Expedited transfer to a cardiac arrest centre for non-ST-elevation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (ARREST): a UK prospective, multicentre, parallel, randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has called for a randomised trial of delivery to a cardiac arrest centre. We aimed to assess whether expedited delivery to a cardiac arrest centre compared with current standard of care following resuscitated cardiac arrest reduces deaths. METHODS: ARREST is a prospective, parallel, multicentre, open-label, randomised superiority trial. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with return of spontaneous circulation following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without ST elevation were randomly assigned (1:1) at the scene of their cardiac arrest by London Ambulance Service staff using a secure online randomisation system to expedited delivery to the cardiac catheter laboratory at one of seven cardiac arrest centres or standard of care with delivery to the geographically closest emergency department at one of 32 hospitals in London, UK. Masking of the ambulance staff who delivered the interventions and those reporting treatment outcomes in hospital was not possible. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30 days, analysed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population excluding those with unknown mortality status. Safety outcomes were analysed in the ITT population. The trial was prospectively registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Registry, 96585404. FINDINGS: Between Jan 15, 2018, and Dec 1, 2022, 862 patients were enrolled, of whom 431 (50%) were randomly assigned to a cardiac arrest centre and 431 (50%) to standard care. 20 participants withdrew from the cardiac arrest centre group and 19 from the standard care group, due to lack of consent or unknown mortality status, leaving 411 participants in the cardiac arrest centre group and 412 in the standard care group for the primary analysis. Of 822 participants for whom data were available, 560 (68%) were male and 262 (32%) were female. The primary endpoint of 30-day mortality occurred in 258 (63%) of 411 participants in the cardiac arrest centre group and in 258 (63%) of 412 in the standard care group (unadjusted risk ratio for survival 1·00, 95% CI 0·90-1·11; p=0·96). Eight (2%) of 414 patients in the cardiac arrest centre group and three (1%) of 413 in the standard care group had serious adverse events, none of which were deemed related to the trial intervention. INTERPRETATION: In adult patients without ST elevation, transfer to a cardiac arrest centre following resuscitated cardiac arrest in the community did not reduce deaths. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation.

The effect of the GoodSAM volunteer first-responder app on survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

AIMS: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation can double survival to hospital discharge in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Mobile phone applications, such as GoodSAM, alerting nearby volunteer first-responders about out-of-hospital cardiac arrest could potentially improve bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation, leading to better patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine GoodSAM's effect on survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS AND RESULTS: We collected data from the Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Outcomes Registry (University of Warwick, UK) submitted by the London Ambulance Service (1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017) and East Midlands Ambulance Service (1 January 2018 to 17 June 2018) and matched out-of-hospital cardiac arrests to GoodSAM alerts. We constructed logistic regression models to determine if there was an association between a GoodSAM first-responder accepting an alert and survival to hospital discharge, adjusting for location type, presenting rhythm, age, gender, ambulance service response time, cardiac arrest witnessed status, and bystander actions. Survival to hospital discharge was 9.6% (393/4196) in London and 7.2% (72/1001) in East Midlands. A GoodSAM first-responder accepted an alert for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in 1.3% (53/4196) cases in London and 5.4% (51/1001) cases in East Midlands. When a responder accepted an alert, the adjusted odds ratio for survival to hospital discharge was 3.15 (95% CI: 1.19-8.36, P = 0.021) in London and 3.19 (95% CI: 1.17-8.73, P = 0.024) in East Midlands. CONCLUSION: Alert acceptance was associated with improved survival in both ambulance services. Alert acceptance rates were low, and challenges remain to maximize the potential benefit of GoodSAM.

