Partnering with survivors & families to determine research priorities for adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

BACKGROUND: Research priority setting in health care has historically been done by expert health care providers and researchers and has not involved patients, family or the public. Survivors & family members have been particularly absent from this process in the field of resuscitation research and specifically adult out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). As such, we sought to conduct a priority setting exercise in partnership with survivors, lay responders and their families in order to ensure that their priorities were visible. We partnered with the James Lind Alliance (UK) and used their commonly used consensus methodology for Public Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) to identify research priorities that reflected the perspectives of all stakeholders. METHODS: We used two rounds of public and health care professional surveys to create the initial priority lists. The initial survey collected open-ended questions while the second round consolidated the list of initial questions into a refined list for prioritization. This was done by reviewing existing evidence and thematic categorization by the multi-disciplinary steering committee. An in-person consensus workshop was conducted to come to consensus on the top ten priorities from all perspectives. The McMaster PPEET tool was used to measure engagement. RESULTS: The initial survey yielded more than 425 responses and 1450 "questions" from survivors and family members (18%), lay responders, health care providers and others. The second survey asked participants to rank a short list of 125 questions. The final top 25 questions were brought to the in-person meeting, and a top ten were selected through the JLA consensus process. The final list of top ten questions included how to improve the rate of lay responder CPR, what interventions used at the scene of an arrest can improve resuscitation and survival, how survival can be improved in rural areas of Canada, what resuscitation medications are most effective, what care patient's family members need, what post-discharge support is needed for survivors, how communication should work for everyone involved with a cardiac arrest, what factors best predict neurologically intact survival, whether biomarkers/genetic tests are effective in predicting OHCA and more research on the short and long-term psycho-social impacts of OHCA on survivors. The PPEET showed overwhelmingly positive results for the patient and family engagement experience during the final workshop. CONCLUSIONS: This inclusive research priority setting provides essential information for those doing resuscitation research internationally. The results provide a guide for priority areas of research and should drive our community to focus on questions that matter to survivors and their families in our work. In particular the Canadian Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium will be incorporating the top ten list into its strategic plan for the future.

"Drones are a great idea! What is an AED?" novel insights from a qualitative study on public perception of using drones to deliver automatic external defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: The quickest way to ensure survival in an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is for a bystander to provide immediate cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and apply an automated external defibrillator (AED). The urgency of OHCA treatment has led to the proposal of alternative avenues for better access to AEDs, particularly in rural settings. More recently, using unmanned aerial vehicles (or drones) to deliver AEDs to rural OHCA sites has proven promising in improving survival rates. OBJECTIVE: A pilot drone AED delivery program is currently being piloted in the community of Caledon, Ontario. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of public perception and acceptance of the use of drones for this purpose and to identify tailored community engagement strategies to ensure successful uptake. METHODS: In-depth qualitative descriptive study using interviews and focus group data collection and inductive thematic analysis. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 67 community members (40 interviews; 2 focus groups of 15) at existing community events in the project area. Interview guides were used to ensure consistency across data collection events. Detailed field notes were recorded when audio-recording was not possible. RESULTS: The central message seen throughout the data was quickly identified as the potential impact of low levels of CPR and AED literacy in the community over anything else including concerns about the drone. The impact of the community's existing relationship with the EMS; the need for bystander CPR & AED promotion prior to the program launch; and the value the community places on transparency and accountability related to the research and the drones were also key findings. In general, the drone concept was found to be acceptable but concerns about providing CPR and using the AED was what created anxieties in the lay public that we underestimated. CONCLUSION: Drone-delivered AEDs may be feasible and effective but successful uptake in smaller communities will require a deep understanding of a community's cardiac arrest literacy levels, information needs and readiness for innovation. This work will inform a robust community engagement plan that will be scalable to other locations considering a drone AED program.

Prehospital cooling to improve successful targeted temperature management after cardiac arrest: A randomized controlled trial.

RATIONALE: Targeted temperature management (TTM) improves survival with good neurological outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but is delivered inconsistently and often with delay. OBJECTIVE: To determine if prehospital cooling by paramedics leads to higher rates of 'successful TTM', defined as achieving a target temperature of 32-34°C within 6h of hospital arrival. METHODS: Pragmatic RCT comparing prehospital cooling (surface ice packs, cold saline infusion, wristband reminders) initiated 5min after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) versus usual resuscitation and transport. The primary outcome was rate of 'successful TTM'; secondary outcomes were rates of applying TTM in hospital, survival with good neurological outcome, pulmonary edema in emergency department, and re-arrest during transport. RESULTS: 585 patients were randomized to receive prehospital cooling (n=279) or control (n=306). Prehospital cooling did not increase rates of 'successful TTM' (30% vs 25%; RR, 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-1.52; p=0.22), but increased rates of applying TTM in hospital (68% vs 56%; RR, 1.21; 95%CI 1.07-1.37; p=0.003). Survival with good neurological outcome (29% vs 26%; RR, 1.13, 95%CI 0.87-1.47; p=0.37) was similar. Prehospital cooling was not associated with re-arrest during transport (7.5% vs 8.2%; RR, 0.94; 95%CI 0.54-1.63; p=0.83) but was associated with decreased incidence of pulmonary edema in emergency department (12% vs 18%; RR, 0.66; 95%CI 0.44-0.99; p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital cooling initiated 5min after ROSC did not increase rates of achieving a target temperature of 32-34°C within 6h of hospital arrival but was safe and increased application of TTM in hospital.

