Emergency medical dispatchers' experiences of using the Medical Priority Dispatch System telephone triage to identify maternity emergencies: a qualitative focus group study.

OBJECTIVES: The ambulance service plays a pivotal role in the provision of care in out-of-hospital maternity emergencies. Telephone triage of this patient group is complex and must be sensitive to an emergency situation to prevent unnecessary delays in treatment. This study aimed to explore emergency medical dispatchers' (EMDs) perceptions of the structured protocol they use. DESIGN: Voluntary participation in semistructured phenomenological focus groups. The participants were asked to discuss their experiences of using Medical Priority Dispatch System Protocol 24 (pregnancy, childbirth and miscarriage). Thematic analysis was applied to code and group topics. Discussion between the EMDs is presented for each theme and their experiences, including quotes, are presented to offer an overview of the maternity protocol and its use. SETTING: A large urban UK ambulance service. PARTICIPANTS: 23 control room staff. RESULTS: Perceptions of maternity emergencies, challenges with key questions, the need for sensitivity surrounding miscarriage, using prearrival instructions and postdispatch instructions to help patients and ideas for additional ProQA functionality emerged as the five overarching themes. Protocol 24 was considered to reflect many of the clinical factors EMDs associate with maternity emergencies although further factors, including some non-clinical, were suggested for inclusion. Miscarriage and termination-related calls were thought to be challenging as the language of the protocol is designed for pregnancy. However, instructions were generally considered well written and user-friendly, although some were thought to be unnecessary. EMDs were largely positive regarding the ProQA software, but felt backward navigation was difficult if a situation changed. CONCLUSIONS: Maternity calls were considered rewarding but complex by EMDs. We suggest changes including the use of more sensitive language in response to miscarriage and termination and make recommendations for the omission and inclusion of specific instructions, as well as enhancements to key questions and functionality. Further research is needed to ensure focus group findings are generalisable to other services, particularly in other countries.

The COVID-19 ambulance response assessment (CARA) study: a national survey of ambulance service healthcare professionals' preparedness and response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic placed significant demand on the NHS, including ambulance services, but it is unclear how this affected ambulance service staff and paramedics in other clinical settings (e.g. urgent and primary care, armed services, prisons). This study aimed to measure the self-perceived preparedness and impact of the first wave of the pandemic on paramedics' psychological stress and perceived ability to deliver care. Methods: Ambulance clinicians and paramedics working in other healthcare settings were invited to participate in a three-phase sequential online survey during the acceleration (April 2020), peak (May 2020) and deceleration (September/October 2020) phases of the first wave of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom. Recruitment used social media, Trust internal bulletins and the College of Paramedics' communication channels, employing a convenience sampling strategy. Data were collected using purposively developed open- and closed-ended questions and the validated general health questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12). Data were analysed using multi-level linear and logistic regression models. Results: Phase 1 recruited 3717 participants, reducing to 2709 (73%) by phase 2 and 2159 (58%) by phase 3. Participants were mostly male (58%, n = 2148) and registered paramedics (n = 1992, 54%). Mean (standard deviation) GHQ-12 scores were 16.5 (5.2) during phase 1, reducing to 15.2 (6.7) by phase 3. A total of 84% of participants (n = 3112) had a GHQ-12 score ≥ 12 during the first phase, indicating psychological distress. Participants that had higher GHQ-12 scores were feeling unprepared for the pandemic, and reported a lack of confidence in using personal protective equipment and managing cardiac arrests in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients. Conclusions: Most participants reported psychological distress, the reasons for which are multi-factorial. Ambulance managers need to be aware of the risks to staff mental health and take action to mitigate these, to support staff in the delivery of unscheduled, emergency and urgent care under these additional pressures.

Route of drug administration in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A protocol for a randomised controlled trial (PARAMEDIC-3).

