Development of a Performance Assessment Scale for Simulated Dispatcher-Assisted Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (Telephone-CPR): A Multi-Center Randomized Simulation-Based Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Dispatchers should be trained to interrogate bystanders with strict protocols to elicit information focused on recognizing cardiac arrest and should provide telephone cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) instructions in all cases of suspected cardiac arrest. While an objective assessment of training outcomes is needed, there is no performance assessment scale for simulated dispatcher-assisted CPR. STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to create a valid and reliable performance assessment scale for simulated dispatcher-assisted CPR. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, controlled, multi-centric simulation-based trial (registration number TCTR20210130002), the scale was developed according to the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) and American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines 2015 and revised by experts. The performance of 48 dispatchers' telephone-CPR and of 48 bystanders carrying out CPR on a manikin was assessed by two independent evaluators using the scale and using a SkillReporter (PC) software to provide CPR objective performance. Continuous variables were described as mean (SD) and categorical variables as numbers and percentage (%). Comparative analysis between two groups used a Student t-test or a non-parametric test of Mann-Whitney. The internal structure of the scale was evaluated, including internal consistency using α Cronbach coefficient, and reproducibility using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and linear correlation coefficient (R2) calculation. RESULTS: The scale included three different parts: two sections for dispatchers' (32 items) and bystanders' CPR performance (15 items) assessment, and a third part recording times. There was excellent internal consistency (α Cronbach coefficient = 0.77) and reproducibility (ICC = 0.93; R² = 0.86). For dispatchers' performance assessment, α Cronbach coefficient = 0.76; ICC = 0.91; R2 = 0.84. For bystanders' performance assessment, α Cronbach coefficient = 0.75; ICC = 0.93; R2 = 0.87. Reproducibility was excellent for nine items, good for 19 items, and moderate for 19 items. No item had poor reproducibility. There was no significant difference between dispatch doctors' and medical dispatch assistants' performances (33.0 [SD = 4.7] versus 32.3 [SD = 3.2] out of 52, respectively; P = .70) or between trained and untrained bystanders to follow the instructions (14.3 [SD = 2.0] versus 13.9 [SD = 1.8], respectively; P = .64). Objective performance (%) was significantly higher for trained bystanders than for untrained bystanders (67.4 [SD = 14.5] versus 50.6 [SD = 19.3], respectively; P = .03). CONCLUSION: The scale was valid and reliable to assess performance for simulated dispatcher-assisted CPR. To the authors' knowledge, no other valid performance tool currently exists. It could be used in simulated telephone-CPR training programs to improve performance.

Prognostic value of PCT, copeptin, MR-proADM, MR-proANP and CT-proET-1 for severe acute dyspnea in the emergency department: the BIODINER study.

CONTEXT: Acute dyspnea is a frequent complaint in patients attending the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of PCT, MR-proANP, MR-proADM, copeptin and CT-proET1 for the risk-stratification of severe acute dyspnea patients presenting to the ED. METHODS: Multicenter prospective study in adult patients with a chief complaint of acute dyspnea. Pro-hormone type biomarkers concentrations were measured on arrival. Combined primary endpoint was a poor outcome. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-four patients were included, 137 (35%) met the primary endpoint. MR-proADM was the only biomarker associated with the primary endpoint (odds ratio 1.43 [95%CI: 1.13-1.82], p = 0.003) as were the presence of paradoxical abdominal breathing (odds ratio 2.48 [95%CI: 1.31-4.68]) or cyanosis (odds ratio 3.18 [1.46-6.89]) Conclusions: In patients with severe acute dyspnea in the ED, pro-hormone type biomarkers measurements have a low added value to clinical signs for the prediction of poor outcome.

Predictors of 30-day mortality in patients admitted to ED for acute heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: Acute heart failure (AHF) is a leading cause of admission in emergency departments (ED). It is associated with significant in-hospital mortality, suggesting that there is room for improvement of care. Our aims were to investigate clinical patterns, biological characteristics and determinants of 30-day mortality. METHODS: We conducted a single site, retrospective review of adult patients (≥18years) admitted to ED for AHF over a 12-month period. Data collected included demographics, clinical, biological and outcomes data. Epidemiologic data were collected at baseline, and patients were followed up during a 30-day period. RESULTS: There were a total of 322 patients. Mean age was 83.9±9.1years, and 47% of the patients were men. Among them, 59 patients (18.3%) died within 30days of admission to the ED. The following three characteristics were associated with increased mortality: age>85years (OR=1.5[95%CI:0.8-2.7], p=0.01), creatinine clearance <30mL/min (OR=2.6[95%CI:1.4-5], p<0.001) and Nt-proBNP >5000pg/mL (OR=2.2[95%CI:1.2-4], p<0.001). The best Nt-proBNP cut-off value to predict first-day mortality was 9000pg/mL (area under the curve (AUC) [95%CI] of 0.790 [0.634-0.935], p<0.001). For 7-day mortality, it was 7900pg/mL (0.698 [0.578-0.819], p<0.001) and for 30-day mortality, 5000pg/mL (0.667 [0.576-0.758], p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nt-proBNP level on admission, age and creatinine clearance, are predictive of 30-day mortality in adult patients admitted to ED for AHF.

Assessment of noninvasive acoustic respiration rate monitoring in patients admitted to an Emergency Department for drug or alcoholic poisoning.

To compare respiration rate measurement by an acoustic method and thoracic impedance to capnometry as the reference method, in patients at the Emergency Department after drug or alcoholic poisoning. In this observational study, 30 patients aged 18 or older, hospitalized at the Emergency Department for drug or alcoholic poisoning, without any contraindication to a face mask and/or a cervical acoustic sensor, were included in the study. They benefited from a simultaneous recording of their respiration rate by the acoustic method (RRa(®), Masimo Corp., Irvine, CA, USA), by thoracic impedance (Philips Intellivue(®) MP2, Suresnes, France) and by capnometry (Capnostream(®) 20, Oridion, Jerusalem, Israël) through a face mask (Capnomask(®), Mediplus Ltd, Raleigh, NC, USA) for 40-60 min. Of the 86,578 triplets collected, 77,155 (89.1%) were exploitable. Median (range) respiration rate measured by capnometry was 18 (7-29) bpm. Compared to capnometry, bias and limits of agreement were 0.1 ± 3.8 bpm for the acoustic method and 0.3 ± 5.5 bpm for thoracic impedance. The proportions of RR values collected by acoustic method or by thoracic impedance which differed over 10 or 20% during more than 15 s, compared to capnometry, were 8.3 versus 14.3, and 1.5 versus 3.8%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The acoustic sensor had to be repositioned on three patients. For 11 patients, the Capnomask(®) was removed several times. In patients with drug or alcoholic poisoning, the acoustic method seems more accurate than thoracic impedance and better tolerated than face mask capnometry.

[New forms of health care coordination in geriatrics]. / Nouvelles formes de coordination paramédicale en gériatrie.

The global care of elderly patients leads to new forms of coordination between allied healthcare professionals. They are based on completely new ethical issues relating to the responsibility of all the healthcare professionals involved. These new practices call for the mobilisation of new skills, the development of new teaching and research into interprofessional collaboration.

A randomized, double-blind study comparing morphine with fentanyl in prehospital analgesia.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare, by a randomized double-blind method, morphine (M) and fentanyl (F) in a prehospital setting. METHODS: Consecutive patients with severe, acute pain defined as a visual analog scale score (VASS) of 60/100 or higher were included. The M group received an initial intravenous M injection of 0.1 mg/kg then of 3 mg every 5 minutes. The F group received an initial intravenous F injection of 1 microg/kg then of 30 microg every 5 minutes. The goal of analgesia was a VASS of 30/100 or lower. The end point was the VASS measured 30 minutes after initial administration (VAS [T30]). RESULTS: There were 26 patients included in the M group and 28 in the F group. Initial VASS(T0) and VASS(T30), mean (95% CI), were 83 (78-88) and 40 (28-52) in the M group and 77 (72-82) and 35 (27-43) in the F group (P=NS). Sixty-two percent of patients in the M group described analgesia as excellent or good vs 76% of those in the F group who did (P=NS). There were no differences in the incidence of side effects in the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that M and F were comparable in treating severe, acute pain in a prehospital setting during the first 30 minutes in spontaneous breathing patients.