Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 79
Filter
1.
Intensive Care Med ; 48(1): 1-15, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1800370

ABSTRACT

Rates of survival with functional recovery for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are notably low. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is emerging as a modality to improve prognosis by augmenting perfusion to vital end-organs by utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during conventional CPR and stabilizing the patient for interventions aimed at reversing the aetiology of the arrest. Implementing this emergent procedure requires a substantial investment in resources, and even the most successful ECPR programs may nonetheless burden healthcare systems, clinicians, patients, and their families with unsalvageable patients supported by extracorporeal devices. Non-randomized and observational studies have repeatedly shown an association between ECPR and improved survival, versus conventional CPR, for in-hospital cardiac arrest in select patient populations. Recently, randomized controlled trials suggest benefit for ECPR over standard resuscitation, as well as the feasibility of performing such trials, in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest within highly coordinated healthcare delivery systems. Application of these data to clinical practice should be done cautiously, with outcomes likely to vary by the setting and system within which ECPR is initiated. ECPR introduces important ethical challenges, including whether it should be considered an extension of CPR, at what point it becomes sustained organ replacement therapy, and how to approach patients unable to recover or be bridged to heart replacement therapy. The economic impact of ECPR varies by health system, and has the potential to outstrip resources if used indiscriminately. Ideally, studies should include economic evaluations to inform health care systems about the cost-benefits of this therapy.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Adult , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy
2.
Resuscitation ; 172: 74-83, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740147

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The Australasian Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (Aus-ROC) out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) Epistry (Epidemiological Registry) now covers 100% of Australia and New Zealand (NZ). This study reports and compares the Utstein demographics, arrest characteristics and outcomes of OHCA patients across our region. METHODS: We included all OHCA cases throughout 2019 as submitted to the Epistry by the eight Australian and two NZ emergency medical services (EMS). We calculated crude and age-standardised incidence rates and performed a national and EMS regional comparison. RESULTS: We obtained data for 31,778 OHCA cases for 2019: 26,637 in Australia and 5,141 in NZ. Crude incidence was 107.9 per 100,000 person-years in Australia and 103.2/100,000 in NZ. Overall, the majority of OHCAs occurred in adults (96%), males (66%), private residences (76%), were unwitnessed (63%), of presumed medical aetiology (83%), and had an initial monitored rhythm of asystole (64%). In non-EMS-witnessed cases, 38% received bystander CPR and 2% received public defibrillation. Wide variation was seen between EMS regions for all OHCA demographics, arrest characteristics and outcomes. In patients who received an EMS-attempted resuscitation (13,664/31,778): 28% (range across EMS = 13.1% to 36.7%) had return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) at hospital arrival and 13% (range across EMS = 9.9% to 20.7%) survived to hospital discharge/30-days. Survival in the Utstein comparator group (bystander-witnessed in shockable rhythm) varied across the EMS regions between 27.4% to 42.0%. CONCLUSION: OHCA across Australia and NZ has varied incidence, characteristics and survival. Understanding the variation in survival and modifiable predictors is key to informing strategies to improve outcomes.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , Humans , Male , New Zealand/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Registries
3.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 11(6): e024140, 2022 03 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1731380

ABSTRACT

Background Little is known about how COVID-19 influenced engagement of citizen responders dispatched to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) by a smartphone application. The objective was to describe and analyze the Danish Citizen Responder Program and bystander interventions (both citizen responders and nondispatched bystanders) during the first COVID-19 lockdown in 2020. Methods and Results All OHCAs from January 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020, with citizen responder activation in 2 regions of Denmark were included. We compared citizen responder engagement for OHCA in the nonlockdown period (January 1, 2020, to March 10, 2020, and April 21, 2020, to June 30, 2020) with the lockdown period (March 11, 2020, to April 20, 2020). Data are displayed in the order lockdown versus nonlockdown period. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates did not differ in the 2 periods (99% versus 92%; P=0.07). Bystander defibrillation (9% versus 14%; P=0.4) or return-of-spontaneous circulation (23% versus 23%; P=1.0) also did not differ. A similar amount of citizen responders accepted alarms during the lockdown (6 per alarm; interquartile range, 6) compared with the nonlockdown period (5 per alarm; interquartile range, 5) (P=0.05). More citizen responders reported performing chest-compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation during lockdown compared with nonlockdown (79% versus 59%; P=0.0029), whereas fewer performed standardized cardiopulmonary resuscitation, including ventilations (19% versus 38%; P=0.0061). Finally, during lockdown, more citizen responders reported being not psychologically affected by attending an OHCA compared with nonlockdown period (68% versus 56%; P<0.0001). Likewise, fewer reported being mildly affected during lockdown (26%) compared with nonlockdown (35%) (P=0.003). Conclusions The COVID-19 lockdown in Denmark was not associated with decreased bystander-initiated resuscitation in OHCAs attended by citizen responders.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Communicable Disease Control , Denmark/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Retrospective Studies
4.
Am J Emerg Med ; 52: 34-42, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1603379

