Resuscitation
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Optimal Response to Cardiac Arrest study: defibrillation waveform effects.
Advances in early defibrillation access, key to the "Chain of Survival", will depend on innovations in defibrillation waveforms, because of their impact on device size and weight. This study compared standard monophasic waveform automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) to an innovative biphasic waveform AED. ⋯ ICBTE was superior to MTE and MDS in defibrillation efficacy and speed and to MTE in ROSC. MTE and MDS did not differ in efficacy. There were no differences among the waveforms in refibrillation or survival.
-
Multicenter Study Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical Trial
The United Kingdom pre-hospital study of active compression-decompression resuscitation.
This prospective, controlled trial with crossover group design compares the effectiveness of active compression-decompression (ACD) cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and standard CPR on the outcomes of victims of prehospital cardiac arrest. In three UK cities, victims of non-traumatic, out of hospital cardiac arrest, over the age of 8 years received either standard or ACD-CPR on arrival of ambulance personnel. Main outcome measures were return of spontaneous circulation, survival to be admitted to the intensive care unit, survival to hospital discharge, and neurological outcome. ⋯ There was no difference between the groups with respect to the neurological outcome of those patients surviving to hospital discharge. Analysis of important subgroups also showed no benefit for ACD-CPR. We conclude that there was no improvement in outcome with ACD-CPR when used by ambulance personnel in Cardiff and Portsmouth.
-
Multicenter Study
Epidemiology and survival rate of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in north-east Italy: The F.A.C.S. study. Friuli Venezia Giulia Cardiac Arrest Cooperative Study.
The results of the first epidemiological, prospective, multicentric study on cardiac arrest in a geographical Italian region are reported. On 708 consecutive cardiac arrests, 438 underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Of these, 344 were identified of cardiac aetiology. ⋯ Overall, the highest probability of survival was achieved when CPR interventions were started within the first minutes after collapse. Basic Life Support (BLS) manoeuvres began after 9 min of untreated cardiac arrest were still followed by a ROSC, but none of these patients survived. The incidence of prehospital cardiac arrest in our population was estimated to be in proportion of 0.95/1000 per year with a survival rate of 6.7%.
-
Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Optimal defibrillation strategy and follow-up of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The Belgian CPCR Study Group.
In the current climate of rising healthcare cost, resuscitation efforts performed outside the hospital are critically evaluated because of their limited success rate in some settings. As part of a quality assurance program between the 1st January 1991 and 31st December 1993, six centres of the Belgian CPCR study group prospectively registered cardiac arrest (CA) patients and their treatment according to the Ustein Style recommendations. ⋯ In a second part of the study we describe long-term management of the 28 surviving VF patients, treated by the single EMS system of Brugge between 1st January 1991 and 30th April 1995: only 6 patients eventually received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), whereas coronary revascularization was performed in 9 patients, and 3 patients were discharged on amiodarone only. Satisfactory long-term survival after out-of-hospital VF can be achieved by an early shock followed by advanced life support and appropriate definitive treatment.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Early defibrillation by emergency physicians or emergency medical technicians? A controlled, prospective multi-centre study.
In a controlled, prospective multi-centre study, defibrillation by emergency medical technicians (EMTs) was compared with the current standard of care in Germany--defibrillation by emergency physicians (EPs)-in order to answer the following questions: can EMTs in a two-tiered emergency medical services (EMS) system with physicians in the field defibrillate earlier than, and as safely as EPs? Does defibrillation by EMTs (study group) affect survival rate and long-term prognosis of patients in ventricular fibrillation (VF), as compared with the current national standards in resuscitation (basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by EMTs, and defibrillation by physicians: control group? ⋯ In our study, EMT defibrillation was equally effective as defibrillation by EPs, but failed to improve survival rates or long-term outcome of patients in VF significantly, compared to EP defibrillation. Due to a reduction in the time intervals from collapse to defibrillation and to ROSC, as well as in adrenalin doses, by EMT-defibrillation, EMTs in Germany should defibrillate if they reach a patient prior to an EP, provided they have received continuous medical training and supervision.