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.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

AIM: Prior studies have reported increased out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) incidence and lower survival during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated how the COVID-19 pandemic affected OHCA incidence, bystander CPR rate and patients' outcomes, accounting for regional COVID-19 incidence and OHCA characteristics. METHODS: Individual patient data meta-analysis of studies which provided a comparison of OHCA incidence during the first pandemic wave (COVID-period) with a reference period of the previous year(s) (pre-COVID period). We computed COVID-19 incidence per 100,000 inhabitants in each of 97 regions per each week and divided it into its quartiles. RESULTS: We considered a total of 49,882 patients in 10 studies. OHCA incidence increased significantly compared to previous years in regions where weekly COVID-19 incidence was in the fourth quartile (>136/100,000/week), and patients in these regions had a lower odds of bystander CPR (OR 0.49, 95%CI 0.29-0.81, p = 0.005). Overall, the COVID-period was associated with an increase in medical etiology (89.2% vs 87.5%, p < 0.001) and OHCAs at home (74.7% vs 67.4%, p < 0.001), and a decrease in shockable initial rhythm (16.5% vs 20.3%, p < 0.001). The COVID-period was independently associated with pre-hospital death (OR 1.73, 95%CI 1.55-1.93, p < 0.001) and negatively associated with survival to hospital admission (OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.64-0.72, p < 0.001) and survival to discharge (OR 0.50, 95%CI 0.46-0.54, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: During the first COVID-19 pandemic wave, there was higher OHCA incidence and lower bystander CPR rate in regions with a high-burden of COVID-19. COVID-19 was also associated with a change in patient characteristics and lower survival independently of COVID-19 incidence in the region where OHCA occurred.

MIRACLE2 Score Compared With Downtime and Current Selection Criterion for Invasive Cardiovascular Therapies After OHCA.

BACKGROUND: The MIRACLE2 score is the only risk score that does not incorporate and can be used for selection of therapies after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the discrimination performance of the MIRACLE2 score, downtime, and current randomized controlled trial (RCT) recruitment criteria in predicting poor neurologic outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: We used the EUCAR (European Cardiac Arrest Registry), a retrospective cohort from 6 centers (May 2012-September 2022). The primary outcome was poor neurologic outcome on hospital discharge (cerebral performance category 3-5). RESULTS: A total of 1,259 patients (total downtime = 25 minutes; IQR: 15-36 minutes) were included in the study. Poor outcome occurred in 41.8% with downtime <30 minutes and in 79.3% for those with downtime >30 minutes. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, MIRACLE2 had a stronger association with outcome (OR: 2.23; 95% CI: 1.98-2.51; P < 0.0001) than zero flow (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01-1.13; P = 0.013), low flow (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.99-1.09; P = 0.054), and total downtime (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.95-1.03; P = 0.52). MIRACLE2 had substantially superior discrimination for the primary endpoint (AUC: 0.877; 95% CI: 0.854-0.897) than zero flow (AUC: 0.610; 95% CI: 0.577-0.642), low flow (AUC: 0.725; 95% CI: 0.695-0.754), and total downtime (AUC: 0.732; 95% CI: 0.701-0.760). For those modeled for exclusion from study recruitment, the positive predictive value of MIRACLE2 ≥5 for poor outcome was significantly higher (0.92) than the CULPRIT-SHOCK (Culprit lesion only PCI Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock) (0.80), EUROSHOCK (Testing the value of Novel Strategy and Its Cost Efficacy In Order to Improve the Poor Outcomes in Cardiogenic Shock) (0.74) and ECLS-SHOCK (Extra-corporeal life support in Cardiogenic shock) criteria (0.81) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The MIRACLE2 score has superior prediction of outcome after OHCA than downtime and higher discrimination of poor outcome than the current RCT recruitment criteria. The potential for the MIRACLE2 score to improve the selection of OHCA patients should be evaluated formally in future RCTs.

Expedited transfer to a cardiac arrest centre for non-ST-elevation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (ARREST): a UK prospective, multicentre, parallel, randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has called for a randomised trial of delivery to a cardiac arrest centre. We aimed to assess whether expedited delivery to a cardiac arrest centre compared with current standard of care following resuscitated cardiac arrest reduces deaths. METHODS: ARREST is a prospective, parallel, multicentre, open-label, randomised superiority trial. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with return of spontaneous circulation following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without ST elevation were randomly assigned (1:1) at the scene of their cardiac arrest by London Ambulance Service staff using a secure online randomisation system to expedited delivery to the cardiac catheter laboratory at one of seven cardiac arrest centres or standard of care with delivery to the geographically closest emergency department at one of 32 hospitals in London, UK. Masking of the ambulance staff who delivered the interventions and those reporting treatment outcomes in hospital was not possible. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30 days, analysed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population excluding those with unknown mortality status. Safety outcomes were analysed in the ITT population. The trial was prospectively registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Registry, 96585404. FINDINGS: Between Jan 15, 2018, and Dec 1, 2022, 862 patients were enrolled, of whom 431 (50%) were randomly assigned to a cardiac arrest centre and 431 (50%) to standard care. 20 participants withdrew from the cardiac arrest centre group and 19 from the standard care group, due to lack of consent or unknown mortality status, leaving 411 participants in the cardiac arrest centre group and 412 in the standard care group for the primary analysis. Of 822 participants for whom data were available, 560 (68%) were male and 262 (32%) were female. The primary endpoint of 30-day mortality occurred in 258 (63%) of 411 participants in the cardiac arrest centre group and in 258 (63%) of 412 in the standard care group (unadjusted risk ratio for survival 1·00, 95% CI 0·90-1·11; p=0·96). Eight (2%) of 414 patients in the cardiac arrest centre group and three (1%) of 413 in the standard care group had serious adverse events, none of which were deemed related to the trial intervention. INTERPRETATION: In adult patients without ST elevation, transfer to a cardiac arrest centre following resuscitated cardiac arrest in the community did not reduce deaths. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation.