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) are a leading cause of mortality in the United States. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically altered the landscape of response to OHCAs, particularly with regard to providing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). We aimed to describe, characterize, and address the attitudes and concerns of healthcare workers towards CPR of OHCA patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of healthcare workers and trainees in the United States and Saudi Arabia via an online survey available between October 2020, and May 2021. The primary outcome of interest was willingness to perform CPR for OHCA, with confidence to handle CPR for OHCA as our secondary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 501 healthcare professionals, including 436 (87%) with background in emergency medicine, participated in our survey. 331 (66%) reported being willing to perform CPR for OHCA, while 170 (34%) were not willing. 311 (94%) willing participants stated that their medical oath and moral responsibility were the main motivators for willingness, while a fear of contracting COVID-19 was the primary demotivating factor for 126 (74%) unwilling participants. Time series analysis with simple exponential smoothing showed an increase in willingness to perform CPR from 30% to 50%, as well as an increase in mean confidence level to perform CPR from 60% to 70%, between October 2020 and May 2021. CONCLUSIONS: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected healthcare workers' attitudes towards performing CPR for OHCA. Confidence levels and willingness to perform CPR increased over time during the study period. Efforts should be directed towards the creation of standardized and evidence-based guidelines for CPR during COVID-19, as well as increasing knowledge regarding risks of infection and effective use of PPE during resuscitation.


Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Pandemics , Adult , COVID-19/transmission , Cross-Sectional Studies , Fear , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
5.
Rev Cardiovasc Med ; 22(4): 1677-1683, 2021 12 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1593890

ABSTRACT

The Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become an unprecedented global public health crisis and a pandemic associated with vicarious psychosocial and economic stresses. Such stresses were reported to lead to behavioral and emotional disturbances in individuals not infected with the COVID-19 virus. It is largely unknown if these stresses can trigger acute cardiovascular events (CVE) in such individuals. Covid-19-neagtive adults presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) during the COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan from March 15, 2020 through March 14, 2021 were enrolled in the study if they reported exposure to psychosocial or economic stresses related to the pandemic lockdown. Of 300 patients enrolled (mean age 58.7 ± 12.9 years), AMI was diagnosed in 269 (89.7%) patients, CVA in 15 (5.0%) patients, and OHCA in 16 (5.3%) patients. Triggering events were psychosocial in 243 (81.0%) patients and economic stressors in 157 (52.3%) patients. The psychosocial stresses included loneliness, hopelessness, fear of COVID-19 infection, anger, and stress-related to death of a significant person. The economic stressors included financial hardships, job loss or insecurity, volatile or loss of income. Exposure to more than one trigger was reported in 213 (71.0%) patients. In-hospital mortality of the patients admitted for AMI or CVA was 2.1%, and none of the OHCA survived the event. The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be a source of significant psychosocial and economic hardships that can trigger life-threatening acute CVE among individuals not infected with the virus.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Adult , Aged , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Jordan , Middle Aged , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/diagnosis , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 57(12)2021 Nov 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1539976

ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: This retrospective study evaluated the clinical impact of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) on the clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Moreover, by focusing on the use of a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), we investigated the medical personnel's perceptions of wearing PAPR during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Materials and Methods: According to the arrival time at the emergency department, the patients were categorized into a conventional PPE group (1 August 2019 to 20 January 2020) and an enhanced PPE group (21 January 2020, to 31 August 2020). The primary outcomes of this analysis were the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate. Additionally, subjective perception of the medical staff regarding the effect of wearing enhanced PPE during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was evaluated by conducting a survey. Results: This study included 130 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, with 73 and 57 patients in the conventional and enhanced PPE groups, respectively. The median time intervals to first intubation and to report the first arterial blood gas analysis results were longer in the enhanced PPE group than in the conventional PPE group (3 min vs. 2 min; p = 0.020 and 8 min vs. 3 min; p < 0.001, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in the ROSC rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-1.67; p = 0.542) and 1 month survival (OR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.07-2.10; p = 0.266) between the two groups. In total, 67 emergent department (ED) professionals responded to the questionnaire. Although a significant number of respondents experienced inconveniences with PAPR use, they agreed that PAPR was necessary during the CPR procedure for protection and reduction of infection transmission. Conclusion: The use of enhanced PPE, including PAPR, affected the performance of CPR to some extent but did not alter patient outcomes. PAPR use during the resuscitation of OHCA patients might positively impact the psychological stability of the medical staff.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , Retrospective Studies
7.
Air Med J ; 41(1): 68-72, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1536419

