The burden and prognostic significance of suspected sepsis in the prehospital setting: A state-wide population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite high in-hospital mortality, the epidemiology of prehospital suspected sepsis presentations is not well described. This retrospective cohort study aimed to quantify the burden of such presentations, and to determine whether such a diagnosis was independently associated with longer-term mortality. METHODS: Retrospective, observational population-based cohort study examining all adult prehospital presentations in Victoria, between January 2015 and June 2019, who required subsequent in-hospital assessment. Linked data were extracted from clinical and administrative datasets. Demographics, illness severity, prehospital treatment and mortality were compared between prehospital suspected sepsis and non-sepsis patients. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the adjusted association between prehospital assessment (suspected sepsis vs non-sepsis) and 6-month mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1 218 047 patients were included. The age-adjusted incidence rate of prehospital suspected sepsis was 65 cases per 100 000 person-years. Those with prehospital suspected sepsis were older (74 vs 62 years), more frequently male (55% vs 47%), with greater physiological derangement. Intravenous cannulas were more often inserted prehospital (60% vs 29%). Crude in-hospital mortality was 6.5-fold higher in the prehospital suspected sepsis group (11.8% vs 1.8%), and by 6 months, 22.6% had died. After adjustment for demographics, illness severity, comorbidity, treatment and hospital location, a diagnosis of prehospital suspected sepsis was associated with a 35% higher likelihood of 6-month mortality (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.29-1.41). CONCLUSIONS: The burden of prehospital suspected sepsis in the Australian setting is significant, with paramedics identifying patients at high-risk of poor longer-term outcomes. This implies the need to consider improved care pathways for this highly vulnerable group.

A study protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled trial of smartphone-activated first responders with ultraportable defibrillators in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: The First Responder Shock Trial (FIRST).

Objective: To describe the First Responder Shock Trial (FIRST), which aims to determine whether equipping frequently responding, smartphone-activated (GoodSAM) first responders with an ultraportable AED can increase 30-day survival rates in OHCA. Methods: The FIRST trial is an investigator-initiated, bi-national (Victoria, Australia and New Zealand), registry-nested cluster-randomised controlled trial where the unit of randomisation is the smartphone-activated (GoodSAM) first responder. High-frequency GoodSAM responders are randomised 1:1 to receive an ultraportable, single-use AED or standard alert procedures using the GoodSAM app.The primary outcome is survival to 30 days. The secondary outcome measures (shockable rhythm, return of spontaneous circulation, event survival, and time to first shock delivery) are routinely collected by OHCA registries in both regions. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (Registration: ACTRN12622000448741) on 22 March 2022. Results: The trial started in November 2022 and the last patient is expected to be enrolled in November 2024. We aim to detect a 7% increase in the proportion of 30-day survivors, from 9% in patients attended by control responders to 16% in patients attended by responders randomised to the ultraportable AED intervention arm. With 80% power, an alpha of 0.05, a cluster size of 1.5 and a coefficient of variation for cluster sizes of 1, the sample size required to detect this difference is 714 (357 per arm). Conclusion: The FIRST study will increase our understanding of the potential role of portable AED use by smartphone-activated community responders and their impact on survival outcomes.

Use of a novel smartphone-based application tool for enrolment and randomisation in pre-hospital clinical trials.

The effective recruitment and randomisation of patients in pre-hospital clinical trials presents unique challenges. Owing to the time critical nature of many pre-hospital emergencies and limited resourcing, the use of traditional methods of randomisation that may include centralised telephone or web-based systems are often not practicable or feasible. Previous technological limitations have necessitated that pre-hospital trialists strike a compromise between implementing pragmatic, deliverable study designs, with robust enrolment and randomisation methodologies. In this commentary piece, we present a novel smartphone-based solution that has the potential to align pre-hospital clinical trial recruitment processes to that of best-in-practice in-hospital and ambulatory care based studies.

No fear: Willingness of smartphone activated first responders to assist with cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aim: To understand the fear and willingness to respond of smartphone activated first responders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We invited smartphone activated first responders registered with the GoodSAM application in Victoria, Australia to take part in an online survey in November 2020. We assessed willingness to respond to an alert and provide CPR during the pandemic and administered the Fear of COVID-19 Scale questionnaire. Regression analysis was conducted to investigate associations between occupation, clinical training, and years of clinical experience with willingness to respond and fear of COVID-19. Results: The survey response rate was 5.1%. Responders (n = 348) had a median age (interquartile range) of 46 years (33-55). Most (67%) were aged 30-59 years and 43% were female. Responders spanned several occupations including paramedics (12.6%), registered nurses (14.7%), and non-clinical individuals (21.8%). Most (92%) reported they would feel comfortable responding to a GoodSAM alert during the pandemic. Almost all (>95%) reported they would provide CPR. About 20% reported being afraid of COVID-19 but only 3.2% reported they had a high-level of fear of COVID-19. The odds of paramedics being willing to respond to an alert was reduced by 73% during the pandemic (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.69). No other associations were found with willingness or fear of COVID-19. Conclusion: Although willingness was high and fear of COVID-19 was low, some smartphone activated first responders were less willing to respond to an alert during the pandemic. These findings may inform future pandemic planning and decision-making around pausing first-responder programs.

Comparison of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrests Occurring in Schools and Other Public Locations: A 12-Year Retrospective Study.

Objective: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) in schools and universities are uncommon. However, these institutions must plan and prepare for such events to ensure the best outcomes. To evaluate their preparedness we assessed baseline characteristics, survival outcomes and 12-year trends for OHCA in schools/universities compared to other public locations.Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of OHCA in schools/universities and public locations between 2008 and 2019 using Victorian Ambulance Cardiac Arrest Registry data.Results: We included 9,037 EMS attended cases, 131 occurred in schools/universities and 8,906 in public locations. Compared to public locations, a significantly higher proportion of EMS treated cases in schools/universities received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (95.5% vs. 78.5%, p < 0.001), public access defibrillation (PAD) (26.1% vs. 9.9%, p < 0.001) and presented in shockable rhythms (69.4% vs. 50.9%, p < 0.001). Unadjusted survival to hospital discharge rates were also significantly higher in schools/universities (39.6% vs. 24.2%, p < 0.001). The long-term unadjusted trends for bystander CPR in schools/universities increased from 91.7% (2008-10) to 100% (2017-19) (p-trend = 0.025), for PAD from 4.2% (2008-10) to 47.5% (2017-19) (p-trend < 0.001) and for survival to hospital discharge from 16.7% (2008-10) to 57.5% (2017-19) (p-trend = 0.004). However, after adjustment for favorable cardiac arrest factors, such as younger age, bystander CPR and PAD, survival was similar between schools/universities and public locations.Conclusion: The majority of OHCA in schools and universities were witnessed and received bystander CPR, however less than half received PAD. Developing site-specific cardiac emergency response plans and providing age appropriate CPR training to primary, secondary and university students would help improve PAD rates.