1695 cases did not receive any bystander CPR, 287 had standard CPR and 154 CC-CPR. Patient characteristics were similar in both the standard and CC-CPR groups except for a higher incidence of residential arrests and previous heart disease sufferers in the CC-CPR group. Patients who received standard CPR (odds ratio (OR) 5.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1-14.0) or CC-CPR (OR 5.0, 95% CI 1.5-16.4) were more likely to survive to discharge than those who had no bystander CPR. There was no significant difference in survival to discharge between those who received CC-CPR and standard CPR (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.3-3.1). CONCLUSION: We found that patients were more likely to survive with any form of bystander CPR than without. This emphasises the importance of chest compressions for OHCA patients, whether with or without ventilation.     

The duration of SIRS before organ failure is a significant prognostic factor of sepsis

Background

A growing elderly population along with advances in equipment and approaches for pre-hospital resuscitation necessitates up-to-date information when developing policies to improve elderly out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) outcomes. We examined the effects of bystander type (family or non-family) intervention on 1-month outcomes of witnessed elderly OHCA patients.

Methods

Data from a total of 85,588 witnessed OHCA events in patients aged ≥65 years, which occurred from 2005 to 2008, were obtained from a nationwide population-based database. Patients were stratified into three age categories (65–74, 75–84, ≥85 years), and the effects of bystander type (family or non-family) on initial cardiac rhythm, rate of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and 1-month outcomes were assessed.

Results

The overall survival rate was 6.9% (65–74 years: 9.8%, 75–84 years: 6.9%, ≥85 years: 4.6%). Initial VF/VT was recorded in 11.1% of cases with a family bystander and 12.9% of cases with a non-family bystander. The rate of bystander CPR was constant across the age categories in patients with a family bystander and increased with advancing age categories in patients with a non-family bystander. Patients having a non-family bystander were associated with significantly higher 1-month rates of survival (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.19–1.33) and favorable neurological status (OR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.34–1.60).

Conclusions

Elderly patient OHCA events witnessed by a family bystander were associated with worse 1-month outcomes than those witnessed by a non-family bystander. Healthcare providers should consider targeting potential family bystanders for CPR education to increase the rate and quality of bystander CPR.     

Does Non-Targeted Community CPR Training Increase Bystander CPR Frequency?

Objective: Only 37% of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) receive bystander Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in Kent County, MI. In May 2014, prehospital providers offered one-time, point-of-contact compression-only CPR training to 2,253 passersby at 7 public locations in Grand Rapids, Michigan. To assess the impact of this intervention, we compared bystander CPR frequency and clinical outcomes in regions surrounding training sites before and after the intervention, adjusting for prehospital covariates. We aimed to assess the effect of this broad, non-targeted intervention on bystander CPR frequency, type of CPR utilized, and clinical outcomes. We also tested for differences in geospatial variation of bystander CPR and clinical outcomes clustered around training sites. Methods: Retrospective, observational, before-after study of adult, EMS-treated OHCA in Kent County from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2015. We generated a 5-kilometer radius surrounding each training site to estimate any geospatial influence that training sites might have on bystander CPR frequency in nearby OHCA cases. Chi-squared, Fisher's exact, and t-tests assessed differences in subject features. Difference-in-differences analysis with generalized estimating equation (GEE) modeling assessed bystander CPR frequency, adjusting for training site, covariates (age, sex, witnessed, shockable rhythm, public location), and clustering around training sites. Similar modeling tested for changes in bystander CPR type, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, and cerebral performance category (CPC) of 1–2 at hospital discharge. Results: We included 899 cases before and 587 cases post-intervention. Overall, we observed no increase in the frequency of bystander CPR or favorable clinical outcomes. We did observe an increase in compression-only CPR, but this was paradoxically restricted to OHCA cases falling outside radii around training sites. In adjusted modeling, the bystander CPR training intervention was not associated with bystander CPR frequency (β ?0.002; 95% CI ?0.16, 0.15), compression-only CPR (β ?0.06; 95% CI ?0.15, 0.02), ROSC (β ?0.06; 95% CI ?0.21, 0.25), survival (β ?0.02; 95% CI ?0.11, 0.06), or favorable neurologic outcome (β ?0.01; 95% CI ?0.07, 0.09). Conclusions: We observed no impact in bystander CPR performance or outcomes from a blanket, non-targeted approach to community CPR education. The effect of targeted CPR education in locales with known low bystander CPR rates should be tested in this region.     

