ABCDE cognitive aid tool in patient assessment - development and validation in a multicenter pilot simulation study.

BACKGROUND: The so called ABCDE approach (Airway-Breathing-Circulation-Disability-Exposure) is a golden standard of patient assessment. The efficacy of using cognitive aids (CA) in resuscitation and peri-arrest situations remains an important knowledge gap. This work aims to develop an ABCDE CA tool (CAT) and study its potential benefits in patient condition assessment. METHODS: The development of the ABCDE CAT was done by 3 rounds of modified Delphi method performed by the members of the Advanced Life Support Science and Education Committee of the European Resuscitation Council. A pilot multicentre study on 48 paramedic students performing patient assessment in pre-post cohorts (without and with the ABCDA CAT) was made in order to validate and evaluate the impact of the tool in simulated clinical scenarios. The cumulative number and proper order of steps in clinical assessment in simulated scenarios were recorded and the time of the assessment was measured. RESULTS: The Delphi method resulted in the ABCDE CAT. The use of ABCDE CAT was associated with more performed assessment steps (804: 868; OR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.35, p = 0.023) which were significantly more frequently performed in proper order (220: 338; OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.40 to 2.02, p < 0.0001). The use of ABCDE CAT did not prolong the time of patient assessment. CONCLUSION: The cognitive aid for ABCDE assessment was developed. The use of this cognitive aid for ABCDE helps paramedics to perform more procedures, more frequently in the right order and did not prolong the patient assessment in advanced life support and peri-arrest care.

Adult Basic Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations on basic life support summarizes evidence evaluations performed for 22 topics that were prioritized by the Basic Life Support Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. The evidence reviews include 16 systematic reviews, 5 scoping reviews, and 1 evidence update. Per agreement within the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, new or revised treatment recommendations were only made after a systematic review. Systematic reviews were performed for the following topics: dispatch diagnosis of cardiac arrest, use of a firm surface for CPR, sequence for starting CPR (compressions-airway-breaths versus airway-breaths-compressions), CPR before calling for help, duration of CPR cycles, hand position during compressions, rhythm check timing, feedback for CPR quality, alternative techniques, public access automated external defibrillator programs, analysis of rhythm during chest compressions, CPR before defibrillation, removal of foreign-body airway obstruction, resuscitation care for suspected opioid-associated emergencies, drowning, and harm from CPR to victims not in cardiac arrest. The topics that resulted in the most extensive task force discussions included CPR during transport, CPR before calling for help, resuscitation care for suspected opioid-associated emergencies, feedback for CPR quality, and analysis of rhythm during chest compressions. After discussion of the scoping reviews and the evidence update, the task force prioritized several topics for new systematic reviews.

Adult Advanced Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations for advanced life support includes updates on multiple advanced life support topics addressed with 3 different types of reviews. Topics were prioritized on the basis of both recent interest within the resuscitation community and the amount of new evidence available since any previous review. Systematic reviews addressed higher-priority topics, and included double-sequential defibrillation, intravenous versus intraosseous route for drug administration during cardiac arrest, point-of-care echocardiography for intra-arrest prognostication, cardiac arrest caused by pulmonary embolism, postresuscitation oxygenation and ventilation, prophylactic antibiotics after resuscitation, postresuscitation seizure prophylaxis and treatment, and neuroprognostication. New or updated treatment recommendations on these topics are presented. Scoping reviews were conducted for anticipatory charging and monitoring of physiological parameters during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Topics for which systematic reviews and new Consensuses on Science With Treatment Recommendations were completed since 2015 are also summarized here. All remaining topics reviewed were addressed with evidence updates to identify any new evidence and to help determine which topics should be the highest priority for systematic reviews in the next 1 to 2 years.

Pediatric Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation. Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children.

