Abstract 1812: More CPR with the New Guidelines. Does it Impact VF Termination by Defibrillation Shocks?

Circulation ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 116 (suppl_16) ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Hersan ◽  
Daniel Jost ◽  
Isabelle L Banville ◽  
Franck Calamai ◽  
David Fontaine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Study Protocol ◽  
Statistical Power ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Termination Rate ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Resuscitation Guidelines ◽  
New Guidelines

The 2005 resuscitation Guidelines emphasize reducing interruptions of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and provide changes to the CPR and defibrillation protocols for automated external defibrillator (AED) use. We investigated whether the differences between Guidelines 2000 and 2005 resuscitation protocols influence the ventricular fibrillation (VF) termination rate of AED shocks during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods: As part of a clinical trial, VF cardiac arrest patients treated by firefighters were prospectively randomized to treatment protocols consistent with Guidelines 2000 (CONTROL) or Guidelines 2005 (STUDY). The STUDY protocol removed stacked shocks and post-shock pulse checks. It featured 1 minute of CPR before the 1st shock, and CPR between rhythm analysis and shock delivery. All AEDs delivered escalating biphasic shocks beginning at 200J. We reviewed AED electronic records to evaluate VF termination for all shocks within the first 8 minutes of treatment. Successful defibrillation was defined per Guidelines 2005 as termination of VF for > 5seconds. A sample size of 400 shocks per group was prospectively chosen for statistical power to detect an 8% difference in VF termination rate. Results: As expected, the STUDY protocol resulted in more prompted CPR time, more actual CPR delivered, and fewer shocks during the first 8 minutes of treatment. The VF termination rate did not differ between the two groups (85% CONTROL vs. 87% STUDY). The proportions of patients with ventricular complexes (24% vs. 27%), in asystole (61% vs. 60%), or remaining in a shockable rhythm (15% vs. 13%) at 5 seconds were also not different between the CONTROL and STUDY groups, respectively. Conclusion: Despite a reduction in CPR hands-off time, VF termination effectiveness of biphasic shocks is similar for Guidelines 2000 and Guidelines 2005 cardiac arrest treatment protocols.

Abstract P82: Implementation Of New Resuscitation Guidelines Takes One-and-a-half Year

Circulation ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 118 (suppl_18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jocelyn Berdowski ◽  
Andra Schmohl ◽  
Rudolph W Koster
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
World Wide ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Spontaneous Circulation ◽  
Chest Compressions ◽  
Return Of Spontaneous Circulation ◽  
Resuscitation Guidelines ◽  
Rhythm Analysis ◽  
New Guidelines ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Objective- In November 2005, updated resuscitation guidelines were introduced world-wide, and will be revised again in 2010. This study aims to determine how long it takes to implement new guidelines. Methods- This was a prospective observational study. From July 2005 to January 2008, we included all patients with a non traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Ambulance paramedics sent all continuous ECG registrations with impedance signal by modem. We excluded ECGs from patients with Return Of Spontaneous Circulation at arrival, incomplete ECG registrations, ECGs with technical deficits or with continuous chest compressions. The same guidelines needed to be used in over 75% of the registration time in order to be labeled. We classified ECGs as guidelines 2000 if the c:v ratio was 15:2, shock blocks were present and there was rhythm analysis after each shock; guidelines 2005 if the c:v ratio was 30:2, a single shock protocol was used and chest compressions was immediately resumed after shock or rhythm analysis in a no shock scenario. We accepted 10% deviations in the amount of compressions (13–17 for 2000 guidelines, 27–33 for 2005). Results- Of the 1703 analyzable ECGs, we classified 827 (48.6%) as guidelines 2000 and 624 (36.6%) as guidelines 2005. In the remaining 252 ECGs (14.8%) 31 used guidelines 1992, 137 applied guidelines 2000 with c:v ratio of 30:2 and 84 did not show distinguishable guideline usage. Since the introduction in November 2005, it took 17 months to apply new guidelines in over 80% of the cases (figure 1 ). Conclusion- Guideline changes are slowly implemented by professionals. This needs to be taken in consideration when new guideline revisions are considered.

scholarly journals External validation of multimodal termination of resuscitation rules for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients in the COVID-19 era