Trends in use of intraosseous and intravenous access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest across English ambulance services: A registry-based, cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The optimum route for drug administration in cardiac arrest is unclear. Recent data suggest that use of the intraosseous route may be increasing. This study aimed to explore changes over time in use of the intraosseous and intravenous drug routes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in England. METHODS: We extracted data from the UK Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Outcomes registry. We included adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients between 2015-2020 who were treated by an English Emergency Medical Service that submitted vascular access route data to the registry. The primary outcome was any use of the intraosseous route during cardiac arrest. We used logistic regression models to describe the association between time (calendar month) and intraosseous use. RESULTS: We identified 75,343 adults in cardiac arrest treated by seven Emergency Medical Service systems between January 2015 and December 2020. The median age was 72 years, 64% were male and 23% presented in a shockable rhythm. Over the study period, the percentage of patients receiving intraosseous access increased from 22.8% in 2015 to 42.5% in 2020. For each study-month, the odds of receiving any intraosseous access increased by 1.019 (95% confidence interval 1.019 to 1.020, p < 0.001). This observed effect was consistent across sensitivity analyses. We observed a corresponding decrease in use of intravenous access. CONCLUSION: In England, the use of intraosseous access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest has progressively increased over time. There is an urgent need for randomised controlled trials to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the different vascular access routes in cardiac arrest.

Experiences and views of people who frequently call emergency ambulance services: A qualitative study of UK service users.

INTRODUCTION: People who call emergency ambulances frequently are often vulnerable because of health and social circumstances, have unresolved problems or cannot access appropriate care. They have higher mortality rates. Case management by interdisciplinary teams can help reduce demand for emergency services and is available in some UK regions. We report results of interviews with people who use emergency ambulance services frequently to understand their experiences of calling and receiving treatment. METHODS: We used a two-stage recruitment process. A UK ambulance service identified six people who were known to them as frequently calling emergency services. Through third-sector organisations, we also recruited nine individuals with healthcare experiences reflecting the characteristics of people who call frequently. We gained informed consent to record and transcribe all telephone interviews. We used thematic analysis to explore the results. RESULTS: People said they make frequent calls to emergency ambulance services as a last resort when they perceive their care needs are urgent and other routes to help have failed. Those with the most complex health needs generally felt their immediate requirements were not resolved and underlying mental and physical problems led them to call again. A third of respondents were also attended to by police and were arrested for behaviour associated with their health needs. Those callers receiving case management did not know they were selected for this. Some respondents were concerned that case management could label frequent callers as troublemakers. CONCLUSION: People who make frequent calls to emergency ambulance services feel their health and care needs are urgent and ongoing. They cannot see alternative ways to receive help and resolve problems. Communication between health professionals and service users appears inadequate. More research is needed to understand service users' motivations and requirements to inform design and delivery of accessible and effective services. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: People with relevant experience were involved in developing, undertaking and disseminating this research. Two public contributors helped design and deliver the study, including developing and analysing service user interviews and drafting this paper. Eight public members of a Lived Experience Advisory Panel contributed at key stages of study design, interpretation and dissemination. Two more public contributors were members of an independent Study Steering Committee.