Neonatal Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for neonatal life support includes evidence from 7 systematic reviews, 3 scoping reviews, and 12 evidence updates. The Neonatal Life Support Task Force generally determined by consensus the type of evidence evaluation to perform; the topics for the evidence updates followed consultation with International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation member resuscitation councils. The 2020 CoSTRs for neonatal life support are published either as new statements or, if appropriate, reiterations of existing statements when the task force found they remained valid. Evidence review topics of particular interest include the use of suction in the presence of both clear and meconium-stained amniotic fluid, sustained inflations for initiation of positive-pressure ventilation, initial oxygen concentrations for initiation of resuscitation in both preterm and term infants, use of epinephrine (adrenaline) when ventilation and compressions fail to stabilize the newborn infant, appropriate routes of drug delivery during resuscitation, and consideration of when it is appropriate to redirect resuscitation efforts after significant efforts have failed. All sections of the Neonatal Resuscitation Algorithm are addressed, from preparation through to postresuscitation care. This document now forms the basis for ongoing evidence evaluation and reevaluation, which will be triggered as further evidence is published. Over 140 million babies are born annually worldwide (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/births-and-deaths-projected-to-2100). If up to 5% receive positive-pressure ventilation, this evidence evaluation is relevant to more than 7 million newborn infants every year. However, in terms of early care of the newborn infant, some of the topics addressed are relevant to every single baby born.

Framework to Support the Process of Decision-Making on Life-Sustaining Treatments in the ICU: Results of a Delphi Study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a consensus framework that can guide the process of decision-making on continuing or limiting life-sustaining treatments in ICU patients, using evidence-based items, supported by caregivers, patients, and surrogate decision makers from multiple countries. DESIGN: A three-round web-based international Delphi consensus study with a priori consensus definition was conducted with experts from 13 countries. Participants reviewed items of the decision-making process on a seven-point Likert scale or with open-ended questions. Questions concerned terminology, content, and timing of decision-making steps. The summarized results (including mean scores) and expert suggestions were presented in the subsequent round for review. SETTING: Web-based surveys of international participants representing ICU physicians, nurses, former ICU patients, and surrogate decision makers. PATIENTS: Not applicable. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In three rounds, respectively, 28, 28, and 27 (of 33 invited) physicians together with 12, 10, and seven (of 19 invited) nurses participated. Patients and surrogates were involved in round one and 12 of 27 responded. Caregivers were mostly working in university affiliated hospitals in Northern Europe. During the Delphi process, most items were modified in order to reach consensus. Seven items lacked consensus after three rounds. The final consensus framework comprises the content and timing of four elements; three elements focused on caregiver-surrogate communication (admission meeting, follow-up meeting, goals-of-care meeting); and one element (weekly time-out meeting) focused on assessing preferences, prognosis, and proportionality of ICU treatment among professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians, nurses, patients, and surrogates generated a consensus-based framework to guide the process of decision-making on continuing or limiting life-sustaining treatments in the ICU. Early, frequent, and scheduled family meetings combined with a repeated multidisciplinary time-out meeting may support decisions in relation to patient preferences, prognosis, and proportionality.

Improved pre-hospital care efficiency due to the implementation of pre-hospital trauma life support (PHTLS®) algorithms.

PURPOSE: Pre-hospital trauma life support (PHTLS®) includes a standardized algorithm for pre-hospital care. Implementation of PHTLS® led to improved outcome in less developed medical trauma systems. We aimed to determine the impact of PHTLS® on quality of pre-hospital care in a European metropolitan area. We hypothesized that the introduction of PHTLS® was associated with improved efficiency of pre-hospital care for severely injured patients and less emergency physician deployment. METHODS: We included adult polytrauma (ISS > 15) patients that were admitted to our level one trauma center during a 7-year time period. Patients were grouped based on the presence or absence of a PHTLS®-trained paramedic in the pre-hospital trauma team. Group I (no-PHTLS group) included all casualties treated by no-PHTLS®-trained personnel. Group II (PHTLS group) was composed of casualties managed by a PHTLS® qualified team. We compared outcome between groups. RESULTS: During the study period, 187,839 rescue operations were executed and 280 patients were included. No differences were seen in patient characteristics, trauma severity or geographical distances between groups. Transfer times were significantly reduced in PHTLS® teams than non-qualified teams (9.3 vs. 10.5 min, P = 0.006). Furthermore, the in-field operation times were significantly reduced in PHTLS® qualified teams (36.2 vs. 42.6 min, P = 0.003). Emergency physician involvement did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to show that the implementation of PHTLS® algorithms in a European metropolitan area is associated with improved efficiency of pre-hospital care for the severely injured. We therefore recommend considering the introduction of PHTLS® in metropolitan areas in the first world.

