Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 66
Filtrar
1.
Health Technol Assess ; 28(16): 1-93, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38551135

RESUMEN

Background: Guidelines for sepsis recommend treating those at highest risk within 1 hour. The emergency care system can only achieve this if sepsis is recognised and prioritised. Ambulance services can use prehospital early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to prioritise patients for treatment or early assessment in the emergency department. Objectives: To determine the accuracy, impact and cost-effectiveness of using early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis requiring urgent treatment. Design: Retrospective diagnostic cohort study and decision-analytic modelling of operational consequences and cost-effectiveness. Setting: Two ambulance services and four acute hospitals in England. Participants: Adults transported to hospital by emergency ambulance, excluding episodes with injury, mental health problems, cardiac arrest, direct transfer to specialist services, or no vital signs recorded. Interventions: Twenty-one early warning scores used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression, categorised as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation, or other specific presentation. Main outcome measures: Proportion of cases prioritised at the four hospitals; diagnostic accuracy for the sepsis-3 definition of sepsis and receiving urgent treatment (primary reference standard); daily number of cases with and without sepsis prioritised at a large and a small hospital; the minimum treatment effect associated with prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective, compared to no prioritisation, assuming willingness to pay £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Results: Data from 95,022 episodes involving 71,204 patients across four hospitals showed that most early warning scores operating at their pre-specified thresholds would prioritise more than 10% of cases when applied to non-specific attendances or all attendances. Data from 12,870 episodes at one hospital identified 348 (2.7%) with the primary reference standard. The National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2), had the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve when applied only to patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection (0.756, 95% confidence interval 0.729 to 0.783) or sepsis alone (0.655, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.68). None of the strategies provided high sensitivity (> 0.8) with acceptable positive predictive value (> 0.15). NEWS2 provided combinations of sensitivity and specificity that were similar or superior to all other early warning scores. Applying NEWS2 to paramedic diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection with thresholds of > 4, > 6 and > 8 respectively provided sensitivities and positive predictive values (95% confidence interval) of 0.522 (0.469 to 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189 to 0.245), 0.447 (0.395 to 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239 to 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268 to 0.365) and 0.333 (confidence interval 0.284 to 0.386). The mortality relative risk reduction from prioritisation at which each strategy would be cost-effective exceeded 0.975 for all strategies analysed. Limitations: We estimated accuracy using a sample of older patients at one hospital. Reliable evidence was not available to estimate the effectiveness of prioritisation in the decision-analytic modelling. Conclusions: No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2, in patients with a paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Research is needed to develop better definition, diagnosis and treatments for sepsis. Study registration: This study is registered as Research Registry (reference: researchregistry5268). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/136/10) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 16. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.


Sepsis is a life-threatening condition in which an abnormal response to infection causes heart, lung or kidney failure. People with sepsis need urgent treatment. They need to be prioritised at the emergency department rather than waiting in the queue. Paramedics attempt to identify people with possible sepsis using an early warning score (based on simple measurements, such as blood pressure and heart rate) alongside their impression of the patient's diagnosis. They can then alert the hospital to assess the patient quickly. However, an inaccurate early warning score might miss cases of sepsis or unnecessarily prioritise people without sepsis. We aimed to measure how accurately early warning scores identified people with sepsis when used alongside paramedic diagnostic impression. We collected data from 71,204 people that two ambulance services transported to four different hospitals in 2019. We recorded paramedic diagnostic impressions and calculated early warning scores for each patient. At one hospital, we linked ambulance records to hospital records and identified who had sepsis. We then calculated the accuracy of using the scores alongside diagnostic impression to diagnose sepsis. Finally, we used modelling to predict how many patients (with and without sepsis) paramedics would prioritise using different strategies based on early warning scores and diagnostic impression. We found that none of the currently available early warning scores were ideal. When they were applied to all patients, they prioritised too many people. When they were only applied to patients whom the paramedics thought had infection, they missed many cases of sepsis. The NEWS2, score, which ambulance services already use, was as good as or better than all the other scores we studied. We found that using the NEWS2, score in people with a paramedic impression of infection could achieve a reasonable balance between prioritising too many patients and avoiding missing patients with sepsis.


