2023 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation engages in a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed, published cardiopulmonary resuscitation and first aid science. Draft Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations are posted online throughout the year, and this annual summary provides more concise versions of the final Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations from all task forces for the year. Topics addressed by systematic reviews this year include resuscitation of cardiac arrest from drowning, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for adults and children, calcium during cardiac arrest, double sequential defibrillation, neuroprognostication after cardiac arrest for adults and children, maintaining normal temperature after preterm birth, heart rate monitoring methods for diagnostics in neonates, detection of exhaled carbon dioxide in neonates, family presence during resuscitation of adults, and a stepwise approach to resuscitation skills training. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces list priority knowledge gaps for further research. Additional topics are addressed with scoping reviews and evidence updates.

2023 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation engages in a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed, published cardiopulmonary resuscitation and first aid science. Draft Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations are posted online throughout the year, and this annual summary provides more concise versions of the final Consensus on Science With Treatment Recommendations from all task forces for the year. Topics addressed by systematic reviews this year include resuscitation of cardiac arrest from drowning, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for adults and children, calcium during cardiac arrest, double sequential defibrillation, neuroprognostication after cardiac arrest for adults and children, maintaining normal temperature after preterm birth, heart rate monitoring methods for diagnostics in neonates, detection of exhaled carbon dioxide in neonates, family presence during resuscitation of adults, and a stepwise approach to resuscitation skills training. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces list priority knowledge gaps for further research. Additional topics are addressed with scoping reviews and evidence updates.

2022 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

This is the sixth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. This summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews include cardiopulmonary resuscitation during transport; approach to resuscitation after drowning; passive ventilation; minimizing pauses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation; temperature management after cardiac arrest; use of diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest; use of vasopressin and corticosteroids during cardiac arrest; coronary angiography after cardiac arrest; public-access defibrillation devices for children; pediatric early warning systems; maintaining normal temperature immediately after birth; suctioning of amniotic fluid at birth; tactile stimulation for resuscitation immediately after birth; use of continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress at term birth; respiratory and heart rate monitoring in the delivery room; supraglottic airway use in neonates; prearrest prediction of in-hospital cardiac arrest mortality; basic life support training for likely rescuers of high-risk populations; effect of resuscitation team training; blended learning for life support training; training and recertification for resuscitation instructors; and recovery position for maintenance of breathing and prevention of cardiac arrest. Members from 6 task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and generated consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections, and priority knowledge gaps for future research are listed.

2022 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

This is the sixth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. This summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews include cardiopulmonary resuscitation during transport; approach to resuscitation after drowning; passive ventilation; minimizing pauses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation; temperature management after cardiac arrest; use of diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest; use of vasopressin and corticosteroids during cardiac arrest; coronary angiography after cardiac arrest; public-access defibrillation devices for children; pediatric early warning systems; maintaining normal temperature immediately after birth; suctioning of amniotic fluid at birth; tactile stimulation for resuscitation immediately after birth; use of continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress at term birth; respiratory and heart rate monitoring in the delivery room; supraglottic airway use in neonates; prearrest prediction of in-hospital cardiac arrest mortality; basic life support training for likely rescuers of high-risk populations; effect of resuscitation team training; blended learning for life support training; training and recertification for resuscitation instructors; and recovery position for maintenance of breathing and prevention of cardiac arrest. Members from 6 task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and generated consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections, and priority knowledge gaps for future research are listed.

2022 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.

This is the sixth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. This summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews include cardiopulmonary resuscitation during transport; approach to resuscitation after drowning; passive ventilation; minimising pauses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation; temperature management after cardiac arrest; use of diagnostic point-of-care ultrasound during cardiac arrest; use of vasopressin and corticosteroids during cardiac arrest; coronary angiography after cardiac arrest; public-access defibrillation devices for children; pediatric early warning systems; maintaining normal temperature immediately after birth; suctioning of amniotic fluid at birth; tactile stimulation for resuscitation immediately after birth; use of continuous positive airway pressure for respiratory distress at term birth; respiratory and heart rate monitoring in the delivery room; supraglottic airway use in neonates; prearrest prediction of in-hospital cardiac arrest mortality; basic life support training for likely rescuers of high-risk populations; effect of resuscitation team training; blended learning for life support training; training and recertification for resuscitation instructors; and recovery position for maintenance of breathing and prevention of cardiac arrest. Members from 6 task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and generated consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections, and priority knowledge gaps for future research are listed.