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haewon Jung ◽  
Mijin Lee ◽  
Jae Wan Cho ◽  
Sang Hun Lee ◽  
Suk Hee Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Disease Transmission ◽  
Life Support ◽  
External Validation ◽  
Advanced Life Support ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Multicenter Observational Study ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Abstract Background: Futile resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients in the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 era can lead to risk of disease transmission and unnecessary transport. Various existing basic or advanced life support (BLS or ALS, respectively) rules for the termination of resuscitation (TOR) have been derived and validated in North America and Asian countries. This study aimed to evaluate the external validation of these rules in predicting the survival outcomes of OHCA patients in the COVID-19 era.Methods: This was a multicenter observational study using the WinCOVID-19 Daegu registry data collected during February 18–March 31, 2020. The subjects were patients who showed cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac etiology. The outcomes of each rule were compared to the actual patient survival outcomes. The sensitivity, specificity, false positive value (FPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) of each TOR rule were evaluated. Results: In total, 170 of the 184 OHCA patients were eligible and evaluated. TOR was recommended for 122 patients based on the international basic life support termination of resuscitation (BLS-TOR) rule, which showed 85% specificity, 74% sensitivity, 0.8% FPV, and 99% PPV for predicting unfavorable survival outcomes. When the traditional BLS-TOR rules and KoCARC TOR rule II were applied to our registry, one patient met the TOR criteria but survived at hospital discharge. With regard to the FPV (upper limit of 95% confidence interval <5%), specificity (100%), and PPV (>99%) criteria, only the KoCARC TOR rule I, which included a combination of three factors including not being witnessed by emergency medical technicians, presenting with an asystole at the scene, and not experiencing prehospital shock delivery or return of spontaneous circulation, was found to be superior to all other TOR rules. Conclusion: Among the previous nine BLS and ALS TOR rules, KoCARC TOR rule I was most suitable for predicting poor survival outcomes and showed improved diagnostic performance. Further research on variations in resources and treatment protocols among facilities, regions, and cultures will be useful in determining the feasibility of TOR rules for COVID-19 patients worldwide.

scholarly journals Use, Outcomes and Policy on the Placement of Automated External Defibrillators on Commercial Aircraft for the Management of In-flight Cardiac Arrest; A Scoping Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Sheehan ◽  
Tom Quinn
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Commercial Aircraft ◽  
Public Places ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Automated External Defibrillators ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Online Databases ◽  
International Policies

<p><strong>ABSTRACT</strong></p><p><strong>Introduction </strong></p><p>Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are increasingly available in public places for the treatment of cardiac arrest. Some commercial aircraft carry an AED, but little is known about international policies and requirements. The aim is to review policy regarding AED placement on commercial aircraft, summarising reported incidence and outcomes of AED utilisation for individuals experiencing an in-flight cardiac arrest (IFCA).</p><p><strong>Methods</strong></p><p>A scoping review was undertaken. Online databases (Medline and CINAHL) were searched using prespecified terms to identify reports evidencing use, outcome and policy of AEDS for IFCA on commercial aircraft. Reports were screened and data extracted following scoping review extraction methods. Data were analysed to describe incidence of AED use and outcomes following IFCA, and policies regarding AED placement on commercial aircraft.</p><p><strong>Results</strong>  </p><p>9 observational studies were identified. 8 reported instances of successful shock delivery using AED. No published reports of safety incidents involving in-flight AED use were found. 7 studies reported survival following AED use: of these, 6 reported administration of a shock for IFCA survivors, whilst 1 study reported deployment of an AED without shock delivery.  Overall, survival following in-flight AED use was 9%, with 37% survival reported where patients presented with shockable rhythm. Only one policy mandating AED placement on commercial aircraft was identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p><p>Despite the small, retrospective and observational nature of the reports identified, findings suggest in-flight AED use is feasible and associated with improved outcomes from IFCA.</p><p><strong>Keywords:</strong> cardiac arrest; defibrillators; AED; aircraft; flight </p>

Abstract 12258: Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest With Initially Shockable Rhythm: What Are the Outcomes if No Shock is Given?

