Prompt advanced life support improves survival from ventricular fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the interval between the arrival of basic life support (BLS) providers and the arrival of advanced life support (ALS) providers is associated with patient outcome after cardiac arrest. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all witnessed, out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation (VF) cardiac arrests between January 1, 1991, and December 31, 2007. Eligible patients (n = 1,781) received full resuscitation efforts from both BLS and ALS providers. RESULTS: The BLS-to-ALS arrival interval was a significant predictor of survival to hospital discharge (odds ratio [OR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-0.99); the likelihood of survival decreased by 4% for every minute that ALS arrival was delayed following BLS arrival. Other significant predictors of survival were whether the arrest occurred in public (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.19-1.85), whether a bystander administered cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.07-1.68), and the interval between the 9-1-1 call and BLS arrival (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.73-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: We found that a shorter BLS-to-ALS arrival interval increased the likelihood of survival to hospital discharge after a witnessed, out-of-hospital VF cardiac arrest. We conclude that ALS interventions may provide additional benefits over BLS interventions alone when utilized in a well-established, two-tiered emergency medical services (EMS) system already optimized for rapid defibrillation. The highest priorities in any EMS system should still be early CPR and early defibrillation, but timely ALS services can supplement these crucial interventions.

Procainamide and survival in ventricular fibrillation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVES: Procainamide is an antiarrhythmic drug of unproven efficacy in cardiac arrest. The association between procainamide and survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest was investigated to better determine the drug's potential role in resuscitation. METHODS: The authors conducted a 10-year study of all witnessed, out-of-hospital, ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT) cardiac arrests treated by emergency medical services (EMS) in King County, Washington. Patients were considered eligible for procainamide if they received more than three defibrillation shocks and intravenous (IV) bolus lidocaine. Four logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) describing the relationship between procainamide and survival. RESULTS: Of the 665 eligible patients, 176 received procainamide, and 489 did not. On average, procainamide recipients received more shocks and pharmacologic interventions and had lengthier resuscitations. Adjusted for their clinical and resuscitation characteristics, procainamide recipients had a lower likelihood of survival to hospital discharge (OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.75). Further adjustment for receipt of other cardiac medications during resuscitation negated this apparent adverse association (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.66 to 1.57). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study of out-of-hospital VF and pulseless VT arrest, procainamide as second-line antiarrhythmic treatment was not associated with survival in models attempting to best account for confounding. The results suggest that procainamide, as administered in this investigation, does not have a large impact on outcome, but cannot eliminate the possibility of a smaller, clinically relevant effect on survival.