Atualização do atendimento do paciente em parada cardiorrespiratória: O que todo clínico deve saber? / Update of medical care in cardiorespiratory arrest: What should every clinician know?

O objetivo deste estudo foi apresentar uma revisão narrativa do atendimento à parada cardiorrespiratória, baseada nas diretrizes mais atuais e, também, uma análise crítica de informações de literatura recente, que vão além das recomendações gerais das diretrizes vigentes. A parada cardiorrespiratória, quando ocorre de forma inesperada, abrupta, em indivíduo que se encontrava estável horas antes do evento, é chamada de morte súbita. Essa condição é a principal causa de óbito extra-hospitalar não traumático e, dentre suas diversas causas, a síndrome coronariana aguda é a mais comum em adultos. Uma vez que a frequência de síndrome coronariana aguda tende a aumentar com o aumento da expectativa de vida e de prevalência de outros fatores de risco na população, a ocorrência de morte súbita também tende a aumentar nesse cenário. No intuito de orientar o atendimento de pacientes em parada cardiorrespiratória, há mais de quatro décadas foram criadas diretrizes internacionais, que evoluíram com o surgimento de novas evidências, especialmente nos últimos 20 anos. Todo médico deve estar preparado para atender uma situação de parada cardiorrespiratória, pois ele pode ser chamado para atender tais casos em diferentes cenários (emergência, unidade de internação ou em ambiente extra-hospitalar). Entretanto, apesar da importância da incorporação de novas evidências nessas diretrizes, mudanças frequentes nas recomendações representam grande desafio para os clínicos se manterem atualizados. Além da dificuldade na atualização permanente, há recomendações feitas pelas diretrizes de sociedades médicas que divergem entre si e são questionadas por especialistas, o que gera dúvida na tomada de decisão do clínico. Conforme pormenorizado neste artigo de atualização, as etapas do algoritmo de Suportes Básico e Avançado de Vida são apresentadas como uma sequência, para facilitar para o socorrista que atua sozinho a oferecer intervenções com impacto na sobrevivência do paciente, devendo priorizar a reanimação cardiopulmonar de qualidade e a desfibrilação precoce, se indicada.

The objective of this study was to present a narrative review of cardiac arrest care based on the most current guidelines, and also a critical analysis of recent literature information that goes beyond the general recommendations of the current guidelines. Cardiac arrest, when occurring unexpectedly, abruptly, in an individual who was stable hours before the event, is called sudden death. This condition is the leading cause of non-traumatic out-of-hospital death and, among its many causes, acute coronary syndrome is the most common in adults. Since the frequency of acute coronary syndrome tends to increase with increasing life expectancy and the prevalence of other risk factors in the population, sudden death also tends to increase in this scenario. In order to guide the care of patients with cardiopulmonary arrest, for over 4 decades, international guidelines have been created and have evolved with the emergence of new evidence, especially in the last 20 years. Every physician should be prepared to deal with a cardiac arrest situation as he or she may be called upon to treat such cases in different scenarios (emergency, inpatient unit or out-of-hospital setting). However, despite the importance of incorporating new evidence into these guidelines, frequent changes to the recommendations pose a major challenge for clinicians to update their knowledge. In addition to the difficulty of constantly updating, there are recommendations made by the guidelines of medical societies that differ from each other and are questioned by specialists, which creates doubt in the process of decision making among clinicians. As detailed in this update article, the stages of the algorithm of Basic and Advanced Life Support are presented in a sequence to help the rescuer who works alone to provide interventions that impact the patient's survival, and prioritize quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation and early defibrillation, if required.

Variations in Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment Program across the Nation: Environmental Scan.