A machine learning algorithm to predict a culprit lesion after out of hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to develop a machine learning algorithm to predict the presence of a culprit lesion in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: We used the King's Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Registry, a retrospective cohort of 398 patients admitted to King's College Hospital between May 2012 and December 2017. The primary outcome was the presence of a culprit coronary artery lesion, for which a gradient boosting model was optimized to predict. The algorithm was then validated in two independent European cohorts comprising 568 patients. RESULTS: A culprit lesion was observed in 209/309 (67.4%) patients receiving early coronary angiography in the development, and 199/293 (67.9%) in the Ljubljana and 102/132 (61.1%) in the Bristol validation cohorts, respectively. The algorithm, which is presented as a web application, incorporates nine variables including age, a localizing feature on electrocardiogram (ECG) (≥2 mm of ST change in contiguous leads), regional wall motion abnormality, history of vascular disease and initial shockable rhythm. This model had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.89 in the development and 0.83/0.81 in the validation cohorts with good calibration and outperforms the current gold standard-ECG alone (AUC: 0.69/0.67/0/67). CONCLUSIONS: A novel simple machine learning-derived algorithm can be applied to patients with OHCA, to predict a culprit coronary artery disease lesion with high accuracy.

Real-time continuous glucose monitoring immediately after severe hypoglycaemia requiring emergency medical services: A randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: Severe hypoglycaemia requiring emergency medical services remains prevalent despite advances in all aspects of diabetes self-management. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RTCGM) technologies can reduce the risk of severe hypoglycaemia for adults with type 1 diabetes, but the impact of these devices has not been assessed in the acute phase after an episode of severe hypoglycaemia. METHODS: We recruited and randomised 35 adults with type 1 diabetes in the acute period after an episode of severe hypoglycaemia requiring emergency medical services and randomised participants to RTCGM with alerts and alarms, or usual care with self-monitored blood glucose for 12 weeks with intermittent blinded CGM. The primary outcome was the difference between groups in percentage time spent in hypoglycaemia (≤3.0 mmol/L, 55 mg/dL). RESULTS: Thirty participants completed the study (median (IQR) age, duration of diabetes, and BMI was 43 (36-56) years, 26 (19-37) years, and 24.9 (21.9-29.0) kg/m2 , respectively). Sufficient CGM data was available for 15 participants in RT-CGM group and 8 in SMBG group for the primary outcome analysis. The RTCGM group had a significantly larger reduction in exposure to glucose below 3.0 mmol/L (RTCGM -0.16 [-1.23 to 0.01] vs. SMBG 1.58 [0.41 to 3.48], p = 0.03) and episodes of nocturnal hypoglycaemia (RT-CGM -0.03 [-0.15 to 0.02] vs. SMBG 0.05 [-0.03 to 0.40], p = 0.02). Episodes of severe hypoglycaemia were significantly lower in the RTCGM group (RTCGM 0.0 vs. SMBG 4.0, p 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: RTCGM implemented acutely after an episode of severe hypoglycaemia is feasible and clinically effective with important implications for hypoglycaemia management pathways and self-monitoring cost effectiveness.

MIRACLE2 Score and SCAI Grade to Identify Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest for Immediate Coronary Angiography.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of performing immediate coronary angiography (CAG) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with stratification of predicted neurologic injury and cardiogenic shock on arrival to a center. BACKGROUND: The role of immediate CAG for patients with OHCA is unclear, which may in part be explained by the majority of patients dying of hypoxic brain injury. METHODS: Between May 2012 and July 2020, patients from 5 European centers were included in the EUCAR (European Cardiac Arrest Registry). Patients were retrospectively classified into low vs high neurologic risk (MIRACLE2 score 0-3 vs ≥4) and degree of cardiogenic shock on arrival (Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions [SCAI] grade A vs B-E). A multivariable logistic regression analysis including immediate CAG was performed for the primary outcome of survival with good neurologic outcome (Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2) at hospital discharge. RESULTS: Nine hundred twenty-six patients were included in the registry, with 405 (43.7%) in the low-risk group and 521 (56.3%) in the high-risk group. Immediate CAG was independently associated with improved survival with good neurologic outcome in the low MIRACLE2 risk group with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (OR: 11.80; 95% CI: 2.24-76.74; P = 0.048) and with SCAI grade B to E shock (OR: 3.23; 95% CI: 1.10-9.50; P = 0.031). No subgroups, including those with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and with SCAI grade B to E shock, achieved any benefit from early CAG in the high MIRACLE2 group. CONCLUSIONS: Combined classification of patients with OHCA with 12-lead electrocardiography, MIRACLE2 score 0 to 3, and SCAI grade B to E identifies a potential cohort of patients at low risk for neurologic injury who benefit most from immediate CAG.

STRategies to manage Emergency ambulance Telephone Callers with sustained High needs: an Evaluation using linked Data (STRETCHED) - a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: UK ambulance services have identified a concern with high users of the 999 service and have set up 'frequent callers' services, ranging from within-service management to cross-sectoral multidisciplinary case management approaches. There is little evidence about how to address the needs of this patient group. AIM: To evaluate effectiveness, safety and efficiency of case management approaches to the care of people who frequently call the emergency ambulance service, and gain an understanding of barriers and facilitators to implementation. OBJECTIVES: (1) Develop an understanding of predicted mechanisms of change to underpin evaluation. (2) Describe epidemiology of sustained high users of 999 services. (3) Evaluate case management approaches to the care of people who call the 999 ambulance service frequently in terms of: (i) Further emergency contacts (999, emergency department, emergency admissions to hospital) (ii) Effects on other services (iii) Adverse events (deaths, injuries, serious medical emergencies and police arrests) (iv) Costs of intervention and care (v) Patient experience of care. (4) Identify challenges and opportunities associated with using case management models, including features associated with success, and develop theories about how case management works in this population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a multisite mixed-methods evaluation of case management for people who use ambulance services frequently by using anonymised linked routine data outcomes in a 'natural experiment' cohort design, in four regional ambulance services. We will conduct interviews and focus groups with service users, commissioners and emergency and non-acute care providers. The planned start and end dates of the study are 1 April 2019 and 1 September 2022, respectively ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study received approval from the UK Health Research Authority (Confidentiality Advisory Group reference number: 19/CAG/0195; research ethics committee reference number: 19/WA/0216).We will collate feedback from our Lived Experience Advisory Panel, the Frequent Caller National Network and Research Management Group for targeted dissemination activities.

The effect of the GoodSAM volunteer first-responder app on survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

AIMS: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation can double survival to hospital discharge in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Mobile phone applications, such as GoodSAM, alerting nearby volunteer first-responders about out-of-hospital cardiac arrest could potentially improve bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation, leading to better patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine GoodSAM's effect on survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. METHODS AND RESULTS: We collected data from the Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Outcomes Registry (University of Warwick, UK) submitted by the London Ambulance Service (1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017) and East Midlands Ambulance Service (1 January 2018 to 17 June 2018) and matched out-of-hospital cardiac arrests to GoodSAM alerts. We constructed logistic regression models to determine if there was an association between a GoodSAM first-responder accepting an alert and survival to hospital discharge, adjusting for location type, presenting rhythm, age, gender, ambulance service response time, cardiac arrest witnessed status, and bystander actions. Survival to hospital discharge was 9.6% (393/4196) in London and 7.2% (72/1001) in East Midlands. A GoodSAM first-responder accepted an alert for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in 1.3% (53/4196) cases in London and 5.4% (51/1001) cases in East Midlands. When a responder accepted an alert, the adjusted odds ratio for survival to hospital discharge was 3.15 (95% CI: 1.19-8.36, P = 0.021) in London and 3.19 (95% CI: 1.17-8.73, P = 0.024) in East Midlands. CONCLUSION: Alert acceptance was associated with improved survival in both ambulance services. Alert acceptance rates were low, and challenges remain to maximize the potential benefit of GoodSAM.

Are there disparities in the location of automated external defibrillators in England?

BACKGROUND: Early defibrillation is an essential element of the chain of survival for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Public access defibrillation (PAD) programmes aim to place automated external defibrillators (AED) in areas with high OHCA incidence, but there is sometimes a mismatch between AED density and OHCA incidence. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess whether there were any disparities in the characteristics of areas that have an AED and those that do not in England. METHODS: Details of the location of AEDs registered with English Ambulance Services were obtained from individual services or internet sources. Neighbourhood characteristics of lower layer super output areas (LSOA) were obtained from the Office for National Statistics. Comparisons were made between LSOAs with and without a registered AED. RESULTS: AEDs were statistically more likely to be in LSOAs with a lower residential but higher workplace population density, with people predominantly from a white ethnic background and working in higher socio-economically classified occupations (p < 0.05). There was a significant correlation between AED coverage and the LSOA Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) (r = 0.79, p = 0.007), with only 27.4% in the lowest IMD decile compared to about 45% in highest. AED density varied significantly across the country from 0.82/km2 in the north east to 2.97/km2 in London. CONCLUSIONS: In England, AEDs were disproportionately placed in more affluent areas, with a lower residential population density. This contrasts with locations where OHCAs have previously occurred. Future PAD programmes should give preference to areas of higher deprivation and be tailored to the local community.