Asunto(s)
Puntuación de Alerta Temprana , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Sepsis , Adulto , Humanos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sepsis/diagnóstico
2.
Resusc Plus ; 17: 100544, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38260121

RESUMEN

Aims: The PARAMEDIC-3 trial evaluates the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an intraosseous first strategy, compared with an intravenous first strategy, for drug administration in adults who have sustained an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods: PARAMEDIC-3 is a pragmatic, allocation concealed, open-label, multi-centre, superiority randomised controlled trial. It will recruit 15,000 patients across English and Welsh ambulance services. Adults who have sustained an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are individually randomised to an intraosseous access first strategy or intravenous access first strategy in a 1:1 ratio through an opaque, sealed envelope system. The randomised allocation determines the route used for the first two attempts at vascular access. Participants are initially enrolled under a deferred consent model.The primary clinical-effectiveness outcome is survival at 30-days. Secondary outcomes include return of spontaneous circulation, neurological functional outcome, and health-related quality of life. Participants are followed-up to six-months following cardiac arrest. The primary health economic outcome is incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Conclusion: The PARAMEDIC-3 trial will provide key information on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of drug route in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Trial registration: ISRCTN14223494, registered 16/08/2021, prospectively registered.

3.
Resuscitation ; 195: 109992, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37937881

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Nacimiento Prematuro , Adulto , Femenino , Niño , Recién Nacido , Humanos , Primeros Auxilios , Consenso , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia , Reanimación Cardiopulmonar/métodos
4.
Circulation ; 148(24): e187-e280, 2023 12 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37942682

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Nacimiento Prematuro , Adulto , Femenino , Niño , Recién Nacido , Humanos , Primeros Auxilios , Consenso , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/diagnóstico , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia
7.
Emerg Med J ; 40(11): 768-776, 2023 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37673643

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Ambulance services need to identify and prioritise patients with sepsis for early hospital assessment. We aimed to determine the accuracy of early warning scores alongside paramedic diagnostic impression to identify sepsis that required urgent treatment. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective diagnostic cohort study involving adult emergency medical cases transported to Sheffield Teaching Hospitals ED by Yorkshire Ambulance Service in 2019. We used routine ambulance service data to calculate 21 early warning scores and categorise paramedic diagnostic impressions as sepsis, infection, non-specific presentation or other presentation. We linked cases to hospital records and identified those meeting the sepsis-3 definition who received urgent hospital treatment for sepsis (reference standard). Analysis determined the accuracy of strategies that combined early warning scores at varying thresholds for positivity with paramedic diagnostic impression. RESULTS: We linked 12 870/24 955 (51.6%) cases and identified 348/12 870 (2.7%) with a positive reference standard. None of the strategies provided sensitivity greater than 0.80 with positive predictive value greater than 0.15. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the National Early Warning Score, version 2 (NEWS2) applied to patients with a diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection was 0.756 (95% CI 0.729, 0.783). No other early warning score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. Paramedic impression of sepsis or infection had sensitivity of 0.572 (0.519, 0.623) and positive predictive value of 0.156 (0.137, 0.176). NEWS2 thresholds of >4, >6 and >8 applied to patients with a diagnostic impression of sepsis or infection, respectively, provided sensitivities and positive predictive values of 0.522 (0.469, 0.574) and 0.216 (0.189, 0.245), 0.447 (0.395, 0.499) and 0.274 (0.239, 0.313), and 0.314 (0.268, 0.365) and 0.333 (0.284, 0.386). CONCLUSION: No strategy is ideal but using NEWS2 alongside paramedic diagnostic impression of infection or sepsis could identify one-third to half of sepsis cases without prioritising unmanageable numbers. No other score provided clearly superior accuracy to NEWS2. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: researchregistry5268, https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry%23home/registrationdetails/5de7bbd97ca5b50015041c33/.