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Xiong ◽  
Ahamed H Idris
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Spontaneous Circulation ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Return Of Spontaneous Circulation ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Multiple Variable ◽  
Multiple Variable Regression ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Resuscitation Attempt

Background: Prompt defibrillation is critical for termination of ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). For ethical reasons, the real impact of not shocking OHCA patients with a shockable rhythm is unlikely to be investigated in clinical trials and thus remains unknown. Objectives: To describe demographics, pre-hospital characteristics, interventions, and outcomes in OHCA patients with an initially shockable rhythm who did and did not get shocked in the field in DFW ROC site. Methods: We included all non-traumatic OHCA cases ≥18 years old with VF or VT as first known rhythms, who were treated and transported to a hospital within the DFW ROC site between 2006 - 2011. We report return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in the field and survival to hospital discharge for victims with and without shock delivered in the field. Multiple variable regression analysis assessed the association between shock delivery and ROSC in the field as well as survival. Results: Included were 882 adult non-traumatic OHCA cases with VF or VT as first known rhythms; mean (±SD) age was 60 ± 15 years, 71% male, bystander witnessed 56%, bystander resuscitation attempt 43%, public arrest location 26%, EMS response time 4.7 ± 2.3 min, 26.9% (237) had ROSC in the field, 14.9% (131) survived to hospital discharge; 93.4% (824) of all patients were shocked, while 6.6% (58) were not shocked. Of the 6.6% (58) who were not shocked, 12.1% (7) achieved ROSC in the field and 8.6% (5) survived to hospital discharge. For those not shocked in the field, the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for ROSC were 0.354 (95% CI 0.158-0.791, p=0.011) and 0.189 (95% CI 0.039-0.911, p=0.038), respectively; and for survival to hospital discharge they were 0.522 (95% CI 0.205-1.331, p=0.173) and 0.498 (95% CI 0.088-2.810, p=0.430), respectively. Conclusions: In the DFW ROC site, 6.6% of OHCA victims with an initially shockable rhythm did not receive a shock, which was significantly associated with decreased ROSC in the field. More patients survived who were shocked in the field, but this difference was not significant after adjustment for Utstein variables.

Abstract 98: The Association Between Manual Mode Defibrillation, Preshock Pause Duration and Appropriate Shock Delivery When Employed by Basic Life Support Paramedics During Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheldon Cheskes ◽  
Morgan Hillier ◽  
Cathy Zhan ◽  
Adam Byers ◽  
P R Verbeek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Pause Duration ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Correct Identification ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Inappropriate Shocks ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Manual Mode

BACKGROUND: Pre-shock pause duration of < 20 seconds is associated with improved survival after cardiac arrest. Manual mode defibrillation has been associated with the shortest duration of pre-shock pause but is largely practiced by paramedics (EMT-P) whereas defibrillator only providers (EMT-D) routinely use the defibrillator in automatic mode. OBJECTIVE: We sought to explore the relationship between manual mode defibrillation, pre-shock pause duration and shock appropriateness when defibrillation is provided by EMT-P vs. EMT-D level of providers. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all treated non-traumatic adult OHCA presenting in a shockable rhythm over a one year period beginning January 1, 2012. Our primary outcome measure was the proportion of manual mode shocks delivered by EMT-D’s with pre- shock pause duration of < 20 secs when compared to EMT-P’s. Our secondary outcome measures were the duration of pre-, post- and peri-shock pause and the proportion of appropriate shocks (defined as correct identification and shock delivery to patients in a shockable rhythm) delivered by either level of provider. This study had a power of 90% to detect an absolute difference of 15% between provider levels in proportion of shocks delivered with pre-shock pause duration <20 secs. RESULTS: Among 2019 treated OHCA, 335(20%) presented in a shockable rhythm. Manual defibrillation was performed in 155 (46%) of these cases (196 shocks by EMT-P, 143 shocks by EMT-D). There were no differences in the proportion of shocks delivered with pre-shock pause duration <20 secs (EMT-P 82.8% vs EMT-D 84.8%, p =.65) nor pre-shock pause duration (sec) (median, Q1, Q3); EMT-P: 12.0 (7.0,17.0) vs. EMT-D: 11.0 (5.0,17.0), p= .13 while EMT-D had shorter peri- shock pause duration (sec) (median, Q1, Q3); EMT-P: 17.0 (12.0, 23.0) vs. EMT-D: 15.0 (9.0, 22.0), p =.03. There were no differences in the rate of inappropriate shocks (EMT-P 1.0% vs EMT-D 0.7%), p=1.0. CONCLUSIONS: Manual mode defibrillation by EMT-D’s produced similar measures of pre-shock pause when compared to EMT-P’s without increasing the rate of inappropriate shocks. More widespread use of EMT-D manual mode defibrillation may have the potential to decrease shock pause duration and improve survival.