Calculating real-world travel routes instead of straight-line distance in the community response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Using straight-line distance to estimate the proximity of public-access Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) or volunteer first-responders to potential out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) does not reflect real-world travel distance. The difference between estimates may be an important consideration for bystanders and first-responders responding to OHCAs and may potentially impact patient outcome. OBJECTIVES: To explore how calculating real-world travel routes instead of using straight-line distance estimates might impact the community response to OHCA. METHODS: We mapped 4355 OHCA (01/04/2016-31/03/2017) and 2677 AEDs in London (UK), and 1263 OHCA (18/06/2017-17/06/2018) and 4704 AEDs in East Midlands (UK) using ArcGIS mapping software. We determined the distance from OHCAs to the nearest AED using straight-line estimates and real-world travel routes. We mapped locations of potential OHCAs (London: n = 9065, 20/09/2019-22/03/2020; East Midlands: n = 7637, 20/09/2019-17/03/2020) for which volunteer first-responders were alerted by the GoodSAM mobile-phone app, and calculated response distance using straight-line estimates and real-world travel routes. We created Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and calculated the Area Under the Curve (AUC) to determine if travel distance predicted whether or not a responder accepted an alert. RESULTS: Real-world travel routes to the nearest AED were (median) 219 m longer (623 m vs 406 m) than straight-line estimates in London, and 211 m longer (568 m vs 357 m) in East Midlands. The identity of the nearest AED changed on 26% occasions in both areas when calculating real-world travel routes. GoodSAM responders' real-world travel routes were (median) 222 m longer (601 m vs 379 m) in London, and 291 m longer (814 m vs 523 m) in East Midlands. AUC statistics for both areas demonstrated that neither straight-line nor real-world travel distance predicted whether or not a responder accepted an alert. CONCLUSIONS: Calculating real-world travel routes increases the estimated travel distance and time for those responding to OHCAs. Calculating straight-line distance may overestimate the benefit of the community response to OHCA.

Cross-sectional analysis of emergency hypoglycaemia and outcome predictors among people with diabetes in an urban population.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Out-of-hospital hypoglycaemia is a common complication for individuals with diabetes mellitus and represents a significant burden to emergency medical services (EMS). We aim to identify the factors associated with receiving parenteral treatment and hospital conveyance. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed a 6-month data set of all London EMS hypoglycaemia. Individuals with a known diabetes diagnosis were included in our analysis and stratified as either having type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 2862 incidents occurred within the area served by London Ambulance Service between January and June 2018. Fifty percent of incidents required parenteral treatment (intravenous glucose or intramuscular glucagon) and were conveyed to hospital. A higher arrival of blood glucose, intact consciousness and receiving oral glucose treatment were all negative predictors for requiring parenteral therapy. Forty-three percent of incidents were labelled as 'hypoglycaemia' by the EMS call handler, and greater odds of hospitalisation were observed among incidents that received parenteral treatment (OR 2.52 [95% CI 1.46, 4.33] p < 0.01) and individuals with type 2 diabetes (OR 2.67 [95% CI 1.52, 4.71] p < 0.01). Repeated callouts from 2% (n = 50) of individuals accounted for 10% (286) of all incidents attended, and 56.4% of individuals attended by EMS on more than one occasion had type 1 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Severe hypoglycaemia requiring emergency service attendance remains common, as does the requirement for parenteral therapy and conveyance to hospital. Early intervention, education and improved accessibility to risk prevention strategies may reduce the necessity for emergency parenteral treatment and hospitalisation, especially among individuals suffering from recurrent hypoglycaemia and high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Adrenaline to improve survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the PARAMEDIC2 RCT.