Asunto(s)
Puntuación de Alerta Temprana , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Sepsis , Humanos , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Curva ROC , Sepsis/diagnóstico , Mortalidad Hospitalaria
8.
Curr Med Res Opin ; 39(5): 681-689, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36951899

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: A considerable proportion of patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) treated with advanced therapies do not achieve remission, even after 1 year of treatment, and suboptimal response to advanced therapies is frequently observed in clinical practice. This study aimed to analyze clinical practice data in the United Kingdom (UK) and assess the rates of clinical remission and inadequate response with advanced therapies among patients with UC. METHODS: This retrospective chart review included patients with UC who initiated a new advanced therapy (i.e. adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, tofacitinib, or vedolizumab) between January 2017 and September 2019 from eight clinics across the UK. At least 12 months of data before and after starting an advanced therapy were required. Remission was assessed using components of the Mayo score. Inadequate response was defined by therapeutic adjustment or emergency treatment. RESULTS: Among 238 patients included (female: 46.6%; median age: 42.0 years; median follow-up: 28.8 months), 178 patients (74.8%) were biologic-naïve. At 12 months, 87 patients (53.9%) had achieved remission (median time to remission: 7.6 months), although 29 (33.3%) among them had required therapeutic modifications to achieve remission. At 12 months, 105 patients (44.3%) had at least one indicator of an inadequate response (median time to the first indicator of inadequate response: 18.0 months). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of the patients did not achieve remission, and almost half of the included patients had an inadequate response within 1 year after treatment initiation. More effective therapies are needed to effectively treat UC.


Treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) follows a stepwise approach that considers disease severity and disease activity. It has the goal of achieving and maintaining steroid-free remission and healing of the gut lining. Treatment options for UC include several conventional and advanced therapies. However, suboptimal response to treatment has been reported in previous observational studies. This results in treatment adjustments, such as therapy discontinuation, dose intensification, and addition of conventional therapies, as well as lengthy concurrent use of corticosteroids.This retrospective chart review evaluated clinical practice data from eight clinics across the United Kingdom. This was done to assess rates of clinical remission and indicators of suboptimal response to advanced therapies among patients with UC. The analysis included data from January 2017 to September 2019.Nearly half of the patients did not have clinical remission within 1 year after starting advanced therapies. Optimization of advanced therapies was often seen, even in patients in remission. The most common indicators of suboptimal therapy were therapy discontinuation, dose escalation of advanced therapy, and the addition of conventional therapies. Our findings suggest that the efficacy of advanced therapies to treat UC remains insufficient in clinical practice. Thus, there is a need for more effective treatment alternatives to achieve better outcomes for patients with UC.


Asunto(s)
Colitis Ulcerosa , Humanos , Femenino , Adulto , Colitis Ulcerosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Colitis Ulcerosa/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Incidencia , Infliximab/uso terapéutico , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Resultado del Tratamiento
9.
Pediatrics ; 151(2)2023 02 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36325925

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Recién Nacido , Niño , Humanos , Primeros Auxilios , Consenso , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia , Tratamiento de Urgencia
10.
Circulation ; 146(25): e483-e557, 2022 12 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36325905

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Recién Nacido , Niño , Humanos , Primeros Auxilios , Consenso , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia , Tratamiento de Urgencia
11.
Resuscitation ; 181: 208-288, 2022 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36336195

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Recién Nacido , Niño , Humanos , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia , Primeros Auxilios , Consenso
12.
Resuscitation ; 180: 11-23, 2022 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36087636

RESUMEN

AIM: Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the published evidence related to family presence during adult resuscitation from cardiac arrest. METHODS: This review, registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021242384) and reported according to PRISMA guidelines, included studies of adult cardiac arrest with family presence during resuscitation that reported one or more patient, family or provider outcomes. Three databases (Medline, CINAHL and EMBASE) were searched from inception to 10/05/2022. Two investigators screened the studies, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The synthesis approach was guided by Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) reporting guidelines and a narrative synthesis method. RESULTS: The search retrieved 9,459 citations of which 31 were included: 18 quantitative studies (including two RCTs), 12 qualitative studies, and one mixed methods study. The evidence was of very low or low certainty. There were four major findings. High-certainty evidence regarding the effect of family presence during resuscitation on patient outcomes is lacking. Family members had mixed outcomes in terms of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and experience of witnessing resuscitation. Provider experience was variable and resuscitation setting, provider education, and provider experience were major influences on family presence during resuscitation. Finally, providers reported that a family support person and organisational guidelines were important for facilitating family presence during resuscitation. CONCLUSION: The effect of family presence during resuscitation varies between individuals. There was variability in the effect of family presence during resuscitation on patient outcomes, family and provider outcomes and perceptions.