Background: Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) is an advance care planning tool that is designed to document end-of-life (EoL) care wishes of those living with limited life expectancies. Although positive impacts of POLST program has been studied, variations in state-specific POLST programs across the nation remain unknown. Objective: Identify state variations in POLST forms and determine if variations are associated with program maturity status. Design: Environmental scan. Measurements: Using the national POLST website, state-specific POLST program characteristics were examined. With available sample POLST forms, EoL care options were abstracted. Results: Of all 51 states (50 United States states and Washington, D.C examined), the majority (n = 48, 98%) were actively participating in POLST; 3 states (5.9%) had Mature status, 19 states and District of Columbia (39.2%) were Endorsed, 24 states were in the developing phase (47.1%), and 4 states (7.8%) were nonconforming. Forty-five states (88.2%) had forms available for review. Antibiotic and intravenous fluid options were identified in 32 (71.1%), and 33 (73.3%) POLST forms, respectively. Hospital transfer and use of oxygen were mentioned in all forms. Use of respiratory devices (i.e., continuous positive airway pressure and bi-level positive airway pressure) were mentioned on 27 (60%) forms, whereas ventilator or intubation use were mentioned in 36 POLST forms (80%). No associations were found between POLST maturity status and provision of treatment options. Conclusions: Variations in integration of infection and symptom management options were identified. Further research is needed to determine if there are regional factors associated with provision of treatment options on POLST forms and if there are differences in actual rates of infection or symptoms reported.

Update: 2017/2018 AHA BLS, ACLS, and PALS guidelines.

In November 2017, the American Heart Association published updates to its adult and pediatric Basic Life Support and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation guidelines; one year later, it published updates to its Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support and Pediatric Advanced Life Support guidelines. This article reviews these updated guidelines and highlights the key changes and how to integrate them into practice.

Impact of prehospital mechanical ventilation: A retrospective matched cohort study of 911 calls in the United States.

Prehospital use of ventilators by emergency medical services (EMS) during 911 calls is increasing. This study described the impact of prehospital mechanical ventilation on prehospital time intervals and on mortality.This retrospective matched-cohort study used 4 consecutive public releases of the US National Emergency Medical Services Information System dataset (2011-2014). EMS activations with recorded ventilator use were randomly matched with activations without ventilator use (1 to 1) on age (range ±â€Š2 years), gender, provider's primary impression, urbanicity, and level of service.A total of 5740 EMS activations were included (2870 patients per group). Patients in the ventilator group had a mean age of 69.1 (±17.3) years with 49.4% males, similar to the non-ventilator group. Activations were mostly in urban settings (83.8%) with an advanced life support level of care (94.5%). Respiratory distress (77.8%) and cardiac arrest (6.8%) were the most common provider's primary impressions. Continuous positive airway pressure was the most common mode of ventilation used (79.2%).Mortality was higher at hospital discharge (29.0% vs 21.1%, P = .01) but not at emergency department (ED) discharge (8.4% vs 7.4%, P = .19) with prehospital ventilator use. Both total on-scene time and total prehospital time intervals increased with reported ventilator use (4.10 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.71-5.49) and 3.59 minutes (95% CI: 3.04-4.14), respectively).Ventilator use by EMS agencies in 911 calls in the US is associated with higher prehospital time intervals without observed impact on survival to ED discharge. More EMS outcome research is needed to provide evidence-based prehospital care guidelines and targeted resource utilization.

Factors related to limitation of life support within 48h of intensive care unit admission: A multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors related to limitations on life support within 48h of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective multicenter study. SETTING: Eleven ICUs. PATIENTS: All patients who died and/or had limitations on life support after ICU admission during a four-month period. VARIABLES: Patient characteristics, hospital characteristics, characteristics of limitations on life support. Time-to-first-limitation was classified as early (<48h of admission) or late (≥48h). We performed univariate, multivariate analyses and CHAID (chi-square automatic interaction detection) analysis of variables associated with limitation of life support within 48h of ICU admission. RESULTS: 3335 patients were admitted; 326 (9.8%) had limitations on life support. A total of 344 patients died; 247 (71.8%) had limitations on life support (range among centers, 58.6%-84.2%). The median (p25-p75) time from admission to initial limitation was 2 (0-7) days. CHAID analysis found that the modified Rankin score was the variable most closely related with early limitations. Among patients with Rankin >2, early limitations were implemented in 71.7% (OR=2.5; 95% CI: 1.5-4.4) and lung disease was the variable most strongly associated with early limitations (OR=12.29; 95% CI: 1.63-255.91). Among patients with Rankin ≤2, 48.8% had early limitations; patients admitted after emergency surgery had the highest rate of early limitations (66.7%; OR=2.4; 95% CI: 1.1-5.5). CONCLUSION: Limitations on life support are common, but the practice varies. Quality of life has the greatest impact on decisions to limit life support within 48h of admission.