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 may have contributed to an excess of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OOHCAs). This observational study identified changes in OOHCA epidemiology pre- and post-COVID-19 lockdown in a single UK helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS). METHODS: A retrospective, single-center (Essex & Herts Air Ambulance), observational study was undertaken with anonymized OOHCA data (demographics, etiology, and outcomes) from March 23, 2020, to June 23, 2020, and comparative data from March 23, 2019, to June 23, 2019. Supplementary data (total OOHCAs and patient outcomes) were provided by the East of England Ambulance Service National Health Service Trust. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test and chi-square test; P < .05 was statistically significant. RESULTS: Of the HEMS activations during national lockdown, 33.6% were for OOHCAs compared with 25.8% during the reference time frame. The frequency of young and female OOHCAs demonstrated a statistically significant increase. Statistically significant variations in medical etiology and initial cardiac rhythm were identified. CONCLUSION: During the initial UK-wide lockdown, the OOHCA characteristics attended by 1 HEMS team were altered. The changes seen may be due to the pathophysiology of COVID-19 or an alteration in dispatch due to the demand placed on the wider ambulance service; this may require further consideration for any future lockdowns or pandemics.


Subject(s)
Air Ambulances , COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Aircraft , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Female , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , State Medicine
8.
Prehosp Disaster Med ; 36(6): 676-683, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526027

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Some studies in countries affected by the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have shown that the missions of Emergency Medical Service (EMS) have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the rate of death and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) has been increased due to the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the process of EMS missions, death, and OHCA. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was performed in Tehran, Iran. All conducted missions in the first six months of the three consecutive solar years of March 21 until September 22 of 2018-2020, which were registered in the registry bank of the Tehran EMS center, were assessed and compared. Based on the opinion of experts, the technician's on-scene diagnoses were categorized into 14 groups, and then death and OHCA cases were compared. RESULTS: In this study, the data of 1,050,376 missions performed in three study periods were analyzed. In general, the number of missions in 2020 was 17.83% fewer than that of 2019 (P < .001); however, the number of missions in 2019 was 30.33% more than that of 2018. On the other hand, the missions of respiratory problems, cardiopulmonary arrest, infectious diseases, and poisoning were increased in 2020 compared to that of 2019. The raw number of OHCA and death cases respectively in 2018, 2019, and 2020 were 25.0, 22.7, and 28.6 cases per 1,000 missions. Of all patients who died in 2020, 4.9% were probable/confirmed COVID-19 cases. The history of heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, and respiratory disease in patients in 2020 was more frequent than that of the other two years. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the number of missions in the Tehran EMS in 2020 were decreased compared to that of 2019, however the number of missions in 2019 was more than that of 2018. Respiratory problems, infectious diseases, poisoning, death, and OHCA were increased compared to the previous two years and cardiovascular complaints, neurological problems, and motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) in 2020 were fewer than that of the other two years.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Iran/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Curr Opin Crit Care ; 27(6): 663-667, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511080

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Sudden out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is still one of the top reasons for death in industrialized countries. Bystander resuscitation rates differ significantly across the world despite bystanders being easily able to save lives in this situation. In the 4 years since initiation of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) World Restart a Heart (WRAH), the initiative helped educating millions of people and thus enabled them to save lives. RECENT FINDINGS: WRAH Day has gained more and more reach, partners and impact over the years. It has the potential of saving hundreds of thousands of lives, changing legislation and inspiring research. During the last year, new strategies had to be developed because of the COVID-pandemic. The importance of educating laypeople is underlined in recent publications and international guidelines. SUMMARY: The WRAH awareness campaign has reached 194 countries and more than 200 million people in the last years. The success of it could even be kept going in the pandemic due to social media and digital/virtual programmes. International guidelines recommend raising awareness and name ILCOR WRAH as a way to do it.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Resuscitation , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Acta Biomed ; 92(5): e2021486, 2021 11 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1503540