13.
Curr Opin Crit Care ; 28(3): 284-289, 2022 06 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35653249

RESUMEN

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review was to give an overview of the most significant updates in resuscitation guidelines and provide some insights into the new topics being considered in upcoming reviews. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent updates to resuscitation guidelines have highlighted the importance of the earlier links in the chain-of-survival aimed to improve early recognition, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and defibrillation. Empowering lay rescuers with the support of emergency medical dispatchers or telecommunicators and engaging the community through dispatching volunteers and Automated External Defibrillators, are considered key in improving cardiac arrest outcomes. Novel CPR strategies such as passive insufflation and head-up CPR are being explored, but lack high-certainty evidence. Increased focus on survivorship also highlights the need for more evidence based guidance on how to facilitate the necessary follow-up and rehabilitation after cardiac arrest. Many of the systematic and scoping reviews performed within cardiac arrest resuscitation domains identifies significant knowledge gaps on key elements of our resuscitation practices. There is an urgent need to address these gaps to further improve survival from cardiac arrest in all settings. SUMMARY: A continuous evidence evaluation process for resuscitation after cardiac arrest is triggered by new evidence or request by the resuscitation community, and provides more current and relevant guidance for clinicians.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Paro Cardíaco , Desfibriladores , Humanos
16.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 18586, 2021 09 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34545117

RESUMEN

Severe sepsis is a time critical condition which is known to have a high mortality rate. Evidence suggests that early diagnosis and early administration of antibiotics can reduce morbidity and mortality from sepsis. The prehospital phase of emergency medical care may provide the earliest opportunity for identification of sepsis and delivery of life-saving treatment for patients. We aimed to assess the feasibility of (1) paramedics recognising and screening patients for severe sepsis, collecting blood cultures and administering intravenous antibiotics; and (2) trial methods in order to decide whether a fully-powered trial should be undertaken to determine safety and effectiveness of this intervention. Paramedics were trained in using a sepsis screening tool, aseptic blood culture collection and administration of intravenous antibiotics. If sepsis was suspected, paramedics randomly allocated patients to intervention or usual care using scratchcards. Patients were followed up at 90 days using linked anonymised data to capture length of hospital admission and mortality. We collected self-reported health-related quality of life at 90 days. We pre-specified criteria for deciding whether to progress to a fully-powered trial based on: recruitment of paramedics and patients; delivery of the intervention; retrieval of outcome data; safety; acceptability; and success of anonymised follow-up. Seventy-four of the 104 (71.2%) eligible paramedics agreed to take part and 54 completed their training (51.9%). Of 159 eligible patients, 146 (92%) were recognised as eligible by study paramedics, and 118 were randomised (74% of eligible patients, or 81% of those recognised as eligible). Four patients subsequently dissented to be included in the trial (3%), leaving 114 patients recruited to follow-up. All recruited patients were matched to routine data outcomes in the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank. Ninety of the 114 (79%) recruited patients had sepsis or a likely bacterial infection recorded in ED. There was no evidence of any difference between groups in patient satisfaction, and no adverse reactions reported. There were no statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups in Serious Adverse Events (ICU admissions; deaths). This feasibility study met its pre-determined progression criteria; an application will therefore be prepared and submitted for funding for a fully-powered multi-centre randomised trial.Trial registration: ISRCTN36856873 sought 16th May 2017; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN36856873.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Sepsis/diagnóstico , Sepsis/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Técnicos Medios en Salud , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Diagnóstico Precoz , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo , Persona de Mediana Edad , Satisfacción del Paciente , Pronóstico , Sepsis/mortalidad , Resultado del Tratamiento
17.
Notf Rett Med ; 24(4): 386-405, 2021.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34093079

RESUMEN

The European Resuscitation Council has produced these basic life support guidelines, which are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. The topics covered include cardiac arrest recognition, alerting emergency services, chest compressions, rescue breaths, automated external defibrillation (AED), cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality measurement, new technologies, safety, and foreign body airway obstruction.

