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 .).

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.

Recommendation for changes to the guidelines of trauma patients with potential spinal injury within a regional UK ambulance trust.

Background: Spinal assessment and immobilisation has been a topic of debate for many years where, despite an emerging evidence base and the delivery of new guidance overseas, little has changed within UK pre-hospital practice. Since 2018, South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust has spent time working with local trauma networks and expertise from within the region and international colleagues to develop a set of C-spine assessment and immobilisation guidelines that reflect the current best available international evidence and significant changes in international pre-hospital practice from settings such as Scandinavia and Australasia. Methods: A specialist group was commissioned to review the topic of pre-hospital spinal immobilisation and explore potential for evidence-based improvement. In conjunction with local trauma networks, subject matter experts and a thorough review of recent literature, a series of recommendations were made in order to improve spinal care within the authoring trust. Results: Seven recommendations were made, and an updated set of guidelines produced. These included the removal of semi-rigid collars from pre-hospital spinal immobilisation; the creation of two tiers of patients to ensure that the high-risk and low-risk populations are considered separately and an accompanying decision tool to safeguard both cohorts; an increased emphasis on the risk of spinal injury in the frail and older patient; an emphasis on spinal motion restriction rather than rigid immobilisation; an increased emphasis on self-extrication; and the use of a marker for emergency departments. Summary: An updated set of guidance has been produced using a combination of specialist and expert opinion alongside a literature review with close involvement of key stakeholders, both public and professional. The new guidance helps to ensure a patient-centred approach where each person is considered an individual with their risk of injury and management measures tailored to their specific needs.

Complexity of the decision-making process of ambulance staff for assessment and referral of older people who have fallen: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Older people who fall commonly present to the emergency ambulance service, and approximately 40% are not conveyed to the emergency department (ED), despite an historic lack of formal training for such decisions. This study aimed to understand the decision-making processes of emergency ambulance staff with older people who have fallen. METHODS: During 2005 ambulance staff in London tested a clinical assessment tool for use with the older person who had fallen. Documented use of the tool was low. Following the trial, 12 staff participated in semistructured interviews. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis was carried out. RESULTS: The interviews revealed a similar assessment and decision-making process among participants: Prearrival: forming an early opinion from information from the emergency call. Initial contact: assessing the need for any immediate action and establishing a rapport. Continuing assessment: gathering and assimilating medical and social information. Making a conveyance decision: negotiation, referral and professional defence, using professional experience and instinct. CONCLUSIONS: An assessment process was described that highlights the complexity of making decisions about whether or not to convey older people who fall and present to the emergency ambulance service, and a predominance of informal decision-making processes. The need for support for ambulance staff in this area was highlighted, generating a significant challenge to those with education roles in the ambulance service. Further research is needed to look at how new care pathways, which offer an alternative to the ED may influence decision making around non-conveyance.

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.

Republished paper: The implications of the NICE guidelines on neurosurgical management for all severe head injuries: systematic review.

Head injury is an important cause of death among young adults in the UK, and a significant burden on NHS resources. However, management is inconsistent, governed largely by local resources. The latest version of the NICE head injury guidelines suggests that more patients with traumatic brain injury should be transferred to receive specialist care. However, this raises issues about the capacity of regional neurosurgical units, particularly to accommodate patients who do not require surgical intervention. Objectives To critically evaluate the basis of the NICE recommendations about transfer for neurosurgical care, and examine the configuration of specialist services to assess the implications of increasing the existing number of transfers. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted of articles discussing the provision of emergency neurosurgical care for adult head injuries in the UK. Results Fifty-eight papers met the criteria for inclusion in the literature review, including seven papers cited in the NICE guidance. Fifty-one papers related to neurosurgical care, including papers on bed occupancy, transfer times and transfer policies. Conclusions The evidence NICE cited is of variable quality. Much of the research was conducted outside the UK, which raises questions about its relevance to the NHS. Care of traumatic brain injuries in the UK is already hampered by the inadequate capacity of regional neurosurgical units to meet demand, and transferring more patients would be likely to exacerbate this. Increasing the number of transfers could also worsen inequalities of access for other groups, such as elective patients, particularly in areas where facilities are most stretched.

The implications of the NICE guidelines on neurosurgical management for all severe head injuries: systematic review.

