Using the American Heart Association's National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for performance improvement.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest that the overall quality of inhospital resuscitation is suboptimal and contributes to poor patient outcomes. In 2000 the American Heart Association created the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (NRCPR) as an evidence-based hospital safety program. Participating hospitals voluntarily join the registry and pay an annual fee that includes data support and report generation. The primary purpose of NRCPR is to support local facility efforts in practice management and performance improvement (PI). CHAIN OF SURVIVAL: The Chain of Survival illustrates the series of critical, interdependent actions necessary to maximize patient outcome from sudden cardiac arrest--early access to the emergency response system, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), early defibrillation, and early advanced cardiovascular care. NRCPR specifically addresses each link and helps hospitals develop, implement, and monitor their resuscitation processes in a manner that builds on available evidence. PARTICIPATION IN NRCPR: On enrollment into NRCPR, each hospital identifies an onsite coordinator who is instructed on a standardized method for abstracting data from patient charts and how to enter data into the NRCPR database. The NRCPR database is managed centrally and provides participating organizations with ongoing, quarterly, and annual reports related to their resuscitation events. DISCUSSION: NRCPR is used as both a local PI tool as well as a source of data that scientists are analyzing to further the understanding of inhospital resuscitation processes and outcomes. Over time, researchers have recognized the need to refine the Chain of Survival to reflect the unique aspects of inhospital resuscitation. A rapid response system provides a new link at the beginning, and postresuscitation care provides a new link at the end of the Chain of Survival.

First documented rhythm and clinical outcome from in-hospital cardiac arrest among children and adults.

CONTEXT: Cardiac arrests in adults are often due to ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT), which are associated with better outcomes than asystole or pulseless electrical activity (PEA). Cardiac arrests in children are typically asystole or PEA. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that children have relatively fewer in-hospital cardiac arrests associated with VF or pulseless VT compared with adults and, therefore, worse survival outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A prospective observational study from a multicenter registry (National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) of cardiac arrests in 253 US and Canadian hospitals between January 1, 2000, and March 30, 2004. A total of 36,902 adults (> or =18 years) and 880 children (<18 years) with pulseless cardiac arrests requiring chest compressions, defibrillation, or both were assessed. Cardiac arrests occurring in the delivery department, neonatal intensive care unit, and in the out-of-hospital setting were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: The rate of survival to hospital discharge following pulseless cardiac arrest was higher in children than adults (27% [236/880] vs 18% [6485/36,902]; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.95-2.68). Of these survivors, 65% (154/236) of children and 73% (4737/6485) of adults had good neurological outcome. The prevalence of VF or pulseless VT as the first documented pulseless rhythm was 14% (120/880) in children and 23% (8361/36,902) in adults (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44-0.65; P<.001). The prevalence of asystole was 40% (350) in children and 35% (13 024) in adults (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.40; P = .006), whereas the prevalence of PEA was 24% (213) in children and 32% (11,963) in adults (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.78; P<.001). After adjustment for differences in preexisting conditions, interventions in place at time of arrest, witnessed and/or monitored status, time to defibrillation of VF or pulseless VT, intensive care unit location of arrest, and duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, only first documented pulseless arrest rhythm remained significantly associated with differential survival to discharge (24% [135/563] in children vs 11% [2719/24,987] in adults with asystole and PEA; adjusted OR, 2.73; 95% CI, 2.23-3.32). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter registry of in-hospital cardiac arrest, the first documented pulseless arrest rhythm was typically asystole or PEA in both children and adults. Because of better survival after asystole and PEA, children had better outcomes than adults despite fewer cardiac arrests due to VF or pulseless VT.

When minutes count--the fallacy of accurate time documentation during in-hospital resuscitation.