Increased survival after EMS witnessed cardiac arrest. Observations from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) Epistry—Cardiac arrest

Background

Out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is common and lethal. It has been suggested that OHCA witnessed by EMS providers is a predictor of survival because advanced help is immediately available. We examined EMS witnessed OHCA from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) to determine the effect of EMS witnessed vs. bystander witnessed and unwitnessed OHCA.

Methods

Data were analyzed from a prospective, population-based cohort study in 10 U.S. and Canadian ROC sites. Individuals with non-traumatic OHCA treated 04/01/06-03/31/07 by EMS providers with defibrillation or chest compressions were included. Cases were grouped into EMS-witnessed, bystander witnessed, and unwitnessed and further stratified for bystander CPR. Multiple logistic regressions evaluated the odds ratio (OR) for survival to discharge relative to the EMS-witnessed group after adjusting for age, sex, public/private location of collapse, ROC site, and initial ECG rhythm. Of 9991 OHCA, 1022 (10.2%) of EMS-witnessed, 3369 (33.7%) bystander witnessed, and 5600 (56.1%) unwitnessed.

Results

The most common initial rhythm in the EMS-witnessed group was PEA which was higher than in the bystander- and unwitnessed groups (p < 0.001). The adjusted OR (95% CI) of survival compared to the EMS-witnessed group was 0.41, (0.36, 0.46) in bystander witnessed with bystander CPR, 0.37 (0.33, 0.43) in bystander witnessed without bystander CPR, 0.17 (0.14, 0.20) in unwitnessed with bystander CPR and 0.21 (0.18, 0.24) in unwitnessed cases without bystander CPR.

Conclusions

Immediate application of prehospital care for OHCA may improve survival. Efforts should be made to educate patients to access 9-1-1 for prodromal symptoms.     

Efficacy of bystander CPR: intervention by lay people and by health care professionals

BACKGROUND: Early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by bystanders prior to the arrival of the rescue team has been shown to be associated with increased survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The aim of this survey was to evaluate the impact on survival of no bystander CPR, lay bystander CPR and professional bystander CPR. METHODS: Patients suffering an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Sweden between 1990 and 2002 who were given CPR and were not witnessed by the ambulance crew were included. RESULTS: In all, 29,711 patients were included, 36% of whom received bystander CPR prior to the arrival of the rescue team. Among the latter, 72% received CPR from lay people and 28% from professionals. Survival to 1 month was 2.2% among those who received no bystander CPR, 4.9% among those who received bystander CPR from lay people (p<0.0001) and 9.2% among those who received bystander CPR from professionals (p<0.0001 compared with bystander CPR by lay people). In a multivariate analysis, lay bystander CPR was associated with improved survival compared to no bystander CPR (OR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.72-2.42), and professional bystander CPR was associated with improved survival compared to lay bystander CPR (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.12-1.67). CONCLUSION: Among patients suffering an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, bystander CPR by lay persons (excluding health care professionals) is associated with an increased chance of survival. Furthermore, there is a distinction between lay persons and health care providers; survival is higher when the latter perform bystander CPR. However, these results may not be explained by differences in the quality of CPR.     

