Safety and Adverse Events During Primary Care Paramedic Interfacility Transfer of Stable STEMI Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines recommend that patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) to hospitals not capable of performing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) be transferred to a PCI-capable hospital if reperfusion can be accomplished within 120 min. Most STEMI patients are accompanied by an advanced care paramedic (ACP, equivalent to EMT-P), nurse, or physician who can manage complications should they arise. In our region, stable STEMI patients are transported by primary care paramedics (PCPs, similar scope of practice to advanced EMT) in cases where a nurse, physician, or ACP paramedic is not available. Our goal was to describe adverse events and need for advanced interventions among initially stable STEMI patients during interfacility transfer by PCPs. METHODS: We reviewed ambulance and hospital records of initially stable STEMI patients (as determined by first set of vital signs documented by paramedics) transferred to a PCI-capable hospital by PCPs between March 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. We identified whether pre-determined adverse clinical events occurred during the transport as well as the potential need for advanced care interventions not within the PCP scope of practice. Adverse events upon arrival in the PCI lab were also identified. RESULTS: Of 346 STEMI patients transferred, 179 met inclusion criteria. The mean age of included patients was 61 years (SD 12.1) and 74.9% (134/179) were male. Median transport interval was 36 min (IQR 3.0). During transport, 47/179 (26.0%) patients experienced pre-defined adverse events; for 16/47 (34%), one or more adverse events was major. Three patients met criteria for ACP interventions. One patient suffered a cardiac arrest and was promptly resuscitated with defibrillation by the PCPs. CONCLUSIONS: We found PCP-interfacility transport of initially stable STEMI patients was safe and associated with a moderate proportion of adverse events, the majority of which did not require an advanced care intervention. These findings may help decision-making to avoid delays transferring stable patients to PCI-capable centers.

The impact of double sequential shock timing on outcomes during refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Animal studies suggest the efficacy of double sequential external defibrillation (DSED) may depend on the interval between the two shocks, or "DSED interval". No human studies have examined this concept. OBJECTIVES: To determine the relationship between DSED interval and termination of ventricular fibrillation (VFT), return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital discharge, and favourable neurological status (MRS ≤ 2) for patients in refractory VF. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of adult (≥18 years) out-of-hospital cardiac arrest between January 2015 and May 2022 with refractory VF who received ≥1 DSED shock. DSED interval was divided into four pre-defined categories. We examined the association between DSED interval and patient outcomes using general estimated equation logistic regression or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Among 106 included patients, 303 DSED shocks were delivered (median 2, IQR 1-3). DSED intervals of 75-125 ms (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16-0.98), 125-500 ms (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16-0.82), and >500 ms (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.63) were associated with lower probability of VF termination compared to <75 ms interval. DSED interval of >75 ms was associated with lower probability of ROSC compared to <75 ms interval (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.98). No association was noted between DSED interval and survival to hospital discharge or neurologic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients in refractory VF a DSED interval of less than 75 ms was associated with improved rates of VF termination and ROSC. No association was noted between DSED interval and survival to hospital discharge or neurologic outcome.

The Effect of Time to Treatment With Antiarrhythmic Drugs on Survival and Neurological Outcomes in Shock Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

OBJECTIVES: Examining the association of time to treatment (drug or placebo) with survival to hospital discharge and neurologic outcome. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Amiodarone, Lidocaine, Placebo randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Emergency medical services enrolled patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) at multiple North American sites. PATIENTS: Adults with nontraumatic OHCA and an initial rhythm of ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia refractory to at least one defibrillation attempt were included. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We used logistic regression to examine the association of time to treatment with survival to hospital discharge and favorable neurologic status at discharge (modified Rankin Scale ≤ 3) for the three treatment groups including an interaction term between treatment and time to treatment to determine the effect of time on treatment effects. Time to treatment data were available for 2,994 out of 3,026 patients (99%). The proportion of patients who survived to hospital discharge decreased as time to drug administration increased, in amiodarone (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.90-0.93 per min), lidocaine (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.96), and placebo (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.90-0.93). Comparing amiodarone to placebo, there was improved survival at all times of drug administration (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.05-1.65). Comparing lidocaine to placebo, survival was not different with shorter times to drug administration (< 11 min), whereas survival was higher with lidocaine at longer times to drug administration with an interaction between treatment effect and time to treatment (p = 0.048). Survival with good neurologic outcome showed similar results for all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Survival and favorable neurologic outcomes decreased with longer times to drug administration. Amiodarone improved survival at all time points whereas lidocaine improved survival only at later time points, compared with placebo.

Effect of Time to Treatment With Antiarrhythmic Drugs on Return of Spontaneous Circulation in Shock-Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

Background The effects of amiodarone and lidocaine on the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in relation to time to treatment in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is not known. We conducted a post hoc analysis of the ROC ALPS (Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Amiodarone, Lidocaine, Placebo) randomized controlled trial examining the association of time to treatment (drug or placebo) with ROSC at hospital arrival. Methods and Results In the trial, adults with nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with initial refractory ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia after at least 1 defibrillation were randomly assigned to receive amiodarone, lidocaine, or placebo. We used logistic regression to examine the association of time to treatment (911 call to study drug administration) with ROSC. An interaction term between treatment and time to treatment was included to determine the potential effect of time on treatment effects. Overall, 1112 (36.7%) patients had ROSC at hospital arrival (350 in the amiodarone arm, 396 in the lidocaine arm, and 366 in the placebo arm). The proportion of patients who had ROSC decreased as time to drug administration increased, in patients treated with amiodarone (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94 per minute increase), lidocaine (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.96), and placebo (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.96). With shorter times to drug administration, the proportion with ROSC was higher in amiodarone versus placebo recipients. Conclusions The probability of ROSC decreased as time to drug administration increased. The effect of amiodarone but not lidocaine to restore ROSC declined with longer times to drug administration, potentially attributable to its adverse hemodynamic effects.