scholarly journals A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of extracorporeal-CPR versus conventional-CPR for adult patients in cardiac arrest

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 347-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Callum J Twohig ◽  
Ben Singer ◽  
Gareth Grier ◽  
Simon J Finney
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Low Flow ◽  
Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Resuscitation Guidelines ◽  
Bystander Cpr ◽  
Refractory Cardiac Arrest

Introduction The probability of surviving a cardiac arrest remains low. International resuscitation guidelines state that extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) may have a role in selected patients suffering refractory cardiac arrest. Identifying these patients is challenging. This project systematically reviewed the evidence comparing the outcomes of ECPR over conventional-CPR (CCPR), before examining resuscitation-specific parameters to assess which patients might benefit from ECPR. Method Literature searches of studies comparing ECPR to CCPR and the clinical parameters of survivors of ECPR were performed. The primary outcome examined was survival at hospital discharge or 30 days. A secondary analysis examined the resuscitation parameters that may be associated with survival in patients who receive ECPR (no-flow and low-flow intervals, bystander-CPR, initial shockable cardiac rhythm, and witnessed cardiac arrest). Results Seventeen of 948 examined studies were included. ECPR demonstrated improved survival (OR 0.40 (0.27–0.60)) and a better neurological outcome (OR 0.10 (0.04–0.27)) over CCPR during literature review and meta-analysis. Characteristics that were associated with improved survival in patients receiving ECPR included an initial shockable rhythm and a shorter low-flow time. Shorter no-flow, the presence of bystander-CPR and witnessed arrests were not characteristics that were associated with improved survival following meta-analysis, although the quality of input data was low. All data were non-randomised, and hence the potential for bias is high. Conclusion ECPR is a sophisticated treatment option which may improve outcomes in a selected patient population in refractory cardiac arrest. Further comparative research is needed clarify the role of this potential resuscitative therapy.

scholarly journals Therapeutic hypothermia after cardiac arrest

2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-18
Author(s):  
A. Iglica ◽  
K. Aganovic ◽  
A. Godinjak ◽  
A. Mujakovic ◽  
S. Jusufovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Therapeutic Hypothermia ◽  
Supportive Therapy ◽  
Heart Association ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Liaison Committee ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Resuscitation Guidelines ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Therapeutic hypothermia in selected patients surviving sudden out-of-hospital cardiac arrest can significantly improve rates of long-term survival and is considered as one of the most important clinical advancements in the science of resuscitation. Since 2003 the American Heart Association/International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation guidelines endorsed the use of hypothermic therapies as standard care for patients suffering from cardiac arrest while in 2005 additional inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to patients experiencing in or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with an initial shockable and non shockable rhythm. The goals of treatment in 2015 include achieving targeted temperature as quickly as possible with immediate initiation of cooling methods accompanied with supportive therapy and controlled rewarming.