BACKGROUND: Adrenaline has been used as a treatment for cardiac arrest for many years, despite uncertainty about its effects on long-term outcomes and concerns that it may cause worse neurological outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate the effects of adrenaline on survival and neurological outcomes, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of adrenaline use. DESIGN: This was a pragmatic, randomised, allocation-concealed, placebo-controlled, parallel-group superiority trial and economic evaluation. Costs are expressed in Great British pounds and reported in 2016/17 prices. SETTING: This trial was set in five NHS ambulance services in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Adults treated for an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were included. Patients were ineligible if they were pregnant, if they were aged < 16 years, if the cardiac arrest had been caused by anaphylaxis or life-threatening asthma, or if adrenaline had already been given. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to either adrenaline (1 mg) or placebo in a 1 : 1 allocation ratio by the opening of allocation-concealed treatment packs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was survival to 30 days. The secondary outcomes were survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, survival at 3, 6 and 12 months, neurological outcomes and health-related quality of life through to 6 months. The economic evaluation assessed the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services. Participants, clinical teams and those assessing patient outcomes were masked to the treatment allocation. RESULTS: From December 2014 to October 2017, 8014 participants were assigned to the adrenaline (n = 4015) or to the placebo (n = 3999) arm. At 30 days, 130 out of 4012 participants (3.2%) in the adrenaline arm and 94 out of 3995 (2.4%) in the placebo arm were alive (adjusted odds ratio for survival 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.97). For secondary outcomes, survival to hospital admission was higher for those receiving adrenaline than for those receiving placebo (23.6% vs. 8.0%; adjusted odds ratio 3.83, 95% confidence interval 3.30 to 4.43). The rate of favourable neurological outcome at hospital discharge was not significantly different between the arms (2.2% vs. 1.9%; adjusted odds ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.68). The pattern of improved survival but no significant improvement in neurological outcomes continued through to 6 months. By 12 months, survival in the adrenaline arm was 2.7%, compared with 2.0% in the placebo arm (adjusted odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.92). An adjusted subgroup analysis did not identify significant interactions. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for adrenaline was estimated at £1,693,003 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest event and £81,070 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the lifetime of survivors. Additional economic analyses estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for adrenaline at £982,880 per percentage point increase in overall survival and £377,232 per percentage point increase in neurological outcomes over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest. LIMITATIONS: The estimate for survival with a favourable neurological outcome is imprecise because of the small numbers of patients surviving with a good outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Adrenaline improved long-term survival, but there was no evidence that it significantly improved neurological outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year exceeds the threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year usually supported by the NHS. FUTURE WORK: Further research is required to better understand patients' preferences in relation to survival and neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and to aid interpretation of the trial findings from a patient and public perspective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73485024 and EudraCT 2014-000792-11. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cardiac arrest is a medical emergency that happens when the heart suddenly stops pumping effectively. When cardiac arrest happens, awareness is lost within seconds. If emergency treatment is not started quickly, the person will die. The first treatments of cardiac arrest involve pressing on the chest, giving rescue breaths and defibrillation (electric shocks applied to the heart). If these treatments do not work, ambulance paramedics use a drug called adrenaline to try to restart the heart. Although this treatment has been used for many years, some recent research suggests that it may cause more harm than good. In this research study, we compared the effects of giving adrenaline with the effects of not giving adrenaline to people who had a cardiac arrest in the community. The research showed that adrenaline was effective at restarting the heart, so more people survived long enough to be admitted to hospital. Thirty days later, 130 out of 4012 patients (3.2%) who received adrenaline and 94 out of 3995 (2.4%) who did not receive adrenaline were alive. However, adrenaline did not improve the number of patients who went home from hospital having made a good recovery and were able to care for themselves. The evidence suggests that adrenaline represents a poor use of NHS funds on cost-effectiveness grounds. In a community survey, 95% of people who responded thought that long-term survival with good brain function was more important than just being alive. Further research exploring the opinions of patients and the public will help to understand the results of this research for the NHS.

Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in London during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: There is an emerging potential link between the COVID-19 pandemic and incidence and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We aimed to describe the incidence, characteristics and outcomes from OHCA in London, UK during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: We examined data for all OHCA patients attended by the London Ambulance Service from 1st March to 30th April 2020 and compared our findings to the previous year. We also compared OHCA characteristics and short-term outcomes for those suspected or confirmed to have COVID-19 with those who were not. Additionally, we investigated the relationship between daily COVID-19 cases and OHCA incidents. RESULTS: We observed an 81% increase in OHCAs during the pandemic, and a strong correlation between the daily number of COVID-19 cases and OHCA incidents (r = 0.828, p < 0.001). We report an increase in OHCA occurring in a private location (92.9% vs 85.5%, p < 0.001) and an increased bystander CPR (63.3% vs 52.6%, p < 0.001) during the pandemic, as well as fewer resuscitation attempts (36.4% vs 39.6%, p = 0.03) and longer EMS response times (9.3 vs 7.2 min, p < 0.001). Survival at 30 days post-arrest was poorer during the pandemic (4.4% vs 10.6%, p < 0.001) and amongst patients where COVID-19 was considered likely (1.0% vs 6.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in London, we saw a dramatic rise in the incidence of OHCA, accompanied by a significant reduction in survival. The pattern of increased incidence and mortality closely reflected the rise in confirmed COVID-19 infections in the city.

