• E J Gallagher, G Lombardi, P Gennis, and M Treiber.
• Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA.
• Acad Emerg Med. 1994 Sep 1; 1 (5): 423-9.

ObjectiveTo identify variation in outcome predictor documentation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest associated with two different methods of data collection: concurrent questioning of personnel following a resuscitation attempt and archival report review.MethodsAll patients > or = 18 years old who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, verified using the New York City 911 telephone system, between October 1, 1990, and April 1, 1991, were eligible for inclusion. The authors reviewed the first 200 cases of presumed primary cardiac arrest involving a resuscitation attempt among 3,243 consecutive ambulance call reports for cardiac arrest occurring during the study period. This archival data set was compared with data for the same 200 cases gathered through direct interview of field personnel by trained paramedics. The two data sets had been compiled independently by different individuals, using the same data collection instrument, which conformed to the Utstein template.ResultsComparison of the data obtained from ambulance records with the data obtained from interviews of prehospital personnel revealed several areas of variance. Of note was a significantly lower proportion of bystander-witnessed ventricular fibrillation (VF) in the data set gathered from written reports (7% vs 18%; 95% CI for the difference 4-18%; p = 0.001).Conclusiondifferences in methods of collection of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest data are associated with a more than twofold variation in the reported incidences of witnessed cardiac arrests manifesting as VF. Methodology-dependent variation in this important "denominator" may produce substantially different estimates of survival within the same cohort of patients.

12 keywords...

hide…