Cost of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors compared with matched control groups.

INTRODUCTION: Societal costs of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors may be extensive due to high health care utilization and sick leave. Knowledge of the costs of OHCA survivors may guide decision-makers to prioritize health resources. AIM: The aims of the study were to evaluate the costs of OHCA survivors from a societal perspective, and to compare these costs to the costs of individuals with non-cardiac arrest myocardial infarction (MI) and individuals with no cardiac disease (non-CD). METHODS: From the Danish OHCA Registers, survivors, with a cardiac arrest between 2005-2018 were identified. Each case was assigned one MI control and one non-CD control, matched on gender and age. Based on register data, costs of healthcare utilization, sick leave, vocational rehabilitation, disability pension and other social benefits one year before event and five years after, were estimated. RESULTS: In total 5,646 OHCA survivors were identified with associated control groups. The mean costs for OHCA survivors during the 6-year period were €119,106 (95%CI: 116,297-121,916), with €83,472 (95%CI: 81,392-85,552) being healthcare costs. Mean costs of OHCA survivors were €49,132 higher than the MI-control group and €100,583 higher than the non-CD control group. CONCLUSIONS: Total costs of OHCA survivors were considerably higher than costs of MI- and non-CD controls. Hospital costs were highest during the first year after event, and work inability during the second to fifth year with sick leave and later disability pension as main burdens.

Long-term survival, functional capacity and quality of life after refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest treated with mechanical circulatory support.

Introduction: Studies on long-term outcomes after refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) treated with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) are limited. This study aimed to evaluate long-term neurologically intact survival, functional capacity and quality of life after refractory OHCA treated with MCS. Methods: This was a follow-up study of survivors after refractory OHCA treated with MCS. Follow-up examinations comprised clinical assessment with transthoracic echocardiography and cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPX). Neurological and cognitive screening was evaluated with the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA test). A good neurological outcome was defined as CPC 1 or CPC 2. Health-related quality of life was measured by questionnaires (Short Form-36 (SF-36)). Results: A total of 101 patients with refractory OHCA were treated with MCS at Aarhus University Hospital between 2015 and 2019. The total low-flow time was median 105 min [IQR, 94-123] minutes. The hospital discharge rate was 27%. At a mean follow-up time of 4.8 years ± 1.6 (range 2.8-6.1 years), 21 patients remained alive of whom 15 consented to participate in the present study. Good neurological outcome with CPC 1-2 was found in 93% (14/15) patients. No severe cognitive function was discovered; mean MoCA score of 26.4 ± 3.1. Functional capacity examined by CPX showed acceptable VO2 max values (23.9 ± 6.3 mL/kg/min). Mean SF-36 scores revealed an overall high level of quality of life in long-term survivors. Conclusions: Long-term survival with a good neurological outcome with functional recovery was high in patients with refractory OHCA treated with MCS. These patients may expect a reasonable quality of life after discharge despite prolonged resuscitation.

Virtual Reality Training for Upper Extremity in Subacute Stroke (VIRTUES): A multicenter RCT.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of upper extremity virtual reality rehabilitation training (VR) to time-matched conventional training (CT) in the subacute phase after stroke. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, single-blind phase III multicenter trial, 120 participants with upper extremity motor impairment within 12 weeks after stroke were consecutively included at 5 rehabilitation institutions. Participants were randomized to either VR or CT as an adjunct to standard rehabilitation and stratified according to mild to moderate or severe hand paresis, defined as ≥20 degrees wrist and 10 degrees finger extension or less, respectively. The training comprised a minimum of sixteen 60-minute sessions over 4 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT); secondary outcome measures were the Box and Blocks Test and Functional Independence Measure. Patients were assessed at baseline, after intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Mean time from stroke onset for the VR group was 35 (SD 21) days and for the CT group was 34 (SD 19) days. There were no between-group differences for any of the outcome measures. Improvement of upper extremity motor function assessed with ARAT was similar at the postintervention (p = 0.714) and follow-up (p = 0.777) assessments. Patients in VR improved 12 (SD 11) points from baseline to the postintervention assessment and 17 (SD 13) points from baseline to follow-up, while patients in CT improved 13 (SD 10) and 17 (SD 13) points, respectively. Improvement was also similar for our subgroup analysis with mild to moderate and severe upper extremity paresis. CONCLUSIONS: Additional upper extremity VR training was not superior but equally as effective as additional CT in the subacute phase after stroke. VR may constitute a motivating training alternative as a supplement to standard rehabilitation. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02079103. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with upper extremity motor impairment after stroke, compared to conventional training, VR training did not lead to significant differences in upper extremity function improvement.