Long term outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC2 randomised trial of adrenaline in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

AIMS: We recently reported early outcomes in patients enrolled in a randomised trial of adrenaline in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the PARAMEDIC2 (Prehospital Assessment of the Role of Adrenaline: Measuring the Effectiveness of Drug Administration in Cardiac Arrest) trial. The purpose of the present paper is to report long-term survival, quality of life, functional and cognitive outcomes at 3, 6 and 12-months. METHODS: PARAMEDIC2 was a pragmatic, individually randomised, double blind, controlled trial with an economic evaluation. Patients were randomised to either adrenaline or placebo. This paper reports results on the modified Rankin Scale scores at 6-months, survival at 6 and 12-months, as well as other cognitive, functional and quality of life outcomes collected at 3 and 6 months (Two Simple Questions, the Mini Mental State Examination, the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline Evaluation for Cardiac Arrest, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist - Civilian Version, Short-Form 12-item Health Survey and the EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L). RESULTS: 8014 patients were randomised with confirmed trial drug administration. At 6-months, 78 (2.0%) of the patients in the adrenaline group and 58 (1.5%) of patients in the placebo group had a favourable neurological outcome (adjusted odds ratio 1.35 [95% confidence interval: 0.93, 1.97]). 117 (2.9%) patients were alive at 6-months in the adrenaline group compared with 86 (2.2%) in the placebo group (1.43 [1.05, 1.96], reducing to 107 (2.7%) and 80 (2.0%) respectively at 12-months (1.38 [1.00, 1.92]). Measures of 3 and 6-month cognitive, functional and quality of life outcomes were reduced, but there was no strong evidence of differences between groups. CONCLUSION: Adrenaline improved survival through to 12-months follow-up. The study did not find evidence of improvements in favourable neurological outcomes. (ISCRTN 73485024).

Risk prediction models for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes in England.

AIMS: The out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) outcomes project is a national research registry. One of its aims is to explore sources of variation in OHCA survival outcomes. This study reports the development and validation of risk prediction models for return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) at hospital handover and survival to hospital discharge. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study included OHCA patients who were treated during 2014 and 2015 by emergency medical services (EMS) from seven English National Health Service ambulance services. The 2014 data were used to identify important variables and to develop the risk prediction models, which were validated using the 2015 data. Model prediction was measured by area under the curve (AUC), Hosmer-Lemeshow test, Cox calibration regression, and Brier score. All analyses were conducted using mixed-effects logistic regression models. Important factors included age, gender, witness/bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) combined, aetiology, and initial rhythm. Interaction effects between witness/bystander CPR with gender, aetiology and initial rhythm and between aetiology and initial rhythm were significant in both models. The survival model achieved better discrimination and overall accuracy compared with the ROSC model (AUC = 0.86 vs. 0.67, Brier score = 0.072 vs. 0.194, respectively). Calibration tests showed over- and under-estimation for the ROSC and survival models, respectively. A sensitivity analysis individually assessing Index of Multiple Deprivation scores and location in the final models substantially improved overall accuracy with inconsistent impact on discrimination. CONCLUSION: Our risk prediction models identified and quantified important pre-EMS intervention factors determining survival outcomes in England. The survival model had excellent discrimination.

The effect of airway management on CPR quality in the PARAMEDIC2 randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Good quality basic life support (BLS) is associated with improved outcome from cardiac arrest. Chest compression fraction (CCF) is a BLS quality indicator, which may be influenced by the type of airway used. We aimed to assess CCF according to the airway strategy in the PARAMEDIC2 study: no advanced airway, supraglottic airway (SGA), tracheal intubation, or a combination of the two. Our hypothesis was that tracheal intubation was associated with a decrease in the CCF compared with alternative airway management strategies. METHODS: PARAMEDIC2 was a multicentre double-blinded placebo-controlled trial of adrenaline vs placebo in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Data showing compression rate and ratio from patients recruited by London Ambulance Service (LAS) as part of this study was collated and analysed according to the advanced airway used during the resuscitation attempt. RESULTS: CPR process data were available from 286/ 2058 (13.9%) of the total patients recruited by LAS. The mean compression rate for the first 5 min of data recording was the same in all groups (P = 0.272) and ranged from 104.2 (95% CI of mean: 100.5, 107.8) min-1 to 108.0 (95% CI of mean: 105.1, 108.3) min-1. The mean compression fraction was also similar across all groups (P = 0.159) and ranged between 74.7% and 78.4%. There was no difference in the compression rates and fractions across the airway management groups, regardless of the duration of CPR. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the compression fraction associated with the airway management strategy.