Compression-Only Versus Rescue-Breathing Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation After Pediatric Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: There are conflicting data regarding the benefit of compression-only bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CO-CPR) compared with CPR with rescue breathing (RB-CPR) after pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to test the hypothesis that RB-CPR is associated with improved neurologically favorable survival compared with CO-CPR following pediatric OHCA, and to characterize age-stratified outcomes with CPR type compared with no bystander CPR (NO-CPR). METHODS: Analysis of the CARES registry (Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival) for nontraumatic pediatric OHCAs (patients aged ≤18 years) from 2013-2019 was performed. Age groups included infants (<1 year), children (1 to 11 years), and adolescents (≥12 years). The primary outcome was neurologically favorable survival at hospital discharge. RESULTS: Of 13,060 pediatric OHCAs, 46.5% received bystander CPR. CO-CPR was the most common bystander CPR type. In the overall cohort, neurologically favorable survival was associated with RB-CPR (adjusted OR: 2.16; 95% CI: 1.78-2.62) and CO-CPR (adjusted OR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.34-1.94) compared with NO-CPR. RB-CPR was associated with a higher odds of neurologically favorable survival compared with CO-CPR (adjusted OR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.10-1.68). In age-stratified analysis, RB-CPR was associated with better neurologically favorable survival versus NO-CPR in all age groups. CO-CPR was associated with better neurologically favorable survival compared with NO-CPR in children and adolescents, but not in infants. CONCLUSIONS: CO-CPR was the most common type of bystander CPR in pediatric OHCA. RB-CPR was associated with better outcomes compared with CO-CPR. These results support present guidelines for RB-CPR as the preferred CPR modality for pediatric OHCA.

Race/Ethnicity and Neighborhood Characteristics Are Associated With Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Pediatric Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in the United States: A Study From CARES.

Background Whether racial and neighborhood characteristics are associated with bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation ( BCPR ) in pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest ( OHCA ) is unknown. Methods and Results An analysis was conducted of CARES (Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival) for pediatric nontraumatic OHCA s from 2013 to 2017. An index (range, 0-4) was created for each arrest based on neighborhood characteristics associated with low BCPR (>80% black; >10% unemployment; <80% high school; median income, <$50 000). The primary outcome was BCPR . BCPR occurred in 3399 of 7086 OHCA s (48%). Compared with white children, BCPR was less likely in other races/ethnicities (black: adjusted odds ratio [ aOR ], 0.59; 95% CI , 0.52-0.68; Hispanic: aOR , 0.78; 95% CI , 0.66-0.94; and other: aOR , 0.54; 95% CI , 0.40-0.72). Compared with arrests in neighborhoods with an index score of 0, BCPR occurred less commonly for arrests with an index score of 1 ( aOR , 0.80; 95% CI , 0.70-0.91), 2 ( aOR , 0.75; 95% CI , 0.65-0.86), 3 ( aOR , 0.52; 95% CI , 0.45-0.61), and 4 ( aOR , 0.46; 95% CI , 0.36-0.59). Black children had an incrementally lower likelihood of BCPR with increasing index score while white children had an overall similar likelihood at most scores. Black children with an index of 4 were approximately half as likely to receive BCPR compared with white children with a score of 0. Conclusions Racial and neighborhood characteristics are associated with BCPR in pediatric OHCA . Targeted CPR training for nonwhite, low-education, and low-income neighborhoods may increase BCPR and improve pediatric OHCA outcomes.

Association of Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation With Overall and Neurologically Favorable Survival After Pediatric Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in the United States: A Report From the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival Surveillance Registry.

Importance: There are few data on the prevalence or outcome of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) in children 18 years and younger. Objective: To characterize BCPR in pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs). Design, Setting, and Participants: This analysis of the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival database investigated nontraumatic OHCAs in children 18 years and younger from January 2013 through December 2015. Exposures: Bystander CPR, which included conventional CPR and compression-only CPR. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival and neurologically favorable survival, defined as a Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2, at the time of hospital discharge. Results: Of the 3900 children younger than 18 years with OHCA, 2317 (59.4%) were infants, 2346 (60.2%) were female, and 3595 (92.2%) had nonshockable rhythms. Bystander CPR was performed on 1814 children (46.5%) and was more common for white children (687 of 1221 [56.3%]) compared with African American children (447 of 1134 [39.4%]) and Hispanic children (197 of 455 [43.3%]) (P < .001). Overall survival and neurologically favorable survival were 11.3% (440 of 3900) and 9.1% (354 of 3900), respectively. On multivariable analysis, BCPR was independently associated with improved overall survival (adjusted proportion, 13.2%; 95% CI, 11.81-14.58; adjusted odds ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.25-1.96) and neurologically favorable survival (adjusted proportion, 10.3%; 95% CI, 9.10-11.54; adjusted odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21-1.98) compared with no BCPR (overall survival: adjusted proportion, 9.5%; 95% CI, 8.28-10.69; neurologically favorable survival: adjusted proportion, 7.59%; 95% CI, 6.50-8.68). For those with data on type of BCPR, 697 of 1411 (49.4%) received conventional CPR and 714 of 1411 (50.6%) received compression-only CPR. On multivariable analysis, only conventional CPR (adjusted proportion, 12.89%; 95% CI, 10.69-15.09; adjusted odds ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.51-2.79) was associated with improved neurologically favorable survival compared with no BCPR (adjusted proportion, 9.59%; 95% CI, 6.45-8.61). There was a significant interaction of BCPR with age. Among infants, conventional BCPR was associated with improved overall survival and neurologically favorable survival while compression-only CPR had similar outcomes to no BCPR. Conclusions and Relevance: Bystander CPR is associated with improved outcomes in pediatric OHCAs. Improving the provision of BCPR in minority communities and increasing the use of conventional BCPR may improve outcomes for children with OHCA.

The Use of Automated External Defibrillators in Infants: A Report From the American Red Cross Scientific Advisory Council.

OBJECTIVE: Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) have been used successfully in many populations to improve survival for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. While ventricular fibrillation and pulseless ventricular tachycardia are more prevalent in adults, these arrhythmias do occur in infants. The Scientific Advisory Council of the American Red Cross reviewed the literature on the use of AEDs in infants in order to make recommendations on use in the population. METHODS: The Cochrane library and PubMed were searched for studies that included AEDs in infants, any external defibrillation in infants, and simulation studies of algorithms used by AEDs on pediatric arrhythmias. RESULTS: There were 4 studies on the accuracy of AEDs in recognizing pediatric arrhythmias. Case reports (n = 2) demonstrated successful use of AED in infants, and a retrospective review (n = 1) of pediatric pads for AEDs included infants. Six studies addressed defibrillation dosages used. The algorithms used by AEDs had high sensitivity and specificity for pediatric arrhythmias and very rarely recommended a shock inappropriately. The energy doses delivered by AEDs were high, although in the range that have been used in out-of-hospital arrest. In addition, there are data to suggest that 2 to 4 J/kg may not be effective defibrillation doses for many children. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of prompt defibrillation for ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia, survival is unlikely. Automated external defibrillators should be used in infants with suspected cardiac arrest, if a manual defibrillator with a trained rescuer is not immediately available. Automated external defibrillators that attenuate the energy dose (eg, via application of pediatric pads) are recommended for infants. If an AED with pediatric pads is not available, the AED with adult pads should be used.

Sternal fracture in the age of pan-scan.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Widespread chest CT use in trauma evaluation may increase the diagnosis of minor sternal fracture (SF), making former teaching about SF obsolete. We sought to determine: (1) the frequency with which SF patients are diagnosed by CXR versus chest CT under current imaging protocols, (2) the frequency of surgical procedures related to SF diagnosis, (3) SF patient mortality and hospital length of stay comparing patients with isolated sternal fracture (ISF) and sternal fracture with other thoracic injury (SFOTI), and (4) the frequency and yield of cardiac contusion (CC) workups in SF patients. METHODS: We analyzed charts and data of all SF patients enrolled from January 2009 to May 2013 in the NEXUS Chest and NEXUS Chest CT studies, two multi-centre observational cohorts of blunt trauma patients who received chest imaging for trauma evaluation. RESULTS: Of the 14,553 patients in the NEXUS Chest and Chest CT cohorts, 292 (2.0%) were diagnosed with SF, and 94% of SF were visible on chest CT only. Only one patient (0.4%) had a surgical procedure related to SF diagnosis. Cardiac contusion was diagnosed in 7 (2.4%) of SF patients. SF patient mortality was low (3.8%) and not significantly different than the mortality of patients without SF (3.1%) [mean difference 0.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.0 to 3.5%]. Only 2 SF patient deaths (0.7%) were attributed to a cardiac cause. SFOTI patients had longer hospital stays but similar mortality to patients with ISF (mean difference 0.8%; 95% CI -4.7% to 12.0). CONCLUSIONS: Most SF are seen on CT only and the vast majority are clinically insignificant with no change in treatment and low associated mortality. Workup for CC in SF patients is a low-yield practice. SF diagnostic and management guidelines should be updated to reflect modern CT-driven trauma evaluation protocols.