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The incidence of Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) is estimated at 1/1000 persons/year. In the pre-Covid-19 era world, OHCA survival rate in Europe was 7-6%. The main objective is to analyze OHCA survival in the Lombardy region by highlighting the factors related to both the victims' characteristics and the chain of survival. METHODS: All OHCAs were grouped into four pre-established periods in 2019 (14-23 January; 15-24 April; 15-24 July; 14-23 October). Following the Utstein method, we selected witnessed OHCAs with presumed cardiac etiology. The outcome of each case was collected in four moments in time: Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), Emergency Department (ED), 24 hours and 30 days. The neurological outcome 30 days after OHCA was also investigated and stratified with the Cerebral Performance Category Score (CPC). RESULTS: We selected 456 cases of OHCA with witnessed cardiac etiology. ROSC was achieved in 121 cases (26.5%), survival in the Emergency Departments in 110 patients (24.1%), after 24 hours in 86 (18.86%) and after 30 days in 72 (15.8%). Male sex was shown to improve OHCA survival. A shockable presentation rhythm, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) performed by bystanders and the activation of Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) positively influenced OHCA outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Males are more predisposed to incur an OHCA event than females, but they have greater chances of survival. Factors most related to survival are: shockable rhythm, bystanders CPR and the activation of a PAD. (www.actabiomedica.it).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Female , Humans , Male , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/etiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Eur J Emerg Med ; 28(6): 423-431, 2021 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1483671

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and a direct mechanism of cardiac arrest in infected patients was hypothesized. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were searched up to April 05, 2021. We included studies comparing out-of-hospital cardiac arrests patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection versus noninfected patients. The primary outcome was survival at hospital discharge or at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation, cardiac arrest witnessed and occurring at home, bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation, proportion of nonshockable rhythm and resuscitation attempted, and ambulance arrival time. RESULTS: In the ten included studies, 18% (1341/7545) of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurred in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and SARS-CoV-2 infection had reduced rates of survival (16/856 [1.9%] vs. 153/2344 [6.5%]; odds ratio (OR) = 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-0.65; P = 0.001; I2 = 28%) and return of spontaneous circulation (188/861 [22%] vs. 640/2403 [27%]; OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.86; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%) when compared to noninfected patients. Ambulance arrived later (15 ± 10 vs. 13 ± 7.5 min; mean difference = 1.64; 95% CI, 0.41-2.88; P = 0.009; I2 = 61%) and nonshockable rhythms (744/803 [93%] vs. 1828/2217 [82%]; OR = 2.79; 95% CI, 2.08-3.73; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%) occurred more frequently. SARS-CoV-2 positive patients suffered a cardiac arrest at home more frequently (1186/1263 [94%] vs. 3598/4055 [89%]; OR = 1.86; 95% CI, 1.45-2.40; P<0.001; I2 = 0%) but witnessed rate (486/890 [55%] vs. 1385/2475 [56%]; OR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.82-1.14; P = 0.63; I2 = 0%) and bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation rate (439/828 [53%] vs. 1164/2304 [51%]; OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.73-1.24; P = 0.70; I2 = 53%) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: One-fifth of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients had low rates of return of spontaneous circulation and survival and were characterized by higher nonshockable rhythms but similar bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation rate. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO - CRD42021243540.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Crit Care Med ; 50(5): 791-798, 2022 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1450451

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe and compare survival among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest as a function of their status for coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: We performed an observational study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients between March 2020 and December 2020. Coronavirus disease 2019 status (confirmed, suspected, or negative) was defined according to the World Health Organization's criteria. SETTING: Information on the patients and their care was extracted from the French national out-of-hospital cardiac arrest registry. The French prehospital emergency medical system has two tiers: the fire department intervenes rapidly to provide basic life support, and mobile ICUs provide advanced life support. The study data (including each patient's coronavirus disease 2019 status) were collected by 95 mobile ICUs throughout France. PATIENTS: We included 6,624 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: 127 cases with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, 473 with suspected coronavirus disease 2019, and 6,024 negative for coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The "confirmed" and "suspected" groups of coronavirus disease 2019 patients had similar characteristics and were more likely to have suffered an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with a respiratory cause (confirmed: 53.7%, suspected coronavirus disease 2019: 56.5%; p = 0.472) than noncoronavirus disease 2019 patients (14.0%; p < 0.001 vs confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 patients). Advanced life support was initiated for 57.5% of the confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 patients, compared with 64.5% of the suspected coronavirus disease 2019 patients (p = 0.149) and 70.6% of the noncoronavirus disease 2019 ones (p = 0.002). The survival rate at 30-day postout-of-hospital cardiac arrest was 0% in the confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 group, 0.9% in the suspected coronavirus disease 2019 group (p = 0.583 vs confirmed), and 3.5% (p = 0.023) in the noncoronavirus disease 2019 group. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlighted a zero survival rate in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. This finding raises important questions with regard to the futility of resuscitation for coronavirus disease 2019 patients and the management of the associated risks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Emergency Medical Services/methods , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Registries
14.
Lancet ; 398(10307): 1257-1268, 2021 10 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1447236