Identifying and overcoming barriers to automated external defibrillator use by GoodSAM volunteer first responders in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest using the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: GoodSAM is a mobile phone app that integrates with UK ambulance services. During a 999 call, if a call handler diagnoses cardiac arrest, nearby volunteer first responders registered with the app are alerted. They can give cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and/or use a public access automated external defibrillator (AED). We aimed to identify means of increasing AED use by GoodSAM first responders. METHODS: We conducted semistructured telephone interviews, using the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify and classify barriers to AED use. We analysed findings using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B) model and subsequently used the Behaviour Change Wheel to develop potential interventions to improve AED use. SETTING: London, UK. PARTICIPANTS: GoodSAM first responders alerted in the previous 7 days about a cardiac arrest. RESULTS: We conducted 30 telephone interviews in two batches in July and October 2018. A public access AED was taken to scene once, one had already been attached on scene another time and three participants took their own AEDs when responding. Most first responders felt capable and motivated to use public access AEDs but were concerned about delaying CPR if they retrieved one and frustrated when arriving after the ambulance service. They perceived lack of opportunities due to unavailable and inaccessible AEDs, particularly out of hours. We subsequently developed 13 potential interventions to increase AED use for future testing. CONCLUSIONS: GoodSAM first responders used AEDs occasionally, despite a capability and motivation to do so. Those operating volunteer first responder systems should consider our proposed interventions to improve AED use. Of particular clinical importance are: highlighting AED location and providing route/time estimates to the patient via the nearest AED. This would help single responders make appropriate decisions about AED retrieval. As AED collection may extend time to reach the patient, where there is sufficient density of potential responders, systems could send one responder to initiate CPR and another to collect an AED.

What are emergency ambulance services doing to meet the needs of people who call frequently? A national survey of current practice in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Emergency ambulance services are integral to providing a service for those with unplanned urgent and life-threatening health conditions. However, high use of the service by a small minority of patients is a concern. Our objectives were to describe: service-wide and local policies or pathways for people classified as Frequent Caller; call volume; and results of any audit or evaluation. METHOD: We conducted a national survey of current practice in ambulance services in relation to the management of people who call the emergency ambulance service frequently using a structured questionnaire for completion by email and telephone interview. We analysed responses using a descriptive and thematic approach. RESULTS: Twelve of 13 UK ambulance services responded. Most services used nationally agreed definitions for 'Frequent Caller', with 600-900 people meeting this classification each month. Service-wide policies were in place, with local variations. Models of care varied from within-service care where calls are flagged in the call centre; contact made with callers; and their General Practitioner (GP) with an aim of discouraging further calls, to case management through cross-service, multi-disciplinary team meetings aiming to resolve callers' needs. Although data were available related to volume of calls and number of callers meeting the threshold for definition as Frequent Caller, no formal audits or evaluations were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulance services are under pressure to meet challenging response times for high acuity patients. Tensions are apparent in the provision of care to patients who have complex needs and call frequently. Multi-disciplinary case management approaches may help to provide appropriate care, and reduce demand on emergency services. However, there is currently inadequate evidence to inform commissioning, policy or practice development.

Paramedic attitudes and experiences of enrolling patients into the PARAMEDIC-2 adrenaline trial: a qualitative survey within the London Ambulance Service.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to gather the views and experiences of paramedics who participated in a large-scale randomised controlled drug trial and to identify barriers to recruitment. DESIGN: We surveyed paramedics using a questionnaire consisting of a mix of closed and open ended questions. SETTING: The study was conducted within the London Ambulance Service, London, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 150 paramedics who were trained to enrol patients into the PARAMEDIC-2 randomised controlled trial of adrenaline versus placebo in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and who returned the questionnaire. RESULTS: 98% of study participants felt prehospital research was very important, and 97.3% reported an overall positive experience of being involved in a drug trial. Only 5.3% felt uncomfortable enrolling patients into the trial without prior consent from the patient or a relative. Over one- third (39.3%) identified one or more barriers to patient recruitment, the most common being the attitudes of other staff. CONCLUSION: We found a strong appetite for involvement in prehospital research among paramedics and an understanding of the importance of research that prevailed over the complexities of the trial. This is an important finding demonstrating that potentially ethically controversial research can be undertaken successfully by paramedics in the prehospital environment.

Attitudes to Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Defibrillator Use: A Survey of UK Adults in 2017.

