Impact of a COVID-19 code blue protocol on resuscitation care and CPR quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the impact of a COVID-19 Code Blue policy on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) processes of care, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality metrics, and survival to hospital discharge. METHODS: We completed a health record review of consecutive IHCA for which resuscitation was attempted. We report Utstein outcomes and CPR quality metrics 33 months before (July,2017-March,2020) and after (April,2020-December,2022) the implementation of a COVID-19 Code Blue policy requiring all team members to don personal protective equipment including gown, gloves, mask, and eye protection for all IHCA. RESULTS: There were 800 IHCA with the following characteristics (Before n = 396; After n = 404): mean age 66, 62.9% male, 81.3% witnessed, 31.3% in the emergency department, 25.6% cardiac cause, and initial shockable rhythm in 16.7%. Among all 404 patients screened for COVID-19, 25 of 288 available test results before IHCA occurred were positive. Comparing the before and after periods: there were relevant time delays (min:sec) in start of chest compressions (0:17vs.0:37;p = 0.005), team arrival (0:43vs.1:21;p = 0.002), 1st rhythm analysis (1:15vs.3:16;p < 0.0001), 1st epinephrine (3:44vs.4:34;p = 0.02), and airway insertion (8:38vs. 10:18;p = 0.02). Resuscitation duration was similar (18:28vs.19:35;p = 0.34). Exception of peri-shock pause which appeared longer (0:06vs.0:14;p = 0.07), chest compression fraction, rate and depth were identical and good. Factors independently associated with survival were age (adjOR 0.98;p < 0.001), male sex (adjOR 1.51;p = 0.048), witnessed (adjOR 2.35;p = 0.02), shockable rhythm (adjOR 3.31;p < 0.0001), hospital location (p = 0.0002), and COVID-19 period (adjOR 0.68;p = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 Code Blue policy was associated with delayed processes of care but similarly good CPR quality. The COVID-19 period appeared associated with decreased survival.

Multi-phase implementation of automated external defibrillator use by nurses during in-hospital cardiac arrest and its impact on survival.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the impact of a medical directive allowing nurses to use defibrillators in automated external defibrillator-mode (AED) on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) outcomes. METHODS: We completed a health record review of consecutive IHCA for which resuscitation was attempted using a pragmatic multi-phase before-after cohort design. We report Utstein outcomes before (Jan.2012-Aug.2013;Control) the implementation of the AED medical directive following usual practice (Sept.2013-Aug.2016;Phase 1), and following the addition of a theory-based educational video (Sept.2016-Dec.2017;Phase 2). RESULTS: There were 753 IHCA with the following characteristics (Before n = 195; Phase 1n = 372; Phase 2n = 186): mean age 66, 60.0% male, 79.3% witnessed, 29.1% noncardiac-monitored medical ward, 23.9% cardiac cause, and initial ventricular fibrillation/tachycardia (VF/VT) 27.2%. Comparing the Before, Phase 1 and 2: an AED was used 0 time (0.0%), 21 times (5.7%), 15 times (8.1%); mean times to 1st analysis were 7 min, 3 min and 1 min (p < 0.0001); mean times to 1st shock were 12 min, 10 min and 8 min (p = 0.32); return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was 63.6%, 59.4% and 58.1% (p = 0.77); survival was 24.6%, 21.0% and 25.8% (p = 0.37). Among IHCA in VF/VT (n = 165), time to 1st analysis and 1st shock decreased by 5 min (p = 0.01) and 6 min (p = 0.23), and ROSC and survival increased by 3.0% (p = 0.80) and 15.6% (p = 0.31). There was no survival benefit overall (1.2%; p = 0.37) or within noncardiac-monitored areas (-7.2%; p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a medical directive allowing for AED use by nurses successfully improved key outcomes for IHCA victims, particularly following the theory-based education video and among the VF/VT group.