Abstract 254: High Shock Efficacy and Algorithm Performance for a 150J Biphasic Waveform AED Used by Lay and BLS Responders During Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacy Gehman ◽  
Edward Kompare ◽  
Barbara Fink ◽  
Tim Johnson ◽  
Walter Hufford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Normal Sinus Rhythm ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Normal Sinus ◽  
High Shock ◽  
Biphasic Waveform ◽  
Post Shock ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Introduction: Effective AED defibrillation of out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) depends on the safe and effective identification of shockable rhythms, and on delivery of effective defibrillation energy. This report summarizes rhythm detection performance and shock efficacy during OHCA uses of Philips HeartStart Home and OnSite AEDs using non-escalating 150 J therapy. Methods: A convenience sample of 185 OHCA AED patient uses were reviewed by clinical experts. All analysis periods that resulted in AED rhythm advisories (Shock Advised or No Shock Advised) were annotated. Shockable rhythm categories include VF and polymorphic VT/flutter. Non-Shockable rhythm categories include normal sinus rhythm, other rhythms (e.g., atrial fibrillation/flutter, bradycardia, SVT, idioventricular, bundle branch block), and asystole. Intermediate rhythms (benefits of defibrillation are limited or uncertain) were not included. Post-shock rhythm was categorized as shockable, non-shockable, or undeterminable (rhythms corrupted by CPR artifact or pads removal within 5-s of shock delivery). Shock success was defined as conversion to a non-shockable rhythm within 5-s post-shock. Results: A total of 487 analysis periods resulted in AED rhythm advisories, with 175 annotated as Shockable and 312 Non-shockable. Sensitivity and specificity (n/N, Exact 95% CI) were 97.7% (171/175, 94.3%, 99.4%) and 100% (312/312, 98.8%, 100.0%) respectively. A total of 165 shocks were delivered to 100 patients with 5 undeterminable post-shock rhythms. The remaining 160 shocks were delivered to 156 Shockable rhythm episodes. All shock efficacy was 96.9% (155/160, 92.9%, 99.0%): 150 episodes converted to non-shockable rhythms after one shock (96.2% (150/156, 91.8%, 98.6%)); 154 after two shocks (98.7% (154/156, 95.4%, 99.8%)); and 155 after three shocks, the first two of which were undeterminable (99.4% (155/156, 96.5%, 100.0%)). The remaining episode had a failed first shock, followed by an undeterminable second shock, which was the last shock of the use. Conclusion: For these 150J fixed-energy AEDs, OHCA defibrillation is safe (100% specificity), and effective (97.7% sensitivity; 96.2% single shock effectiveness; 98.7% after two shocks; 99.4% after three shocks).

Abstract 123: Field Accuracy of Paramedic Shock Delivery Using a Filtered ECG Rhythm

Circulation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 140 (Suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hill Stoecklein ◽  
Andrew Pugh ◽  
Michael Stroud ◽  
Scott Youngquist
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Salt Lake ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Salt Lake City ◽  
Fire Department ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Shockable Rhythm ◽  
Lake City ◽  
Neurologically Intact ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Introduction: Recognition and rapid defibrillation of shockable rhythms is strongly associated with increased survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). The Salt Lake City Fire Department (SLCFD) adopted ECG rhythm filtering technology in 2011, along with a protocol to rapidly defibrillate shockable rhythms without awaiting the end of the 2-minute CPR epoch. Paramedics were also trained to empirically shock asystole, as studies have shown poor agreement in cases of fine and moderate amplitude Ventricular Fibrillation (VF). Hypothesis: We hypothesized that the mandate to shock perceived asystole plus the use of filtering technology would result in high case sensitivity for shockable rhythms at the expense of an unknown frequency of shock delivery to organized rhythms. Methods: Prospectively collected defibrillator data from cardiac arrest cases treated by SLCFD between Dec 2011 and June 2019 were analyzed. Timing of rhythm changes and defibrillation events was manually abstracted using the manufacturer’s review software. The gold standard for rhythm interpretation was post-incident physician interpretation. Results: Paramedics attempted resuscitation in 942 OHCAs. We excluded 41 pediatric cases, 140 cases of BLS or bystander-only AED resuscitation, and 65 cases in which the defibrillator file was unavailable. Overall, 696 adult cardiac arrests with 1,389 shocks delivered were available for analysis. Shocks were delivered to 958 (69%) shockable, 261 (19%) asystole, 158 (11%) PEA, 4 (0.3%) SVT, and 8 (0.6%) unknown underlying rhythms. In 280 cases no shock was delivered despite an initial shockable rhythm in 3 of these cases. Shock delivery case sensitivity was 180/183 (0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.97-1.0) with false positive proportion of delivered shocks of 158/1,389 (0.11, 95% CI:0.10-0.13) for PEA only and 419/1,389 (0.30, 95% CI:0.28-0.33) for combined PEA and asystole. Neurologically intact (CPC 1-2) overall and Utstein survival rates were 15% and 46% respectively. Conclusions: Using ECG rhythm-filtering technology and an aggressive protocol to defibrillate VF and empirically shock asystole, we demonstrated high case sensitivity for VF at the expense of an 11% rate of shock delivery to underlying PEA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document