Diagnostic yields, charges, and radiation dose of chest imaging in blunt trauma evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Chest radiography (CXR) is the most common imaging in adult blunt trauma patient evaluation. Knowledge of the yields, attendant costs, and radiation doses delivered may guide effective chest imaging utilization. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to determine the diagnostic yields of blunt trauma chest imaging (CXR and chest computed tomography [CT]), to estimate charges and radiation exposure per injury identified, and to delineate assessment points in blunt trauma evaluation at which decision instruments for selective chest imaging would have the greatest effect. METHODS: From December 2009 to January 2012, we enrolled patients older than 14 years who received CXR during blunt trauma evaluations at nine U.S. Level I trauma centers in this prospective, observational study. Thoracic injury seen on chest imaging and clinical significance of the injury were defined by a trauma expert panel. Yields of imaging were calculated, as well as mean charges and effective radiation dose (ERD) per injury. RESULTS: Of 9,905 enrolled patients, 55.4% had CXR alone, 42.0% had both CXR and CT, and 2.6% had CT alone. The yields for detecting thoracic injury were CXR 8.4% (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) = 7.8% to 8.9%), chest CT 28.8% (95% CI = 27.5% to 30.2%), and chest CT after normal CXR 15.0% (95% CI = 13.9% to 16.2%). The mean charges and ERD (millisievert [mSv]) per injury diagnosis of CXR, chest CT, and chest CT after normal CXR were $3,845 (0.24 mSv), $10,597 (30.9 mSv), and $20,347 (59.3 mSv), respectively. The mean charges and ERD per clinically major thoracic injury diagnosis on chest CT after normal CXR were $203,467 and 593 mSv. CONCLUSIONS: Despite greater diagnostic yield, chest CT entails substantially higher charges and radiation dose per injury diagnosed, especially when performed after a normal CXR. Selective chest imaging decision instruments should identify patients who require no chest imaging and patients who may benefit from chest CT after a normal CXR.

NEXUS chest: validation of a decision instrument for selective chest imaging in blunt trauma.

IMPORTANCE: Chest radiography (chest x-ray [CXR] and chest computed tomography [CT]) is the most common imaging in blunt trauma evaluation. Unnecessary trauma imaging leads to greater costs, emergency department time, and patient exposure to ionizing radiation. OBJECTIVE To validate our previously derived decision instrument (NEXUS Chest) for identification of blunt trauma patients with very low risk of thoracic injury seen on chest imaging (TICI). We hypothesized that NEXUS Chest would have high sensitivity (>98%) for the prediction of TICI and TICI with major clinical significance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From December 2009 to January 2012, we enrolled blunt trauma patients older than 14 years who received chest radiography in this prospective, observational, diagnostic decision instrument study at 9 US level I trauma centers. Prior to viewing radiographic results, physicians recorded the presence or absence of the NEXUS Chest 7 clinical criteria (age >60 years, rapid deceleration mechanism, chest pain, intoxication, abnormal alertness/mental status, distracting painful injury, and tenderness to chest wall palpation). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Thoracic injury seen on chest imaging was defined as pneumothorax, hemothorax, aortic or great vessel injury, 2 or more rib fractures, ruptured diaphragm, sternal fracture, and pulmonary contusion or laceration seen on radiographs. An expert panel generated an a priori classification of clinically major, minor, and insignificant TICIs according to associated management changes. RESULTS: Of 9905 enrolled patients, 43.1% had a single CXR, 42.0% had CXR and chest CT, 6.7% had CXR and abdominal CT (without chest CT), 5.5% had multiple CXRs without CT, and 2.6% had chest CT alone in the emergency department. The most common trauma mechanisms were motorized vehicle crash (43.9%), fall (27.5%), pedestrian struck by motorized vehicle (10.7%), bicycle crash (6.3%), and struck by blunt object, fists, or kicked (5.8%). Thoracic injury seen on chest imaging was seen in 1478 (14.9%) patients with 363 (24.6%) of these having major clinical significance, 1079 (73.0%) minor clinical significance, and 36 (2.4%) no clinical significance. NEXUS Chest had a sensitivity of 98.8% (95% CI, 98.1%-99.3%), a negative predictive value of 98.5% (95% CI, 97.6%.6-99.1%), and a specificity of 13.3% (95% CI, 12.6%-14.1%) for TICI. The sensitivity and negative predictive value for TICI with clinically major injury were 99.7% (95% CI, 98.2%-100.0%) and 99.9% (95% CI, 99.4%-100.0%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We have validated the NEXUS Chest decision instrument, which may safely reduce the need for chest imaging in blunt trauma patients older than 14 years.