Bag-Valve-Mask Ventilation and Survival From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have measured ventilation during early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) before advanced airway placement. Resuscitation guidelines recommend pauses after every 30 chest compressions to deliver ventilations. The effectiveness of bag-valve-mask ventilation delivered during the pause in chest compressions is unknown. We sought to determine: (1) the incidence of lung inflation with bag-valve-mask ventilation during 30:2 CPR; and (2) the association of ventilation with outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS: We studied patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from 6 sites of the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium CCC study (Trial of Continuous Compressions versus Standard CPR in Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest). We analyzed patients assigned to the 30:2 CPR arm with ≥2 minutes of thoracic bioimpedance signal recorded with a cardiac defibrillator/monitor. Detectable ventilation waveforms were defined as having a bioimpedance amplitude ≥0.5 Ω (corresponding to ≥250 mL VT) and a duration ≥1 s. We defined a chest compression pause as a 3- to 15-s break in chest compressions. We compared the incidence of ventilation and outcomes in 2 groups: patients with ventilation waveforms in <50% of pauses (group 1) versus those with waveforms in ≥50% of pauses (group 2). RESULTS: Among 1976 patients, the mean age was 65 years; 66% were male. From the start of chest compressions until advanced airway placement, mean±SD duration of 30:2 CPR was 9.8±4.9 minutes. During this period, we identified 26 861 pauses in chest compressions; 60% of patients had ventilation waveforms in <50% of pauses (group 1, n=1177), and 40% had waveforms in ≥50% of pauses (group 2, n=799). Group 1 had a median of 12 pauses and 2 ventilations per patient versus group 2, which had 12 pauses and 12 ventilations per patient. Group 2 had higher rates of prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (40.7% versus 25.2%; P<0.0001), survival to hospital discharge (13.5% versus 4.1%; P<0.0001), and survival with favorable neurological outcome (10.6% versus 2.4%; P<0.0001). These associations persisted after adjustment for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, lung inflation occurred infrequently with bag-valve-mask ventilation during 30:2 CPR. Lung inflation in ≥50% of pauses was associated with improved return of spontaneous circulation, survival, and survival with favorable neurological outcome.

The hospital care and outcomes of long-term care patients treated by paramedics during an emergency call: exploring the potential impact of 'treat-and-refer' pathways and community paramedicine.