A population-based study of the epidemiology of pancreatic cancer: a brief report.

OBJECTIVE: Administrative data are used to describe the pancreatic cancer (pcc) population. The analysis examines demographic details, incidence, site, survival, and factors influencing mortality in a cohort of individuals diagnosed with pcc. METHODS: Incident cases of pcc diagnosed in Ontario between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2011 were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry. They were linked by encrypted health card number to several administrative databases to obtain demographic and mortality information. Descriptive, bivariate, and survival analyses were conducted. RESULTS: During the period of interest, 9221 new cases of pcc (4548 in men, 4673 in women) were diagnosed, for an age-adjusted standardized annual incidence in the range of 8.6-9.5 per 100,000 population. Mean age at diagnosis was 70.3 ± 12.5 years (standard deviation). Five-year survival was 7.2% (12.8% for those <60 years of age and 3.6% for those >80 years of age). Survival varied by sex, older age, rural residence, lower income, site of involvement in the pancreas, and presence of comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate in pcc is exceptionally high. With an increasing incidence and a mortality positively associated with age, additional support will be needed for this highly fatal disease as demographics in Ontario continue to trend toward a higher proportion of older individuals.

Health system costs for stage-specific breast cancer: a population-based approach.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present analysis was to determine the publicly funded health care costs associated with the care of breast cancer (bca) patients by disease stage. METHODS: Incident cases of female invasive bca (2005-2009) were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked to administrative datasets from the publicly funded system. The type and use of health care services were stratified by disease stage over the first 2 years after diagnosis. Mean costs and costs by type of clinical resource used in the care of bca patients were compared with costs for a matched control group. The attributable cost for the 2-year time horizon was determined in 2008 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: This cohort study involved 39,655 patients with bca and 190,520 control subjects. The average age in those groups was 61.1 and 60.9 years respectively. Most bca patients were classified as either stage i (34.4%) or stage ii (31.8%). Of the bca cohort, 8% died within the first 2 years after diagnosis. The overall mean cost per bca case from a public payer perspective in the first 2 years after diagnosis was $41,686. Over the 2-year time horizon, the mean cost increased by stage: i, $29,938; ii, $46,893; iii, $65,369; and iv, $66,627. The attributable cost of bca was $31,732. Cost drivers were cancer clinic visits, physician billings, and hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Costs of care increased by stage of bca. Cost drivers were cancer clinic visits, physician billings, and hospitalizations. These data will assist planning and decision-making for the use of limited health care resources.

Are the 2010 guidelines on cardiopulmonary resuscitation lost in translation? A call for increased focus on implementation science.

Despite significant resources spent on rigorous evidence review and resuscitation guideline development, an important gap remains in our understanding of effective strategies and tools for implementing resuscitation guidelines. The lack of evidence about effective guideline implementation for resuscitation is likely reducing the impact of the incredible amount of work that goes into the production of such guidelines. This commentary draws attention to knowledge translation learnings from other content areas and within the area of resuscitation science to support a call for increased attention and innovation in implementation science as an equally important investment for the future of resuscitation medicine.

Population-based home care services in breast cancer: utilization and costs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine utilization and costs of home care services (hcs) for individuals with a diagnosis of breast cancer (bc). METHODS: Incident cases of invasive bc in women were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry (2005-2009) and linked with other Ontario health care administrative databases. Control patients were selected from the population of women never diagnosed with any type of cancer. The types and proportions of hcs used were determined and stratified by disease stage. Attributable home care utilization and costs for bc patients were determined. Factors associated with hcs costs were assessed using regression analysis. RESULTS: Among the 39,656 bc and 198,280 control patients identified (median age: 61.6 years for both), 75.4% of bc patients used hcs (62.1% stage i; 85.7% stage ii; 94.6% stage iii; 79.1% stage iv) compared with 14.6% of control patients. The number of hcs used per patient-year were significantly higher for the bc patients than for the control patients (14.97 vs. 6.13, p < 0.01), resulting in higher costs per patient-year ($1,210 vs. $325; $885 attributable cost to bc, p < 0.01). The number of hcs utilized and the associated costs increased as the bc stage increased. In contrast, hcs costs decreased as income increased and as previous health care exposure decreased. INTERPRETATION: Patients with bc used twice as many hcs, resulting in costs that were almost 4 times those observed in a matched control group. Less than an additional $1000 per bc patient per year were spent on hcs utilization in the study population.