UNLABELLED: Head injury is an important cause of death among young adults in the UK, and a significant burden on NHS resources. However, management is inconsistent, governed largely by local resources. The latest version of the NICE head injury guidelines suggests that more patients with traumatic brain injury should be transferred to receive specialist care. However, this raises issues about the capacity of regional neurosurgical units, particularly to accommodate patients who do not require surgical intervention. OBJECTIVES: To critically evaluate the basis of the NICE recommendations about transfer for neurosurgical care, and examine the configuration of specialist services to assess the implications of increasing the existing number of transfers. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted of articles discussing the provision of emergency neurosurgical care for adult head injuries in the UK. RESULTS: Fifty-eight papers met the criteria for inclusion in the literature review, including seven papers cited in the NICE guidance. Fifty-one papers related to neurosurgical care, including papers on bed occupancy, transfer times and transfer policies. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence NICE cited is of variable quality. Much of the research was conducted outside the UK, which raises questions about its relevance to the NHS. Care of traumatic brain injuries in the UK is already hampered by the inadequate capacity of regional neurosurgical units to meet demand, and transferring more patients would be likely to exacerbate this. Increasing the number of transfers could also worsen inequalities of access for other groups, such as elective patients, particularly in areas where facilities are most stretched.

A critical reassessment of ambulance service airway management in prehospital care: Joint Royal Colleges Ambulance Liaison Committee Airway Working Group, June 2008.

Paramedic tracheal intubation has been practised in the UK for more than 20 years and is currently a core skill for paramedics. Growing evidence suggests that tracheal intubation is not the optimal method of airway management by paramedics and may be detrimental to patient outcomes. There is also evidence that the current initial training of 25 intubations performed in-hospital is inadequate, and that the lack of ongoing intubation practice may compound this further. Supraglottic airway devices (eg, laryngeal mask airway), which were not available when extended training and paramedic intubation was first introduced, are now in use in many ambulance services and are a suitable alternative prehospital airway device for paramedics.

The assessment and management of thermal burn injuries in a UK ambulance service: a clinical audit.

BACKGROUND: Although burn emergencies are infrequently encountered, the ambulance service is often the first point of contact for patients in these situations. It is therefore important that these potentially devastating injuries are managed in accordance with the evidence base. Appropriate assessment and management of these patients in the pre-hospital phase will have a significant impact upon their long-term outcomes, such as scarring cosmesis and functionality. AIM AND OBJECTIVES: This audit was conducted to determine if patients presenting to one UK ambulance service with thermal burn injuries were managed safely, effectively and in a timely manner. Areas highlighted for improvement will assist in directing future pre-hospital research and educational requirements. Epidemiological data will also be provided. RESULTS: 278 thermal burn incidents occurring from June 2017 to May 2018 (inclusive) were included in this audit. A larger proportion of burn patients were paediatrics who fell into the 0-10 age category, most burn patients were injured at a home address and only nine of the overall sample were major burns. Only 35% of patients received adequate cooling of their burns, an essential first aid intervention. The assessment of pain (87%) and provision of analgesia (75%) showed a higher compliance rate. However, only 54% had pain reassessed after analgesia. There was a near 100% compliance rate for patients being managed without hydrogel dressings and topical medicines. CONCLUSION: The results indicate several areas for improvement within the ambulance trust. Of importance is the application of basic first aid, such as cooling. It is important not only to improve education among staff but also to understand non-compliance. It should be acknowledged that assessment of pain and provision of analgesia demonstrated far higher compliance compared to current pre-hospital evidence. Several points for education and research have been identified.

Data based integration of critical illness and injury patient care from EMS to emergency department to intensive care unit.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Describe the challenges and opportunities for an integrated emergency care data system for the delivery and care of critical illness and injury. RECENT FINDINGS: Standardized data comparable across geographies and settings of care has been a critical challenge for emergency care data systems. Emergency medical services (EMS), emergency department (ED), ICU and hospital care are integrated units of service in critical illness and injury care. The applicability of available evidence and outcome measures to these units of service needs to be determined. A recently developed fully integrated, emergency care data system for quality improvement of EMS service delivery and patient care has been linked to ED, ICU and in-hospital data systems for myocardial infarction, trauma and stroke. The data system also provides a platform for linking EMS with emergency physicians, other healthcare providers, and public health agencies responsible for planning, disease surveillance, and disaster preparedness. SUMMARY: Given its time-sensitive nature, new data systems and analytic methods will be required to examine the impact of emergency care. The linkage of emergency care data systems to outcomes based systems could create an ideal environment to improve patient morbidity and mortality in critical illness and injury.