INTRODUCTION: Adults living in long-term care (LTC) are at increased risk of harm when transferred to the emergency department (ED), and programs targeting treatment on-site are increasing. We examined characteristics, clinical course, and disposition of LTC patients transported to the ED to examine the potential impact of alternative models of paramedic care for LTC patients. METHODS: We conducted a health records review of paramedic and ED records between April 1, 2016, and March 31, 2017. We included emergency calls originating from LTC centers and patients transported to either ED campus of The Ottawa Hospital. We excluded scheduled or deferrable transfers, and patients with Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale of 1. We categorized patients into groups based on care they received in the ED. We calculated standardized differences to examine differences between groups. RESULTS: We identified four groups: (1) patients requiring no treatment or diagnostics in the ED (7.9%); (2) patients receiving ED treatment within current paramedic directives and no diagnostics (3.2%); (3) patients requiring diagnostics or ED care outside current paramedic directives (54.9%); and (4) patients requiring admission (34.1%). CONCLUSION: This study found 7.9% of LTC patients transported to the ED did not receive diagnostics, medications, or treatment, and overall 11.1% of patients could have been treated by paramedics within current medical directives using 'treat-and-refer' pathways. This group could potentially expand utilizing community paramedics with expanded scopes of practice.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: Les adultes qui vivent dans des établissements de soins de longue durée (SLD) courent un risque accru de subir des préjudices lorsqu'ils sont transférés à l'urgence (SU), et les programmes ciblant le traitement sur place augmentent. Nous avons examiné les caractéristiques, l'évolution clinique et la disposition des patients en SLD transportés à l'urgence afin d'examiner l'impact potentiel des modèles alternatifs de soins paramédicaux pour les patients en SLD. MéTHODES: Nous avons effectué un examen des dossiers médicaux des paramédics et des SU entre le 1er avril 2016 et le 31 mars 2017. Nous avons inclus les appels d'urgence provenant des centres de soins de longue durée et les patients transportés à l'un ou l'autre des campus de l'Hôpital d'Ottawa. Nous avons exclu les transferts planifiés ou reportables et les patients ayant un score d'acuité au triage canadien de 1. Nous avons catégorisé les patients en groupes en fonction des soins reçus à l'urgence. Nous avons calculé des différences normalisées pour examiner les différences entre les groupes. RéSULTATS: Nous avons identifié 4 groupes : 1) les patients qui n'ont pas besoin de traitement ou de diagnostic à l'urgence (7,9 %); 2) les patients qui reçoivent un traitement à l'urgence selon les directives actuelles des ambulanciers et aucun diagnostic (3,2 %); 3) les patients qui ont besoin de diagnostics ou de soins à l'urgence en dehors des directives actuelles des ambulanciers (54,9 %); et 4) patients nécessitant une admission (34,1 %). CONCLUSION: Cette étude a révélé que 7,9 % des patients en SLD transportés à l'urgence n'ont pas reçu de diagnostic, de médicaments ou de traitement et, dans l'ensemble, 11,1 % des patients auraient pu être traités par des ambulanciers paramédicaux selon les directives médicales actuelles en utilisant les voies de traitement et d'aiguillage. Ce groupe pourrait potentiellement prendre de l'expansion en utilisant des ambulanciers paramédicaux communautaires avec des champs de pratique élargis.

Pharmacologic Interventions to Prevent Delirium in Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

To compare the relative efficacy of pharmacologic interventions in the prevention of delirium in ICU trauma patients. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Embase, and Cochrane Registry of Clinical Trials from database inception until June 7, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacologic interventions in critically ill trauma patients. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for network analysis were followed. Random-effects models were fit using a Bayesian approach to network meta-analysis. Between-group comparisons were estimated using hazard ratios (HRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, each with 95% credible intervals. Treatment rankings were estimated for each outcome in the form of surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total 3,541 citations were screened; six randomized clinical trials (n = 382 patients) were included. Compared with combined propofol-dexmedetomidine, there may be no difference in delirium prevalence with dexmedetomidine (HR 1.44, 95% CI 0.39-6.94), propofol (HR 2.38, 95% CI 0.68-11.36), nor haloperidol (HR 3.38, 95% CI 0.65-21.79); compared with dexmedetomidine alone, there may be no effect with propofol (HR 1.66, 95% CI 0.79-3.69) nor haloperidol (HR 2.30, 95% CI 0.88-6.61). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this network meta-analysis suggest that there is no difference found between pharmacologic interventions on delirium occurrence, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, or mortality, in trauma ICU patients.

The impact of time to hemostatic intervention and delayed care for patients with traumatic hemorrhage: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled bleeding is a common cause of preventable mortality in trauma. While it is intuitive that delays to hemostasis may lead to worse outcomes, the impacts of these delays remain incompletely explored. This systematic review aimed to characterize the extant definitions of delayed hemostatic intervention and to quantify the impacts of delays on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science from inception to August 2022. Studies defining "delayed intervention" and those comparing times to intervention among adults presenting to hospital with blunt or penetrating injuries who required major hemostatic intervention were eligible. The coprimary outcomes were mortality and the definition of delay to hemostasis used. Secondary outcomes included units of packed red blood cells received, length of stay in hospital, and length of stay in intensive care. RESULTS: We identified 2,050 studies, with 24 studies including 10,168 patients meeting the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were retrospective observational cohort studies, and most were at high risk of bias. A variety of injury patterns and hemostatic interventions were considered, with 69.6% of studies reporting a statistically significant impact of increased time to intervention on mortality. Definitions of delayed intervention ranged from 10 minutes to 4 hours. Conflicting data were reported for impact of time on receipt of blood products, while one study found a significant impact on intensive care length of stay. No studies assessed length of stay in hospital. CONCLUSION: The extant literature is heterogeneous with respect to injuries included, methods of hemostasis employed, and durations of delay examined. While the majority of the included studies demonstrated a statistically significant relationship between time to intervention and mortality, an evidence-informed definition of delayed intervention for bleeding trauma patients at large has not been solidified. In addition, standardized research is needed to establish targets, which could reduce morbidity and mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review; Level IV.