Can bystanders' gender affect the clinical outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A prospective,multicentre observational study

Background and purposeOut-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is one of the most common causes of death in many countries. For OHCA patients to have a good clinical outcome, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is extremely significant. It is necessary to study the various characteristics of bystanders to improve bystander CPR quality. We aimed to evaluate the correlation between bystanders' gender and clinical outcomes of patients with OHCA.MethodsWe conducted an observational study by using a prospective, multicenter registry of OHCA resuscitation, provided by the Korean Cardiac Arrest Research Consortium registry from October 2015 to June 2017. The following data were collected: patient's age, patient's gender, witnessed by a layperson, characteristics of the bystanders (age grouped by decade, gender, CPR education, compression method, and perception of automated external defibrillators), arrest place, emergency medical services arrival time, and initial electrocardiogram rhythms. Outcome variables were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation, survival discharge, and cerebral performance category status at discharge.ResultsA total of 691 patients were included in the study. There were significant differences in the initial shockable rhythm and previous CPR training between bystander's gender. Characteristics such as age, patient's gender, witnessed by a layperson, bystander's gender, initial shockable rhythm, and arrest place were significantly associated with neurologic outcome at discharge, using univariable analysis. However, in the multivariate logistic model, there was no significant correlation between bystander's gender and neurologic outcome. In the subgroup analysis using the multivariate logistic model with 291 patients without missing values of CPR education and bystander’ age, there was a significant difference in neurologic outcome depending on bystander's CPR education status.ConclusionThere was no difference in the neurologic outcomes of OHCA patients based on bystanders' gender. However, according to subgroup analysis, there was a difference in the neurologic outcome depending on the status of bystanders' CPR education and females received less CPR education than males. Therefore, more active CPR education is required.     

Type of bystander and rate of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in nursing home patients suffering out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

AimWe investigated bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) provision rate and survival outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients in nursing homes by bystander type.MethodsA population-based observational study was conducted for nursing home OHCAs during 2013–2018. The exposure was the bystander type: medical staff, non-medical staff, or family. The primary outcome was bystander CPR provision rate; the secondary outcomes were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to discharge. Multivariable logistic regression analysis which corrected for various demographic and clinical characteristics evaluated bystander type impact on study outcomes. Bystander CPR rate trend was investigated by bystander type.ResultsOf 8281 eligible OHCA patients, 26.0%, 70.8%, and 3.2% cases were detected by medical staff, non-medical staff, and family, respectively. Provision rate of bystander CPR was 69.9% and rate of bystander defibrillation was 0.4% in total. Bystander CPR was provided by medical staff, non-medical staff, and families in 74.8%, 68.9%, and 52.1% respectively. Total survival rate was 2.2%, out of which, 3.3% was for medical staff, 3.2% for non-medical staff, and 0.6% for family. Compared to the results of detection by medical staff, the adjusted odds ratios (95% CIs) for provision of bystander CPR were 0.56 (0.49–0.63) for detection by non-medical staff and 0.33 (0.25–0.44) for detection by family. The bystander CPR rates of all three groups increased over time, and among them, the medical staff group increased the most. For prehospital ROSC and survival to discharge, no significant differences were observed according to bystander type.ConclusionAlthough OHCA was detected more often by non-medical staff, they provided bystander CPR less frequently than the medical staff did. To improve survival outcome of nursing home OHCA, bundle interventions including increasing the usage of automated external defibrillators and expanding CPR training for non-medical staff in nursing home are needed.     

Characteristics and outcome among patients suffering from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with the emphasis on availability for intervention trials