ABSTRACT

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation prioritises treatment for cardiac arrests from a primary cardiac cause, which make up the majority of treated cardiac arrests. Early chest compressions and, when indicated, a defibrillation shock from a bystander give the best chance of survival with a good neurological status. Cardiac arrest can also be caused by special circumstances, such as asphyxia, trauma, pulmonary embolism, accidental hypothermia, anaphylaxis, or COVID-19, and during pregnancy or perioperatively. Cardiac arrests in these circumstances represent an increasing proportion of all treated cardiac arrests, often have a preventable cause, and require additional interventions to correct a reversible cause during resuscitation. The evidence for treating these conditions is mostly of low or very low certainty and further studies are needed. Irrespective of the cause, treatments for cardiac arrest are time sensitive and most effective when given early-every minute counts.


Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis/therapy , Asphyxia/therapy , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Heart Arrest/therapy , Hypothermia/therapy , Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular/therapy , Pulmonary Embolism/therapy , Wounds and Injuries/therapy , Anaphylaxis/complications , Asphyxia/complications , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Electric Countershock , Female , Heart Arrest/etiology , Humans , Hypothermia/complications , Intraoperative Complications/therapy , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/etiology , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Personal Protective Equipment , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Pregnancy , Pulmonary Embolism/complications , Return of Spontaneous Circulation , SARS-CoV-2 , Wounds and Injuries/complications
15.
Resuscitation ; 167: 22-28, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1347808

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation within CPR (ECPR) may improve survival among patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We evaluated outcomes after incorporating ECPR into a conventional resuscitation system. METHODS: We introduced a prehospital-activated ECPR protocol for select refractory OHCAs into one of four metropolitan regions in British Columbia. We prospectively identified ECPR-eligible patients in both the ECPR region and the three other regions to serve as the control group. We compared the proportion with favorable neurological outcomes at hospital discharge (cerebral performance category ≤2) and used logistic regression to estimate the association with treatment region. RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely due to changes in hospital protocols and COVID-19. In the ECPR region, 15/58 (25.9%) patients had favourable neurological outcomes owing to conventional resuscitation and 2/58 (3.4%) owing to ECPR, for a total of 17/58 (29.3%). In the control regions, 67/250 (26.8%) patients had a favourable outcome owing to conventional resuscitation, for a between-group difference of 2.5% (95% CI -10 to 15%). We did not detect a statistically significant association between treatment region and outcomes. CONCLUSION: In this prematurely-terminated study of ECPR for refractory OHCA, we did not detect an association between a regional ECPR protocol and neurologically favorable outcomes. However, our data suggests that outcomes owing to conventional resuscitation were similar, with the potential for additional survivors due to ECPR therapies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Emerg Med J ; 38(9): 679-684, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1311172

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Emergency medical service (EMS) personnel have high COVID-19 risk during resuscitation. The resuscitation protocol for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) was modified in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, how the adjustments in the EMS system affected patients with OHCA remains unclear. METHODS: We analysed data from the Taichung OHCA registry system. We compared OHCA outcomes and rescue records for 622 cases during the COVID-19 outbreak period (1 February to 30 April 2020) with those recorded for 570 cases during the same period in 2019. RESULTS: The two periods did not differ significantly with respect to patient age, patient sex, the presence of witnesses or OHCA location. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation with automated external defibrillators were more common in 2020 (52.81% vs 65.76%, p<0.001%, and 23.51% vs 31.67%, p=0.001, respectively). The EMS response time was longer during the COVID-19 pandemic (445.8±210.2 s in 2020 vs 389.7±201.8 s in 2019, p<0.001). The rate of prehospital return of spontaneous circulation was lower in 2020 (6.49% vs 2.57%, p=0.001); 2019 and 2020 had similar rates of survival discharge (5.96% vs 4.98%). However, significantly fewer cases had favourable neurological function in 2020 (4.21% vs 2.09%, p=0.035). CONCLUSION: EMS response time for patients with OHCA was prolonged during the COVID-19 pandemic. Early advanced life support by EMS personnel remains crucial for patients with OHCA.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/standards , Emergency Medical Services/standards , Emergency Medical Technicians/standards , Emergency Medical Technicians/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/complications , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Taiwan/epidemiology , Time-to-Treatment/standards , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
18.
Curr Opin Crit Care ; 27(3): 209-215, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1294818