Alternative care models for paramedic patients from long-term care centers: a national survey of Canadian paramedic services.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term care (LTC) patients do poorly when transported to emergency departments (ED). Community paramedic programs deliver enhanced care in their place of residence, yet few programs are reported in the literature. We conducted a national cross-sectional survey of land ambulance services to understand if such programs exist in Canada, and what the perceived needs and priorities are for future programs. METHODS: We emailed a 46 question survey to paramedic services across Canada. We asked about service characteristics, current ED diversion programs, existing diversion programs specific to LTC patients, priorities for future programs, the potential impact of such programs, and what the feasibility and barriers are to implementing programs that treat LTC patients on-site, avoiding an ED visit. RESULTS: We received responses from 50 sites across Canada, providing services to 73.5% of the total population. Almost a third (30.0%) had existing treat-and-refer programs, and 65.5% of services transported to destinations other than an ED. Almost all respondents (98.0%) felt the need for programs to treat LTC patients on-site, and 36.0% had existing programs. The top priorities for future programs were support for patients being discharged (30.6%), extended care paramedics (24.5%), and respiratory illness treat-in-place programs (20.4%). The highest potential impact was expected from support for patients being discharged (62.0%) and respiratory illness treat-in-place programs (54.0%). Required changes in legislation (36.0%) and required changes to the system of medical oversight (34.0%) were identified as top barriers to implementing such programs. CONCLUSION: There is a significant mismatch between the perceived need for community paramedic programs treating LTC patients on-site, and the number of programs in place. Programs could benefit from standardized outcome measurement and the publication of peer-reviewed evidence to guide future programs. Changes in legislation and medical oversight are needed to address the identified barriers to program implementation.

RéSUMé: INTRODUCTION: Les patients en soins de longue durée (SLD) se portent mal lorsqu'ils sont transportés aux services d'urgence (SU). Les programmes paramédicaux communautaires permettent de fournir des soins améliorés sur le lieu de résidence des patients, mais peu de programmes sont signalés dans la littérature. Nous avons mené une enquête transversale nationale auprès des services d'ambulance terrestre afin de déterminer si de tels programmes existent au Canada, et quels sont les besoins et les priorités perçus pour les programmes futurs. METHODS: Nous avons envoyé par courriel un sondage de 46 questions aux services paramédicaux partout au Canada. Nous avons posé des questions sur les caractéristiques des services, les programmes actuels de déjudiciarisation des urgences, les programmes de déjudiciarisation existants spécifiques aux patients en SLD, les priorités pour les programmes futurs, l'impact potentiel de ces programmes, et la faisabilité et les obstacles à la mise en œuvre de programmes qui traitent les patients atteints de SLD sur place, évitant ainsi une visite aux urgences. RESULTS: Nous avons reçu des réponses de 50 sites à travers le Canada, fournissant des services à 73,5 % de la population totale. Près d'un tiers (30,0 %) disposent de programmes de traitement et d'orientation, et 65,5 % des services sont transportés vers des destinations autres que les urgences. Presque tous les répondants (98,0 %) ont ressenti le besoin de programmes pour traiter les patients en SLD sur place, et 36,0 % disposaient de programmes existants. Les principales priorités des futurs programmes étaient le soutien aux patients sortant (30,6 %), les ambulanciers paramédicaux en soins prolongés (24,5 %) et les programmes de traitement sur place des maladies respiratoires (20,4 %). L'impact potentiel le plus élevé était attendu du soutien aux patients en cours de sortie (62,0%) de l'hôpital et des programmes de traitement sur place des maladies respiratoires (54,0%). Les changements nécessaires dans la législation (36,0%) et dans le système de surveillance médicale (34,0%) ont été identifiés comme les principaux obstacles à la mise en œuvre de tels programmes. CONCLUSION: Il existe un décalage important entre le besoin perçu de programmes paramédicaux communautaires pour traiter les patients en SLD sur place et le nombre de programmes en place. Les programmes pourraient bénéficier d'une mesure standardisée des résultats et de la publication de preuves évaluées par des pairs pour guider les futurs programmes. Des changements dans la législation et la surveillance médicale sont nécessaires pour éliminer les obstacles identifiés à la mise en œuvre du programme.

Cervical spine injuries in adults ≥ 65 years after low-level falls - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adults ≥ 65 are at risk of cervical spine (C-spine) injury, even after low-level falls. The objectives of this systematic review were to determine the prevalence of C-spine injury in this population and explore the association of unreliable clinical exam with C-spine injury. METHODS: We conducted this systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews to include studies reporting on C-spine injury in adults ≥ 65 years after low-level falls. Two reviewers independently screened articles, abstracted data, and assessed bias. Discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. A meta-analysis was performed to estimate overall prevalence and the pooled odds ratio for the association between C-spine injury and an unreliable clinical exam. RESULTS: The search identified 2044citations, 138 full texts were screened, and 21 studies were included in the systematic review. C-spine injury prevalence in adults ≥ 65 years after low-level falls was 3.8% (95% CI: 2.8-5.3). The odds of c-spine injury in those with altered level of consciousness (aLOC) v/s not aLOC was 1.21 (0.90-1.63) and in those with GCS < 15 v/s GCS 15 was 1.62 (0.37-6.98). Studies were at a low-risk of bias, although some had low recruitment and significant loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Adults ≥ 65 years are at risk of cervical spine injury after low-level falls. More research is needed to determine whether there is an association between cervical spine injury and GCS < 15 or altered level of consciousness.

Higher Oxygenation Is Associated with Improved Survival in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury but Not Traumatic Shock.

Pre-hospital resuscitation of critically injured patients traditionally includes supplemental oxygen therapy to address potential hypoxemia. The objective of this study was to explore the association between pre-hospital hypoxemia, hyperoxemia, and mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and traumatic shock. We hypothesized that both hypoxemia and hyperoxemia would be associated with increased mortality. We used the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Prospective Observational Prehospital and Hospital Registry for Trauma (ROC PROPHET) database of critically injured patients to identify a severe TBI cohort (pre-hospital Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] 3-8) and a traumatic shock cohort (systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg and pre-hospital GCS >8). Arterial blood gas (ABG) obtained within 30 min of hospital arrival was required for inclusion. Patients with hypoxemia (PaO2 <80 mm Hg) and hyperoxemia (PaO2 >400 mm Hg) were compared to those with normoxemia (PaO2 80-400 mm Hg) with regard to the primary outcome measure of in-hospital mortality in both the TBI and traumatic shock cohorts. Multiple logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) after adjustment for multiple covariables. In addition, regression spline curves were generated to estimate the risk of death as a continuous function of PaO2 levels. A total of 1248 TBI patients were included, of whom 396 (32%) died before hospital discharge. Associations between hypoxemia and increased mortality (OR, 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.8; p = 0.008) and between hyperoxemia and decreased mortality (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9; p = 0.018) were observed. A total of 582 traumatic shock patients were included, of whom 52 (9%) died before hospital discharge. No statistically significant associations were observed between in-hospital mortality and either hypoxemia (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.4-2.4; p = 0.987) or hyperoxemia (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.6-5.7; p = 0.269). Among patients with severe TBI but not traumatic shock, hypoxemia was associated with an increase of in-hospital mortality and hyperoxemia was associated with a decrease of in-hospital mortality.

Epinephrine in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Network Meta-analysis and Subgroup Analyses of Shockable and Nonshockable Rhythms.

BACKGROUND: Epinephrine is the most commonly used drug in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) resuscitation, but evidence supporting its efficacy is mixed. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the comparative efficacy and safety of standard dose epinephrine, high-dose epinephrine, epinephrine plus vasopressin, and placebo or no treatment in improving outcomes after OHCA? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, we searched six databases from inception through June 2022 for randomized controlled trials evaluating epinephrine use during OHCA resuscitation. We performed frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and present ORs and 95% CIs. We used the the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to rate the certainty of evidence. Outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission, survival to discharge, and survival with good functional outcome. RESULTS: We included 18 trials (21,594 patients). Compared with placebo or no treatment, high-dose epinephrine (OR, 4.27; 95% CI, 3.68-4.97), standard-dose epinephrine (OR, 3.69; 95% CI, 3.32-4.10), and epinephrine plus vasopressin (OR, 3.54; 95% CI, 2.94-4.26) all increased ROSC. High-dose epinephrine (OR, 3.53; 95% CI, 2.97-4.20), standard-dose epinephrine (OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 2.66-3.38), and epinephrine plus vasopressin (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 2.27-3.44) all increased survival to hospital admission as compared with placebo or no treatment. However, none of these agents may increase survival to discharge or survival with good functional outcome as compared with placebo or no treatment. Compared with placebo or no treatment, standard-dose epinephrine improved survival to discharge among patients with nonshockable rhythm (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.21-3.63), but not in those with shockable rhythm (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.39-1.85). INTERPRETATION: Use of standard-dose epinephrine, high-dose epinephrine, and epinephrine plus vasopressin increases ROSC and survival to hospital admission, but may not improve survival to discharge or functional outcome. Standard-dose epinephrine improved survival to discharge among patients with nonshockable rhythm, but not those with shockable rhythm. TRIAL REGISTRY: Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/arxwq.

Clinical outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: The minute-by-minute impact of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

AIMS: The time-dependent prognostic role of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients has not been described with great precision, especially for neurologic outcomes. Our objective was to assess the association between bystander CPR, emergency medical service (EMS) response time, and OHCA patients' outcomes. METHODS: This cohort study used the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Cardiac Epidemiologic Registries. Bystander-witnessed adult OHCA treated by EMS were included. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge and secondary outcome was survival with a good neurologic outcome (modified Rankin scale 0-2). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the associations and interactions between bystander CPR, EMS response time and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 229,637 patients, 41,012 were included (18,867 [46.0%] without bystander CPR and 22,145 [54.0%] with bystander CPR). Bystander CPR was independently associated with higher survival (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.70 [95%CI 1.61-1.80]) and survival with a good neurologic outcome (AOR = 1.87 [95%CI 1.70-2.06]), while longer EMS response times were independently associated with lower survival to hospital discharge (each additional minute of EMS response time: AOR = 0.92 [95%CI 0.91-0.93], p < 0.001) and lower survival with a good neurologic outcome (AOR = 0.88 [95%CI 0.86-0.89], p < 0.001). There was no interaction between bystander CPR and EMS response time's association with survival (p = 0.12) and neurologic outcomes (p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Although bystander CPR is associated with an immediate increase in odds of survival and of good neurologic outcome for OHCA patients, it does not influence the negative association between longer EMS response time and survival and good neurologic outcome.

Implementation of the Modified Canadian C-Spine Rule by Paramedics.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The Canadian C-spine rule was modified and validated for use by the paramedics in a multicenter study where patients were assessed with the Canadian C-spine rule yet all transported with immobilization. This study evaluated the clinical impact of the modified Canadian C-spine rule when implemented by paramedics. METHODS: This single-center prospective cohort implementation study took place in Ottawa, Canada (from 2011 to 2015). Advanced and primary care paramedics were trained to use the modified Canadian C-spine rule, collect data on a standardized study form, and selectively transport eligible patients without immobilization. We evaluated all consecutive low-risk adult patients (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] 15, stable vital signs) at risk for a neck injury. We followed all patients without initial radiologic evaluation for 30 days. Analyses included descriptive statistics with 95% confidence intervals (CI), sensitivity, specificity, and kappa coefficients. RESULTS: The 4,034 enrolled patients had a mean age of 43 (range 16 to 99), and 53.4% were female. Motor vehicle collisions were the most common mechanism of injury (55.1%), followed by falls (23.9%). There were 11 clinically important injuries. The paramedics classified these injuries with a sensitivity of 90.9% (95% CI, 58.7 to 99.8) and specificity of 66.5% (95% CI, 65.1 to 68.0). There was no adverse event or resulting spinal cord injury. The kappa agreement between paramedics and investigators was 0.94. A total of 2,583 (64.0%) immobilizations were avoided using the modified Canadian C-spine rule. CONCLUSION: Paramedics could accurately apply the modified Canadian C-spine rule to low-risk trauma patients and significantly reduce the need for spinal immobilization during transport. This resulted in no adverse event or any spinal cord injury.

Patient and Prehospital Predictors of Hospital Admission for Patients With and Without Histories of Diabetes Treated by Paramedics for Hypoglycemia: A Health Record Review Study.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to describe the characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients treated by paramedics for hypoglycemia, and to determine the predictors of hospital admission for these patients within 72 hours of the initial hypoglycemia event. METHODS: We performed a health record review of paramedic call reports and emergency department records over a 12-month period. We queried prehospital databases to identify cases, which included all patients ⩾18 years with prehospital glucose readings of <72 mg/dl (<4.0 mmol/L) and excluded terminally ill and cardiac arrest patients. We developed and piloted a standardized data collection tool and obtained consensus on all data definitions before initiation of data extraction by trained investigators. Data analyses included descriptive statistics univariate and logistic regression presented as adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: There were 791 patients with the following characteristics: mean age 56.2, male 52.3%, type 1 diabetes 11.6%, on insulin 43.3%, median initial glucose 54.0 mg/dl (3.0 mmol/L), from home 56.4%. They were treated by advanced care paramedics 80.1%, received intravenous D50 37.8%, intramuscular glucagon 17.8%, oral complex carbs/protein 25.7%, and accepted transport to hospital 70.2%. Among those transported, 134 (24.3%) were initially admitted and four more were admitted within 72 hours. One patient was admitted, discharged, and admitted again within 72 hours. Patients without documented histories of diabetes (aOR 2.35, CI 1.13-4.86), with cardiovascular disease (aOR 1.81, CI 1.10-3.00), on corticosteroids (aOR 4.63, CI 2.15-9.96), on oral hypoglycemic agent(s) (aOR 1.92, CI 1.02-3.62), or those given glucagon (aOR 1.77, CI 1.07-2.93) on scene were more likely to be admitted to hospital, whereas patients on insulin (aOR 0.49, CI 0.27-0.91), able to tolerate complex oral carbs/protein (aOR 0.22, CI 0.10-0.48), with final GCS scores of 15 (aOR 0.53, CI 0.34-0.83), or from public locations (aOR 0.40, CI 0.21-0.75) were less likely to be admitted. CONCLUSIONS: There are several patient and prehospital management characteristics which, in combination, could be incorporated into a safe clinical decision tool for patients who present with hypoglycemia.