Ethical challenges in Emergency Medical Services: controversies and recommendations.

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers face many ethical issues while providing prehospital care to children and adults. Although provider judgment plays a large role in the resolution of conflicts at the scene, it is important to establish protocols and policies, when possible, to address these high-risk and complex situations. This article describes some of the common situations with ethical underpinnings encountered by EMS personnel and managers including denying or delaying transport of patients with non-emergency conditions, use of lights and sirens for patient transport, determination of medical futility in the field, termination of resuscitation, restriction of EMS provider duty hours to prevent fatigue, substance abuse by EMS providers, disaster triage and difficulty in switching from individual care to mass-casualty care, and the challenges of child maltreatment recognition and reporting. A series of ethical questions are proposed, followed by a review of the literature and, when possible, recommendations for management.

Medical direction of wilderness and other operational emergency medical services programs.

Within a healthcare system, operational emergency medical services (EMS) programs provide prehospital emergency care to patients in austere and resource-limited settings. Some of these programs are additionally considered to be wilderness EMS programs, a specialized type of operational EMS program, as they primarily function in a wilderness setting (eg, wilderness search and rescue, ski patrols, water rescue, beach patrols, and cave rescue). Other operational EMS programs include urban search and rescue, air medical support, and tactical law enforcement response. The medical director will help to ensure that the care provided follows protocols that are in accordance with local and state prehospital standards, while accounting for the unique demands and needs of the environment. The operational EMS medical director should be as qualified as possible for the specific team that is being supervised. The medical director should train and operate with the team frequently to be effective. Adequate provision for compensation, liability, and equipment needs to be addressed for an optimal relationship between the medical director and the team.

Cardiac arrest survival as a function of ambulance deployment strategy in a large urban emergency medical services system.

INTRODUCTION: This study examines the effect of paramedic deployment strategy on witnessed ventricular fibrillation (VF) cardiac arrest outcomes. Our null hypothesis was that there is no difference in survival between an EMS system using targeted response (TR) and one using a uniform or all advanced life support (ALS) response (UR) model. We define targeted response as a system where paramedics are sent to critical incidents while ambulances staffed with basic EMTs are sent to less critical incidents. A secondary outcome measure was paramedic skill proficiency between the systems. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all 1997 VF arrests in a large urban EMS system. The majority of the city is a busy, urban area that uses TR. Outlying areas of the city are suburban and are served by a UR model. All areas have first responders equipped with automated external defibrillators. Outcomes are compared using Utstein criteria. RESULTS: Patient populations were well matched. There were 181 patients in the TR group and 24 in the UR group. Units in the TR area were able to demonstrate shorter response and time to defibrillation intervals than in the UR area. Rates for return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), admission to the ward/intensive care unit (ICU), survival to discharge and survival to 1 year were all better in the cohort of patients cared for in the TR area than those in the UR area. Rates for successful intubation and IV initiation were also better in the TR areas than in the UR areas. CONCLUSION: This study shows improved outcomes for a subset of patients with cardiac arrest when they are cared for in an area that uses TR compared to an area that uses a UR EMS system.