A retrospective analysis of ketamine administration by critical care paramedics in a pre-hospital care setting.

OBJECTIVE: This project aims to describe pre-hospital use of ketamine in trauma by South East Coast Ambulance Service critical care paramedics and evaluate the occurrence of any side effects or adverse events. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients receiving pre-hospital ketamine for trauma between 16 March 2013 and 30 April 2017. Administrations were identified from Advanced Life Saving Interventions and Procedures reports submitted by the clinician and, later, from an electronic database. Each was scrutinised for patient demographics, doses and reports of side effects or adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 510 unique administrations were identified. Following the exclusion of 61 records, 449 (88.0%) administrations remained. The most common indication for administration of ketamine was lower limb injury, with 228 (50.8%) administrations. Ketamine was only administered intravenously, and the median dose of ketamine for all administrations was 30 mg (interquartile range 20-40 mg). The gender split was dominated by males who accounted for 302 (67.3%) administrations compared to 147 (32.7%) females. The median age of patients was 44 years (interquartile range 28-58 years), with women on average being older than men. Telephone calls to a consultant were made for 243/449 (54.1%) of the administrations, reflecting a need for sanctioning of the drug, advice on dosages or indications, for example. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care paramedics within a well governed system are able to safely administer ketamine within an approved dosing regimen under a Patient Group Direction. Median doses are in keeping with nationally approved guidelines. Reported side effects were within the described frequencies in the British National Formulary. Prospective studies are now needed in order to confirm the safety and efficacy of ketamine administration among the advanced paramedic population.

Temporal and geographic patterns of stab injuries in young people: a retrospective cohort study from a UK major trauma centre.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the epidemiology of assaults resulting in stab injuries among young people. We hypothesised that there are specific patterns and risk factors for injury in different age groups. DESIGN: Eleven-year retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Urban major trauma centre in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 1824 patients under the age of 25 years presenting to hospital after a stab injury resulting from assault. OUTCOMES: Incident timings and locations were obtained from ambulance service records and triangulated with prospectively collected demographic and injury characteristics recorded in our hospital trauma registry. We used geospatial mapping of individual incidents to investigate the relationships between demographic characteristics and incident timing and location. RESULTS: The majority of stabbings occurred in males from deprived communities, with a sharp increase in incidence between the ages of 14 and 18 years. With increasing age, injuries occurred progressively later in the day (r2=0.66, p<0.01) and were less frequent within 5 km of home (r2=0.59, p<0.01). Among children (age <16), a significant peak in injuries occurred between 16:00 and 18:00 hours, accounting for 22% (38/172) of injuries in this group compared with 11% (182/1652) of injuries in young adults. In children, stabbings occurred earlier on school days (hours from 08:00: 11.1 vs non-school day 13.7, p<0.01) and a greater proportion were within 5 km of home (90% vs non-school day 74%, p=0.02). Mapping individual incidents demonstrated that the spike in frequency in the late afternoon and early evening was attributable to incidents occurring on school days and close to home. CONCLUSIONS: Age, gender and deprivation status are potent influences on the risk of violent injury in young people. Stab injuries occur in characteristic temporal and geographical patterns according to age group, with the immediate after-school period associated with a spike in incident frequency in children. This represents an opportunity for targeted prevention strategies in this population.

Public perceptions and experiences of myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and CPR in London.

INTRODUCTION: The lay public have limited knowledge of the symptoms of myocardial infarction ("heart attack"), and inaccurate perceptions of cardiac arrest survival rates. Levels of CPR training and willingness to intervene in cardiac emergencies are also low. AIMS: To explore public perceptions of myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest; investigate perceptions of cardiac arrest survival rates; assess levels of training and attitudes towards CPR, and explore the types of interventions considered useful for increasing rates of bystander CPR among Greater London residents. METHODS: A quantitative interview survey was conducted with 1011 Greater London residents. Eight focus groups were also conducted to explore a range of issues in greater depth and validate trends that emerged in the initial survey. RESULTS: Chest pain was the most commonly recognised symptom of "heart attack". Around half of the respondents were aware that a myocardial infarction differs from a cardiac arrest, although their ability to explain this difference was limited. The majority overestimated that at least a quarter of cardiac arrest patients in London survive to hospital discharge. Few participants had received CPR training, and most were hesitant about performing the procedure on a stranger. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness and knowledge of CPR, and reactions to cardiac emergencies, reflect relatively low levels of CPR training in London. Publicising cardiac arrest survival figures may be instrumental in prompting members of the public to train in CPR and motivating those who have been trained to intervene in a cardiac emergency.