Defibrillation Strategies for Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in defibrillation technology, shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation remains common during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Double sequential external defibrillation (DSED; rapid sequential shocks from two defibrillators) and vector-change (VC) defibrillation (switching defibrillation pads to an anterior-posterior position) have been proposed as defibrillation strategies to improve outcomes in patients with refractory ventricular fibrillation. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial with crossover among six Canadian paramedic services to evaluate DSED and VC defibrillation as compared with standard defibrillation in adult patients with refractory ventricular fibrillation during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Patients were treated with one of these three techniques according to the strategy that was randomly assigned to the paramedic service. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included termination of ventricular fibrillation, return of spontaneous circulation, and a good neurologic outcome, defined as a modified Rankin scale score of 2 or lower (indicating no symptoms to slight disability) at hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 405 patients were enrolled before the data and safety monitoring board stopped the trial because of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. A total of 136 patients (33.6%) were assigned to receive standard defibrillation, 144 (35.6%) to receive VC defibrillation, and 125 (30.9%) to receive DSED. Survival to hospital discharge was more common in the DSED group than in the standard group (30.4% vs. 13.3%; relative risk, 2.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33 to 3.67) and more common in the VC group than in the standard group (21.7% vs. 13.3%; relative risk, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.01 to 2.88). DSED but not VC defibrillation was associated with a higher percentage of patients having a good neurologic outcome than standard defibrillation (relative risk, 2.21 [95% CI, 1.26 to 3.88] and 1.48 [95% CI, 0.81 to 2.71], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with refractory ventricular fibrillation, survival to hospital discharge occurred more frequently among those who received DSED or VC defibrillation than among those who received standard defibrillation. (Funded by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada; DOSE VF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04080986.).

Bayesian analysis of amiodarone or lidocaine versus placebo for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical trials for patients with shock-refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), including the Amiodarone, Lidocaine or Placebo (ALPS) trial, have been unable to demonstrate definitive benefit after treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs. A Bayesian approach, combining the available evidence, may yield additional insights. METHODS: We conducted a reanalysis of the ALPS trial comparing treatment with amiodarone or lidocaine with placebo in patients with OHCA following shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia (VF/VT). We used Bayesian regression to assess the probability of improved survival or improved neurological outcome on the 7-point modified Rankin Scale. We derived weak, moderate and strong priors from a previous clinical trial. RESULTS: The original ALPS trial randomised 3026 adult patients with OHCA to amiodarone (n=974, survival to hospital discharge 24.4%), lidocaine, (n=993, survival 23.7%) or placebo (n=1059, survival 21.0%). In our reanalysis the probability of improved survival from amiodarone ranged from 83% (strong prior) to 95% (weak prior) compared with placebo and from 78% (strong) to 90% (weak) for lidocaine-an estimated improvement in survival of 2.9% (IQR 1.4%-3.8%) for amiodarone and 1.7% (IQR 0.84%-3.2%) for lidocaine over placebo (moderate prior). The probability of improved neurological outcome from amiodarone ranged from 96% (weak) to 99% (strong) compared with placebo and from 88% (weak) to 96% (strong) for lidocaine. CONCLUSIONS: In a Bayesian reanalysis of patients with shock-resistant VF/VT OHCA, treatment with amiodarone had high probabilities of improved survival and neurological outcome, while treatment with lidocaine had a more modest benefit.

Rationale, development and implementation of the ReACanROC registry for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in France and Canada.

France and Canada prehospital systems and care delivery in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) show substantial differences. This article aims to describe the rationale, design, implementation and expected research implications of the international, population-based, France-Canada registry for OHCAs, namely ReACanROC, which is built from the merging of two nation-wide, population-based, Utstein-style prospectively implemented registries for OHCAs attended to by emergency medical services. Under the supervision of an international steering committee and research network, the ReACanROC dataset will be used to run in-depth analyses on the differences in organisational, practical and geographic predictors of survival after OHCA between France and Canada. ReACanROC is the first Europe-North America registry ever created to meet this goal. To date, it covers close to 80 million people over the two countries, and includes approximately 200 000 cases over a 10-year period.