AIM: To describe all patients treated for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) according to the Utstein criteria and their characteristics and outcome with emphasis on whether they were available for early intervention trials. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a study where data were collected prospectively. SETTING: The Municipality of G?teborg/M?lndal in Sweden. PATIENTS: All patients suffering from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the Municipality of G?teborg/M?lndal in whom cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was attempted between May 2003 and May 2005. INTERVENTIONS: Part of the study cohort, i.e. patients with a witnessed, non-traumatic, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were distributed (cluster) to mechanical (LUCAS) or manual chest compression. RESULTS: The overall survival to discharge from hospital among the 508 patients was 8.5%. The corresponding value for non-cardiac cases was 5.1% and for cardiac cases if crew witnessed 16.1%, bystander witnessed 12.7% and non-witnessed 1.4%. Fifty-nine percent of the patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria for the trial and had no exclusion criteria and 9.7% of these survived to discharge. Ten percent of patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria but were excluded and 20.4% survived to discharge. Thirty-one percent of patients did not fulfil the inclusion criteria and 2.5% survived. Among patients included in the LUCAS group, many of the survivors, 10/13 (77%), experienced a rapid return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) before the application of the device. CONCLUSION: Among patients with OHCA in whom CPR was started 8.5% survived to hospital discharge and 59% were theoretically available for an early intervention trial. These patients have a different outcome compared with patients not available. However, among those available, the majority of survivors had a rapid ROSC before the application of the intervention (LUCAS). This raises concerns about the potential for early intervention trials to improve outcome after OHCA.     

Do dispatcher instructions facilitate bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation and improve outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest? A comparison of family and non-family bystanders

Objectives

Bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has been reported to increase the possibility of survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest (OHCA). We evaluated the effects of CPR instructions by emergency medical dispatchers on the frequency of bystander CPR and outcomes, and whether these effects differed between family and non-family bystanders.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study, using Utstein-style records of OHCA taken in a rural area of Japan between January 2004 and December 2009.

Results

Of the 559 patients with non-traumatic OHCA witnessed by laypeople, 231 (41.3%) were given bystander CPR. More OHCA patients received resuscitation when the OHCA was witnessed by non-family bystanders than when it was witnessed by family members (61.4% vs. 34.2%). The patients with non-family-witnessed OHCA were more likely to be given conventional CPR (chest compression plus rescue breathing) or defibrillation with an AED than were those with family-witnessed OHCA. Dispatcher instructions significantly increased the provision of bystander CPR regardless of who the witnesses were. Neurologically favorable survival was increased by CPR in non-family-witnessed, but not in family-witnessed, OHCA patients. No difference in survival rate was observed between the cases provided with dispatcher instructions and those not provided with the instructions.

Conclusions

Dispatcher instructions increased the frequency of bystander CPR, but did not improve the rate of neurologically favorable survival in patients with witnessed OHCA. Efforts to enhance the frequency and quality of resuscitation, especially by family members, are required for dispatcher-assisted CPR.     

Association of response time interval with neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest according to bystander CPR

BackgroundThis study intended to find out how association between response time interval (RTI) and good neurological outcome is affected by bystander CPR. We hypothesized that bystander CPR will ensure positive effect in relationship between RTI and clinical outcome.MethodsA retrospective, observational study was made with Pan-Asian Resuscitation Outcome Study data from January 2009 to December 2016. Six cities from four Asian countries were selected. EMS-treated, non-traumatic witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) cases were included. General demographic data, prehospital cardiac arrest details and clinical outcome were collected and analyzed according to whether bystander CPR was performed. Good neurological outcome and survival discharge were primary and secondary outcomes.ResultsA total of 13,245 OHCA cases were analyzed. Median EMS response time intervals were 6 min, regardless of bystander CPR. Dividing into RTI time range by 3 min, good neurological outcome and survival discharge were only significant in 3 to 6 minutes group (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.42, 1.17–1.73 95% confidence interval [CI] and AOR 1.31, 1.15–1.51 95% CI) in non-bystander CPR group but in bystander CPR group significant RTI time range was 3 to 9 min (AOR 2.02, 1.82, 1.62–2.52, 1.48–2.25 95% CI for primary, AOR 1.66, 1.43, 1.41–1.96, 1.22–1.67 95% CI for secondary).ConclusionsAs response time interval increased, slower deterioration of good neurological outcome and survival discharge was shown in cardiac arrest patients with bystander CPR performed. If bystander CPR is provided, RTI time range showing significant neurological outcome and survival improvement seems to be relatively lengthened.