18.
Resuscitation ; 161: 98-114, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33773835

RESUMEN

The European Resuscitation Council has produced these basic life support guidelines, which are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. The topics covered include cardiac arrest recognition, alerting emergency services, chest compressions, rescue breaths, automated external defibrillation (AED), CPR quality measurement, new technologies, safety, and foreign body airway obstruction.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Paro Cardíaco , Consenso , Cardioversión Eléctrica , Paro Cardíaco/terapia , Humanos
19.
Resuscitation ; 162: 73-81, 2021 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33582257

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) improves cardiac arrest survival. Cough CPR, percussion pacing and precordial thump have been reported as alternative CPR techniques. We aimed to summarise in a systematic review the effectiveness of these alternative CPR techniques. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library on 24/08/2020. We included randomised controlled trials, observational studies and case series with five or more patients. Two reviewers independently reviewed title and abstracts to identify studies for full-text review, and reviewed bibliographies and 'related articles' (using PubMed) of full-texts for further eligible studies. We extracted data and performed risk-of-bias assessments on studies included in the systematic review. We summarised data in a narrative synthesis, and used GRADE to assess evidence certainty. RESULTS: We included 23 studies (cough CPR n = 4, percussion pacing n = 4, precordial thump n = 16; one study studied two interventions). Only two (both precordial thump) had a comparator group ('standard' CPR). For all techniques evidence certainty was very low. Available evidence suggests that precordial thump does not improve survival to hospital discharge in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The review did not find evidence that cough CPR or percussion pacing improve clinical outcomes following cardiac arrest. CONCLUSION: Cough CPR, percussion pacing and precordial thump should not be routinely used in established cardiac arrest. In specific inpatient, monitored settings cough CPR (in conscious patients) or percussion pacing may be attempted at the onset of a potential lethal arrhythmia. These must not delay standard CPR efforts in those who lose cardiac output. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019152925.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Tos/etiología , Humanos , Alta del Paciente , Percusión
20.
Resuscitation ; 158: 23-29, 2021 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33197522

RESUMEN

AIM: To assess whether any clinical decision rule for patients sustaining an in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) can predict mortality or survival with poor neurological outcome. METHODS: We searched online databases from inception through July 2020 for randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies. Two reviewers assessed studies for inclusion. We followed PRISMA guidelines for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, used the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies framework to evaluate risk of bias, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to evaluate certainty of evidence. We assessed predictive values for no return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), death before hospital discharge, and survival with unfavorable neurological outcome. RESULTS: Out of 6436 studies, 92 studies were selected for full-text screening. We included 3 observational studies describing the derivation and external validation for the UN10 rule (Unwitnessed arrest; Nonshockable rhythm; 10 min of resuscitation without ROSC) amongst patients suffering from IHCA. No studies were identified for clinical implementation. Positive Predicted Values (PPV) for death before hospital discharge for the three studies were 100% (95% CI: 97.1%-100%), 98.9% (95% CI: 96.5%-99.7%), and 93.7% (95% CI: 93.3%-94.0%). One study reported a PPV for prediction of survival with unfavorable neurological outcome, 95.2% (95% CI: 94.9%-95.6%). The level of evidence was rated as very low certainty. CONCLUSIONS: We identified very low certainty evidence for one clinical decision rule (the UN-10 rule) that was unable to reliably predict mortality or survival with unfavorable neurological outcome for adults suffering from IHCA. We identified no evidence for children. PROSPERO CRD42020164091.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Adulto , Niño , Reglas de Decisión Clínica , Pruebas Diagnósticas de Rutina , Hospitales , Humanos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...