Pre-hospital Assessment of the Role of Adrenaline: Measuring the Effectiveness of Drug administration In Cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC-2): Trial protocol.

Despite its use since the 1960s, the safety or effectiveness of adrenaline as a treatment for cardiac arrest has never been comprehensively evaluated in a clinical trial. Although most studies have found that adrenaline increases the chance of return of spontaneous circulation for short periods, many studies found harmful effects on the brain and raise concern that adrenaline may reduce overall survival and/or good neurological outcome. The PARAMEDIC-2 trial seeks to determine if adrenaline is safe and effective in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. This is a pragmatic, individually randomised, double blind, controlled trial with a parallel economic evaluation. Participants will be eligible if they are in cardiac arrest in the out-of-hospital environment and advanced life support is initiated. Exclusions are cardiac arrest as a result of anaphylaxis or life threatening asthma, and patient known or appearing to be under 16 or pregnant. 8000 participants treated by 5 UK ambulance services will be randomised between December 2014 and August 2017 to adrenaline (intervention) or placebo (control) through opening pre-randomised drug packs. Clinical outcomes are survival to 30 days (primary outcome), hospital discharge, 3, 6 and 12 months, health related quality of life, and neurological and cognitive outcomes (secondary outcomes). Trial registration (ISRCTN73485024).

Level of consciousness on admission to a Heart Attack Centre is a predictor of survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between the neurological status at the time of handover from the ambulance crew to a Heart Attack Centre (HAC) in patients who have achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and subsequent outcome, in the context of current treatment standards, is unknown. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients treated by London Ambulance Service (LAS) from 1(st) April 2011 to 31(st) March 2013 admitted to a HAC in Greater London was undertaken. Neurological status (A - alert; V - responding to voice; P - responding to pain; U - unresponsive) recorded by the ambulance crew on handover was compared with length of hospital stay and survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 475 sequential adult cardiac arrests of presumed cardiac origin, achieving ROSC on admission to a HAC were identified. Outcome data was available for 452 patients, of whom 253 (56.0%) survived to discharge. Level of consciousness on admission to the HAC was a predictor of duration of hospital stay (P<0.0001) and survival to hospital discharge (P<0.0001). Of those presenting with a shockable rhythm, 32.3% (120/371) were 'A' or 'V', compared with 9.1% (9/99) of those with non-shockable rhythms (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with shockable rhythms achieving ROSC are more likely to be conscious (A or V) compared with those with non-shockable rhythms. Most patients who are conscious on admission to the HAC will survive, compared with approximately half of those who are unconscious (P or U), suggesting that critical care is generally appropriate at all levels of consciousness if ROSC has been achieved.

Survival of resuscitated cardiac arrest patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) conveyed directly to a Heart Attack Centre by ambulance clinicians.

OBJECTIVE: This study reports survival outcomes for patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) subsequent to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and who were conveyed directly by ambulance clinicians to a specialist Heart Attack Centre for expert cardiology assessment, angiography and possible percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive review of data sourced from the London Ambulance Service's OHCA registry over a one-year period. RESULTS: We observed excellent survival rates for our cohort of patients with 66% of patients surviving to be discharged from hospital, the majority of whom were still alive after one year. Those who survived tended to be younger, to have had a witnessed arrest in a public place with an initial cardiac rhythm of VF/VT, and to have been transported to the specialist centre more quickly than those who did not. CONCLUSION: A system allowing ambulance clinicians to autonomously convey OHCA STEMI patients who achieve a return of spontaneous circulation directly to a Heart Attack Centre is highly effective and yields excellent survival outcomes.

Increases in survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a five year study.

OBJECTIVE: This study reports improvements in survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in London over a five year period from 2007 to 2012 and explores the potential reasons for the very striking increases observed. METHODS: Data from the London Ambulance Service's cardiac arrest registry from 2007 to 2012 were analysed retrospectively for all patients who met the Utstein comparator group criteria (an arrest of a presumed cardiac cause that was bystander witnessed with an initial rhythm of VF/VT). RESULTS: We observed an increase in survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the five year period, with incremental improvements each year from 12% to 32% for the Utstein comparator group of patients. CONCLUSION: We suggest that a range of important changes made to pre-hospital cardiac care in London over the last five years have contributed to the observed increase in survival over the study period. In addition we advocate a range of further initiatives to continue improving survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.