Background Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation ( CPR ) and public access defibrillator ( PAD ) use can save the lives of people who experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Little is known about the proportions of UK adults trained, their characteristics and willingness to act if witnessing an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, or the public's knowledge regarding where the nearest PAD is located. Methods and Results An online survey was administered by YouGov to a nonprobabilistic purposive sample of UK adults, achieving 2084 participants, from a panel that was matched to be representative of the population. We used descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression modeling for analysis. Almost 52% were women, 61% were aged <55 years, and 19% had witnessed an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Proportions ever trained were 57% in chest-compression-only CPR, 59% in CPR , and 19.4% in PAD use. Most with training in any resuscitation technique had trained at work (54.7%). Compared with people not trained, those trained in PAD use said they were more likely to use one (odds ratio: 2.61), and those trained in CPR or chest-compression-only CPR were more likely to perform it (odds ratio: 5.39). Characteristics associated with being trained in any resuscitation technique included youth, female sex, higher social grade, and full-time employment. Conclusions In the United Kingdom, training makes a difference in people's willingness to act in the event of a cardiac arrest. Although there is considerable opportunity to increase the proportion of the general population trained in CPR , consideration should be also given to encouraging training in PAD use and targeting training for those who are older or from lower social grades.

Repeated adrenaline doses and survival from an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Adrenaline is the primary drug of choice for resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Although adrenaline may increase the chance of achieving return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), there is limited evidence that repeated doses of adrenaline improves overall survival, and increasing evidence of a detrimental effect on neurological function in survivors. This paper reports the relationship between repeated doses of adrenaline and survival in a cohort of patients attended by the London Ambulance Service in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A retrospective review of OHCA treated by the London Ambulance Service over a one year period. Patients aged ≥18 years who received one or more doses of adrenaline (1 mg bolus) during resuscitation were included in the analyses. Outcomes described are survival to hospital discharge and survival to one year post-arrest. RESULTS: Over the one year study period, 3151 patients received adrenaline during OHCA. A significant inverse relationship was found between increasing cumulative doses of adrenaline and survival both to hospital discharge and one year post-arrest. No patients survived after receiving more than ten adrenaline doses. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that repeated doses of adrenaline are associated with decreasing odds of survival. There were no survivors amongst patients requiring more than 10 doses of adrenaline.

Characteristics of neighbourhoods with high incidence of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and low bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates in England.

Aims: The aim of the project was to identify the neighbourhood characteristics of areas in England where out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) incidence was high and bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) was low using registry data. Methods and results: Analysis was based on 67 219 cardiac arrest events between 1 April 2013 and 31 December 2015. Arrest locations were geocoded to give latitude/longitude. Postcode district was chosen as the proxy for neighbourhood. High-risk neighbourhoods, where OHCA incidence based on residential population was >127.6/100 000, or based on workday population was >130/100 000, and BCPR in bystander witnessed arrest was <60% were observed to have: a greater mean residential population density, a lower workday population density, a lower rural-urban index, a higher proportion of people in routine occupations and lower proportion in managerial occupations, a greater proportion of population from ethnic minorities, a greater proportion of people not born in UK, and greater level of deprivation. High-risk areas were observed in the North-East, Yorkshire, South-East, and Birmingham. Conclusion: The study identified neighbourhood characteristics of high-risk areas that experience a high incidence of OHCA and low bystander resuscitation rate that could be targeted for programmes of training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator use.

Rationale and design of: A Randomized tRial of Expedited transfer to a cardiac arrest center for non-ST elevation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: The ARREST randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a global public health issue. There is wide variation in both regional and inter-hospital survival rates from OHCA and overall survival remains poor at 7%. Regionalization of care into cardiac arrest centers (CAC) improves outcomes following cardiac arrest from ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) through concentration of services and greater provider experience. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) recommends delivery of all post-arrest patients to a CAC, but that randomized controlled trials are necessary in patients without ST elevation (STE). METHODS/DESIGN: Following completion of a pilot randomized trial to assess safety and feasibility of conducting a large-scale randomized controlled trial in patients following OHCA of presumed cardiac cause without STE, we present the rationale and design of A Randomized tRial of Expedited transfer to a cardiac arrest center for non-ST elevation OHCA (ARREST). In total 860 patients will be enrolled and randomized (1:1) to expedited transfer to CAC (24/7 access to interventional cardiology facilities, cooling and goal-directed therapies) or to the current standard of care, which comprises delivery to the nearest emergency department. Primary outcome is 30-day all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes are 30-day and 3-month neurological status and 3, 6 and 12-month mortality. Patients will be followed up for one year after enrolment. CONCLUSION: Post-arrest care is time-critical, requires a multi-disciplinary approach and may be more optimally delivered in centers with greater provider experience. This trial would help to demonstrate if regionalization of post-arrest care to CACs reduces mortality in patients without STE, which could dramatically reshape emergency care provision.

