Defining a Research Agenda for Layperson Prehospital Hemorrhage Control: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: Trauma is the leading cause of death for US individuals younger than 45 years, and uncontrolled hemorrhage is a major cause of trauma mortality. The US military's medical advancements in the field of prehospital hemorrhage control have reduced battlefield mortality by 44%. However, despite support from many national health care organizations, no integrated approach to research has been made regarding implementation, epidemiology, education, and logistics of prehospital hemorrhage control by layperson immediate responders in the civilian sector. Objective: To create a national research agenda to help guide future work for prehospital hemorrhage control by laypersons. Evidence Review: The 2-day, in-person, National Stop the Bleed (STB) Research Consensus Conference was conducted on February 27 to 28, 2019, to identify and achieve consensus on research gaps. Participants included (1) subject matter experts, (2) professional society-designated leaders, (3) representatives from the federal government, and (4) representatives from private foundations. Before the conference, participants were provided a scoping review on layperson prehospital hemorrhage control. A 3-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted to determine high-priority research questions. The top items, with median rating of 8 or more on a Likert scale of 1 to 9 points, were identified and became part of the national STB research agenda. Findings: Forty-five participants attended the conference. In round 1, participants submitted 487 research questions. After deduplication and sorting, 162 questions remained across 5 a priori-defined themes. Two subsequent rounds of rating generated consensus on 113 high-priority, 27 uncertain-priority, and 22 low-priority questions. The final prioritized research agenda included the top 24 questions, including 8 for epidemiology and effectiveness, 4 for materials, 9 for education, 2 for global health, and 1 for health policy. Conclusions and Relevance: The National STB Research Consensus Conference identified and prioritized a national research agenda to support laypersons in reducing preventable deaths due to life-threatening hemorrhage. Investigators and funding agencies can use this agenda to guide their future work and funding priorities.

Assessment of CPR interruptions from transthoracic impedance during use of the LUCAS™ mechanical chest compression system.

BACKGROUND: Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a key determinant of outcome following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Recent evidence shows manual chest compressions are typically too shallow, interruptions are frequent and prolonged, and incomplete release between compressions is common. Mechanical chest compression systems have been developed as adjuncts for CPR but interruption of CPR during their use is not well documented. AIM: Analyze interruptions of CPR during application and use of the LUCAS™ chest compression system. METHODS: 54 LUCAS 1 devices operated on compressed air, deployed in 3 major US emergency medical services systems, were used to treat patients with OHCA. Electrocardiogram and transthoracic impedance data from defibrillator/monitors were analyzed to evaluate timing of CPR. Separately, providers estimated their CPR interruption time during application of LUCAS, for comparison to measured application time. RESULTS: In the 32 cases analyzed, compressions were paused a median of 32.5s (IQR 25-61) to apply LUCAS. Providers' estimates correlated poorly with measured pause length; pauses were often more than twice as long as estimated. The average device compression rate was 104/min (SD 4) and the average compression fraction (percent of time compressions were occurring) during mechanical CPR was 0.88 (SD 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Interruptions in chest compressions to apply LUCAS can be <20s but are often much longer, and users do not perceive pause time accurately. Therefore, we recommend better training on application technique, and implementation of systems using impedance data to give users objective feedback on their mechanical chest compression device use.

Take Heart America: A comprehensive, community-wide, systems-based approach to the treatment of cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVES: To determine out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival rates before and after implementation of the Take Heart America program (a community-based initiative that sequentially deployed all of the most highly recommended 2005 American Heart Association resuscitation guidelines in an effort to increase out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival). PATIENTS: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients in Anoka County, MN, and greater St. Cloud, MN, from November 2005 to June 2009. INTERVENTIONS: Two sites in Minnesota with a combined population of 439,692 people (greater St. Cloud and Anoka County) implemented: 1) widespread cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator skills training in schools and businesses; 2) retraining of all emergency medical services personnel in methods to enhance circulation, including minimizing cardiopulmonary resuscitation interruptions, performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation before and after single-shock defibrillation, and use of an impedance threshold device; 3) additional deployment of automated external defibrillators in schools and public places; and 4) protocols for transport to and treatment by cardiac arrest centers for therapeutic hypothermia, coronary artery evaluation and treatment, and electrophysiological evaluation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: More than 28,000 people were trained in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator use in the two sites. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates increased from 20% to 29% (p = .086, odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval 0.96-2.89). Three cardiac arrest centers were established, and hypothermia therapy for admitted out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims increased from 0% to 45%. Survival to hospital discharge for all patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in these two sites improved from 8.5% (nine of 106, historical control) to 19% (48 of 247, intervention phase) (p = .011, odds ratio 2.60, confidence interval 1.19-6.26). A financial analysis revealed that the cardiac arrest centers concept was financially feasible, despite the costs associated with high-quality postresuscitation care. CONCLUSIONS: The Take Heart America program doubled cardiac arrest survival when compared with historical controls. Study of the feasibility of generalizing this approach to larger cities, states, and regions is underway.