UNLABELLED: The purpose of this study is to examine the commonly held assumption that time is measured and documented accurately during resuscitation from cardiac arrest in the hospital. METHODS: A two-pronged approach was used to evaluate the accuracy of time documentation and measurement. First, two existing databases-the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (NRCPR) and a 240-bed hospital's repository of cardiac arrest records-were evaluated for completeness and accuracy of documentation on resuscitation records of times required for calculating the Utstein gold-standard process intervals-recognition of pulselessness to starting cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), delivery of first defibrillation shock, successful intubation, and epinephrine (adrenaline) administration. Second, nurses from a 900-bed hospital were interviewed to determine timepieces used during resuscitations, and timepieces were assessed for coherence and precision. RESULTS: : From the NRCPR database that included 10,689 pulseless cardiac arrests submitted by 176 hospitals, time data for calculating the Utstein intervals were missing for 10.9% of the interventions; negative intervals were calculated for 4%. From 232 consecutive resuscitation records from the 240-bed hospital, 85 records were identified from non-monitored units with staff who provided only CPR. Defibrillation, intubation and epinephrine administration were delayed until after arrival of advanced life support (ALS) responders; unlikely intervals of 0 min from event recognition to these ALS interventions were calculated for 11.5%. Sixty-seven nurses from the 900-bed hospital were interviewed; when documenting information during resuscitations, 21 (31.3%) reported using only patient room clocks, 30 (44.8%) only their watches, and 16 (23.9%) several timepieces. In all in-patient units in the same hospital, 241 timepieces (nurses' and physicians' watches, clocks in patient rooms, defibrillator clocks, central station monitors, and nursing station clocks) were compared to atomic time. The mean absolute time difference from atomic clock was 2.83 min (S.D. +/-5.9 min), median 1.88 min, and range 52.1 min slow to 72.85 min fast. There was no difference among timepieces (P = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Missing time data, negative calculated Utstein gold-standard process intervals, unlikely intervals of 0 min from arrest recognition to ALS interventions in units with CPR providers only, use of multiple timepieces for recording time data during the same event, and wide variation in coherence and precision of timepieces bring into question the ability to use time intervals to evaluate resuscitation practice in the hospital. Practitioners, researchers and manufacturers of resuscitation equipment must come together to create a method to collect and document accurately essential resuscitation time elements. Our ability to enhance the resuscitation process and improve patient outcomes requires that this be done.

Cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation outcome reports: update and simplification of the Utstein templates for resuscitation registries. A statement for healthcare professionals from a task force of the international liaison committee on resuscitation (American Heart Association, European Resuscitation Council, Australian Resuscitation Council, New Zealand Resuscitation Council, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, InterAmerican Heart Foundation, Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa).

Outcome following cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation is dependent on critical interventions, particularly early defibrillation, effective chest compressions, and advanced life support. Utstein-style definitions and reporting templates have been used extensively in published studies of cardiac arrest, which has led to greater understanding of the elements of resuscitation practice and progress toward international consensus on science and resuscitation guidelines. Despite the development of Utstein templates to standardize research reports of cardiac arrest, international registries have yet to be developed. In April 2002 a task force of ILCOR met in Melbourne, Australia, to review worldwide experience with the Utstein definitions and reporting templates. The task force revised the core reporting template and definitions by consensus. Care was taken to build on previous definitions, changing data elements and operational definitions only on the basis of published data and experience derived from those registries that have used Utstein-style reporting. Attention was focused on decreasing the complexity of the existing templates and addressing logistical difficulties in collecting specific core and supplementary (i.e., essential and desirable) data elements recommended by previous Utstein consensus conference. Inconsistencies in terminology between in-hospital and out-of-hospital Utstein templates were also addressed. The task force produced a reporting tool for essential data that can be used for both quality improvement (registries) and research reports and that should be applicable to both adults and children. The revised and simplified template includes practical and succinct operational definitions. It is anticipated that the revised template will enable better and more accurate completion of all reports of cardiac arrest and resuscitation attempts. Problems with data definition, collection, linkage, confidentiality, management, and registry implementation are acknowledged and potential solutions offered. Uniform collection and tracking of registry data should enable better continuous quality improvement within every hospital, EMS system, and community.

Cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation outcome reports: update and simplification of the Utstein templates for resuscitation registries: a statement for healthcare professionals from a task force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (American Heart Association, European Resuscitation Council, Australian Resuscitation Council, New Zealand Resuscitation Council, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, InterAmerican Heart Foundation, Resuscitation Councils of Southern Africa).

Outcome after cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation is dependent on critical interventions, particularly early defibrillation, effective chest compressions, and advanced life support. Utstein-style definitions and reporting templates have been used extensively in published studies of cardiac arrest, which has led to greater understanding of the elements of resuscitation practice and progress toward international consensus on science and resuscitation guidelines. Despite the development of Utstein templates to standardize research reports of cardiac arrest, international registries have yet to be developed. In April 2002, a task force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) met in Melbourne, Australia, to review worldwide experience with the Utstein definitions and reporting templates. The task force revised the core reporting template and definitions by consensus. Care was taken to build on previous definitions, changing data elements and operational definitions only on the basis of published data and experience derived from those registries that have used Utstein-style reporting. Attention was focused on decreasing the complexity of the existing templates and addressing logistical difficulties in collecting specific core and supplementary (ie, essential and desirable) data elements recommended by previous Utstein consensus conferences. Inconsistencies in terminology between in-hospital and out-of-hospital Utstein templates were also addressed. The task force produced a reporting tool for essential data that can be used for both quality improvement (registries) and research reports and that should be applicable to both adults and children. The revised and simplified template includes practical and succinct operational definitions. It is anticipated that the revised template will enable better and more accurate completion of all reports of cardiac arrest and resuscitation attempts. Problems with data definition, collection, linkage, confidentiality, management, and registry implementation are acknowledged and potential solutions offered. Uniform collection and tracking of registry data should enable better continuous quality improvement within every hospital, emergency medical services system, and community.