A Randomized Trial of Epinephrine in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Concern about the use of epinephrine as a treatment for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest led the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation to call for a placebo-controlled trial to determine whether the use of epinephrine is safe and effective in such patients. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind trial involving 8014 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the United Kingdom, paramedics at five National Health Service ambulance services administered either parenteral epinephrine (4015 patients) or saline placebo (3999 patients), along with standard care. The primary outcome was the rate of survival at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included the rate of survival until hospital discharge with a favorable neurologic outcome, as indicated by a score of 3 or less on the modified Rankin scale (which ranges from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]). RESULTS: At 30 days, 130 patients (3.2%) in the epinephrine group and 94 (2.4%) in the placebo group were alive (unadjusted odds ratio for survival, 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06 to 1.82; P=0.02). There was no evidence of a significant difference in the proportion of patients who survived until hospital discharge with a favorable neurologic outcome (87 of 4007 patients [2.2%] vs. 74 of 3994 patients [1.9%]; unadjusted odds ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.61). At the time of hospital discharge, severe neurologic impairment (a score of 4 or 5 on the modified Rankin scale) had occurred in more of the survivors in the epinephrine group than in the placebo group (39 of 126 patients [31.0%] vs. 16 of 90 patients [17.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the use of epinephrine resulted in a significantly higher rate of 30-day survival than the use of placebo, but there was no significant between-group difference in the rate of a favorable neurologic outcome because more survivors had severe neurologic impairment in the epinephrine group. (Funded by the U.K. National Institute for Health Research and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN73485024 .).

Double sequential defibrillation therapy for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests: The London experience.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in treatment for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), a subgroup of patients remain in refractory ventricular fibrillation (RVF) during resuscitation. Recent evidence suggests that double sequential defibrillation (DSD), where two shocks are delivered to the patient in quick succession, may provide an effective therapy for RVF. This study describes the characteristics and survival outcomes of OHCA patients treated by ambulance clinicians using a local DSD protocol in an attempt to resolve RVF. METHODS: This is a retrospective, observational analysis of patients who received DSD by the London Ambulance Service from 1st July 2015 to 31st December 2016. A comparator group of patients who received more than six consecutive standard shocks (not DSD) for persistent VF was also identified. Outcomes included pre-hospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), ROSC sustained to hospital, and survival to hospital discharge. DSD patients who survived to hospital discharge are reported in further detail. RESULTS: During the 18-month study period, 45 patients were treated with DSD: a third obtained a pre-hospital ROSC and 7% survived to hospital discharge. We observed similar ROSC and survival rates amongst those who received standard defibrillation only. CONCLUSION: Our observational study did not find any clear benefit of DSD use by EMS in the treatment of RVF. However, we find that 3 patients, who were treated with DSD following unsuccessful single shocks, had their VF terminated. Prospective randomised clinical trials are urgently needed to investigate the potential value of DSD in the pre-hospital setting.

Can the prehospital National Early Warning Score identify patients most at risk from subsequent deterioration?

INTRODUCTION: The National Early Warning Score (NEWS) aids the early recognition of those at risk of becoming critically ill. NEWS has been recommended for use by ambulance services, but very little work has been undertaken to date to determine its suitability. This paper examines whether a prehospital NEWS derived from ambulance service clinical observations is associated with the hospital ED disposition. METHODS: Prehospital NEWS was retrospectively calculated from the ambulance service clinical records of 287 patients who were treated by the ambulance service and transported to hospital. In this cohort study, derived NEWS scores were compared with ED disposition data and patients were categorised into the following groups depending on their outcome: discharged from ED, admitted to a ward, admitted to intensive therapy unit (ITU) or died. RESULTS: Prehospital NEWS-based ambulance service clinical observations were significantly associated with discharge disposition groups (p<0.001), with scores escalating in line with increasing severity of outcome. Patients who died or were admitted to ITU had higher scores than those admitted to a ward or discharged from ED (mean NEWS 7.2 and 7.5 vs 2.6 and 1.7, respectively), and in turn those who were admitted to a ward had higher pre-hospital NEWS than those who were discharged (2.6 vs 1.7). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the NEWS could successfully be used by ambulance services to identify patients most at risk from subsequent deterioration. The implementation of this early warning system has the potential to support ambulance clinician decision making, providing an additional tool to identify and appropriately escalate care for acutely unwell patients.