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss different approaches to citizen responder activation and possible future solutions for improved citizen engagement in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) resuscitation. RECENT FINDINGS: Activating volunteer citizens to OHCA has the potential to improve OHCA survival by increasing bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and early defibrillation. Accordingly, citizen responder systems have become widespread in numerous countries despite very limited evidence of their effect on survival or cost-effectiveness. To date, only one randomized trial has investigated the effect of citizen responder activation for which the outcome was bystander CPR. Recent publications are of observational nature with high risk of bias. A scoping review published in 2020 provided an overview of available citizen responder systems and their differences in who, when, and how to activate volunteer citizens. These differences are further discussed in this review. SUMMARY: Implementation of citizen responder programs holds the potential to improve bystander intervention in OHCA, with advancing technology offering new improvement possibilities. Information on how to best activate citizen responders as well as the effect on survival following OHCA is warranted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of citizen responder programs.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Electric Countershock , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy
19.
Resuscitation ; 166: 101-109, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1271768

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is still low. For every minute without resuscitation the likelihood of survival decreases. One critical step is initiation of immediate, high quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The aim of this subgroup analysis of data collected for the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest Study number 2 (EuReCa TWO) was to investigate the association between OHCA survival and two types of bystander CPR namely: chest compression only CPR (CConly) and CPR with chest compressions and ventilations (FullCPR). METHOD: In this subgroup analysis of EuReCa TWO, all patients who received bystander CPR were included. Outcomes were return of spontaneous circulation and survival to 30-days or hospital discharge. A multilevel binary logistic regression analysis with survival as the dependent variable was performed. RESULTS: A total of 5884 patients were included in the analysis, varying between countries from 21 to 1444. Survival was 320 (8%) in the CConly group and 174 (13%) in the FullCPR group. After adjustment for age, sex, location, rhythm, cause, time to scene, witnessed collapse and country, patients who received FullCPR had a significantly higher survival rate when compared to those who received CConly (adjusted odds ration 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.17-1.83). CONCLUSION: In this analysis, FullCPR was associated with higher survival compared to CConly. Guidelines should continue to emphasise the importance of compressions and ventilations during resuscitation for patients who suffer OHCA and CPR courses should continue to teach both.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Emergency Medical Services , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , Registries , Survival Rate , Ventilation
20.
Emerg Med J ; 38(9): 673-678, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1287247

ABSTRACT

AIM: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is an emergency procedure where interpersonal distance cannot be maintained. There are and will always be outbreaks of infection from airborne diseases. Our objective was to assess the potential risk of airborne virus transmission during CPR in open-air conditions. METHODS: We performed advanced high-fidelity three-dimensional modelling and simulations to predict airborne transmission during out-of-hospital hands-only CPR. The computational model considers complex fluid dynamics and heat transfer phenomena such as aerosol evaporation, breakup, coalescence, turbulence, and local interactions between the aerosol and the surrounding fluid. Furthermore, we incorporated the effects of the wind speed/direction, the air temperature and relative humidity on the transport of contaminated saliva particles emitted from a victim during a resuscitation process based on an Airborne Infection Risk (AIR) Index. RESULTS: The results reveal low-risk conditions that include wind direction and high relative humidity and temperature. High-risk situations include wind directed to the rescuer, low humidity and temperature. Combinations of other conditions have an intermediate AIR Index and risk for the rescue team. CONCLUSIONS: The fluid dynamics, simulation-based AIR Index provides a classification of the risk of contagion by victim's aerosol in the case of hands-only CPR considering environmental factors such as wind speed and direction, relative humidity and temperature. Therefore, we recommend that rescuers perform a quick assessment of their airborne infectious risk before starting CPR in the open air and positioning themselves to avoid wind directed to their faces.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/adverse effects , Models, Biological , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Aerosols/adverse effects , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/standards , Computer Simulation , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Humidity , Hydrodynamics , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/complications , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Temperature , Wind
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL