Comparing characteristics and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest during the early and late COVID-19 pandemic at an academic institution in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced major changes in the resuscitation practices of cardiac arrest victims. AIM: We aimed to compare the characteristics and outcomes of patients who sustained in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) during the early COVID-19 pandemic period (2020) with those during the late COVID-19 pandemic period (2021). METHODS: This was a retrospective review of adult patients sustaining IHCA at a single academic centre. We compared characteristics and outcomes of IHCA for 5 months in 2020 with those experiencing IHCA for 5 months in 2021. RESULTS: Patients sustaining IHCA during the early COVID-19 pandemic period had higher rates of delayed epinephrine administration of more than 5 min (13.4% vs. 1.9%; p < 0.01), more frequent delays in the initiation of chest compressions (55.6% vs. 17.9%; p < 0.01), and were intubated less often (23.0% vs. 59.3%; p < 0.01). In terms of outcomes, both return of spontaneous circulation (35.8% vs. 51.2%; p < 0.01) and survival to hospital discharge rates (13.9% vs. 30.2%; p < 0.01) were lower during the early COVID-19 pandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: The early COVID-19 pandemic period was associated with delays in epinephrine administration and chest compression initiation for IHCA. Moreover, both return of spontaneous circulation and survival to hospital discharge were lower during the early COVID-19 pandemic period.

Anesthesia Preferences and Outcomes in Saudi Arabian Healthcare: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesia choice is critical in ensuring optimal surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction. We aimed to investigate anesthesia preferences, trends, and outcomes in elective surgeries within Saudi Arabian healthcare settings. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted among anesthesia residents and attending anesthesiologists across Saudi Arabia. Participants provided demographic information and responded to questions regarding anesthesia preferences, trends, and outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, and logistic regression analysis was employed to identify factors associated with anesthesia preference. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 572 healthcare professionals in Saudi Arabia. Among participants, 51.7% (n=296) preferred general anesthesia, while 48.3% (n=276) favored regional anesthesia for elective surgeries. Factors influencing anesthesia choice included patient preference, surgical complexity, and resource availability. Over half of the respondents reported an increase in regional anesthesia preference over the past five years, although some perceived inadequate training in this area. Common barriers to regional anesthesia adoption included equipment availability, patient reluctance, and limited training opportunities. Postoperative recovery was perceived as quicker with regional anesthesia by 52.3% (n=299) of participants, with postoperative nausea and vomiting being the most common complication associated with general anesthesia. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that participants above 50 years had lower odds of preferring regional anesthesia, while those perceiving training adequacy in regional anesthesia as adequate had higher odds of preferring it (OR=0.64, 95% CI: 0.41-0.98, p=0.041; OR=1.58, 95% CI: 1.21-2.05, p=0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study provides insights into anesthesia practice patterns in Saudi Arabian healthcare settings. Individualized anesthesia care, ongoing training in regional anesthesia, and evidence-based decision-making are essential to optimize perioperative outcomes and patient satisfaction.