Calculating real-world travel routes instead of straight-line distance in the community response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Using straight-line distance to estimate the proximity of public-access Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) or volunteer first-responders to potential out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) does not reflect real-world travel distance. The difference between estimates may be an important consideration for bystanders and first-responders responding to OHCAs and may potentially impact patient outcome. OBJECTIVES: To explore how calculating real-world travel routes instead of using straight-line distance estimates might impact the community response to OHCA. METHODS: We mapped 4355 OHCA (01/04/2016-31/03/2017) and 2677 AEDs in London (UK), and 1263 OHCA (18/06/2017-17/06/2018) and 4704 AEDs in East Midlands (UK) using ArcGIS mapping software. We determined the distance from OHCAs to the nearest AED using straight-line estimates and real-world travel routes. We mapped locations of potential OHCAs (London: n = 9065, 20/09/2019-22/03/2020; East Midlands: n = 7637, 20/09/2019-17/03/2020) for which volunteer first-responders were alerted by the GoodSAM mobile-phone app, and calculated response distance using straight-line estimates and real-world travel routes. We created Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and calculated the Area Under the Curve (AUC) to determine if travel distance predicted whether or not a responder accepted an alert. RESULTS: Real-world travel routes to the nearest AED were (median) 219 m longer (623 m vs 406 m) than straight-line estimates in London, and 211 m longer (568 m vs 357 m) in East Midlands. The identity of the nearest AED changed on 26% occasions in both areas when calculating real-world travel routes. GoodSAM responders' real-world travel routes were (median) 222 m longer (601 m vs 379 m) in London, and 291 m longer (814 m vs 523 m) in East Midlands. AUC statistics for both areas demonstrated that neither straight-line nor real-world travel distance predicted whether or not a responder accepted an alert. CONCLUSIONS: Calculating real-world travel routes increases the estimated travel distance and time for those responding to OHCAs. Calculating straight-line distance may overestimate the benefit of the community response to OHCA.

Cross-sectional analysis of emergency hypoglycaemia and outcome predictors among people with diabetes in an urban population.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Out-of-hospital hypoglycaemia is a common complication for individuals with diabetes mellitus and represents a significant burden to emergency medical services (EMS). We aim to identify the factors associated with receiving parenteral treatment and hospital conveyance. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed a 6-month data set of all London EMS hypoglycaemia. Individuals with a known diabetes diagnosis were included in our analysis and stratified as either having type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 2862 incidents occurred within the area served by London Ambulance Service between January and June 2018. Fifty percent of incidents required parenteral treatment (intravenous glucose or intramuscular glucagon) and were conveyed to hospital. A higher arrival of blood glucose, intact consciousness and receiving oral glucose treatment were all negative predictors for requiring parenteral therapy. Forty-three percent of incidents were labelled as 'hypoglycaemia' by the EMS call handler, and greater odds of hospitalisation were observed among incidents that received parenteral treatment (OR 2.52 [95% CI 1.46, 4.33] p < 0.01) and individuals with type 2 diabetes (OR 2.67 [95% CI 1.52, 4.71] p < 0.01). Repeated callouts from 2% (n = 50) of individuals accounted for 10% (286) of all incidents attended, and 56.4% of individuals attended by EMS on more than one occasion had type 1 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Severe hypoglycaemia requiring emergency service attendance remains common, as does the requirement for parenteral therapy and conveyance to hospital. Early intervention, education and improved accessibility to risk prevention strategies may reduce the necessity for emergency parenteral treatment and hospitalisation, especially among individuals suffering from recurrent hypoglycaemia and high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes.

Adrenaline to improve survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the PARAMEDIC2 RCT.

BACKGROUND: Adrenaline has been used as a treatment for cardiac arrest for many years, despite uncertainty about its effects on long-term outcomes and concerns that it may cause worse neurological outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate the effects of adrenaline on survival and neurological outcomes, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of adrenaline use. DESIGN: This was a pragmatic, randomised, allocation-concealed, placebo-controlled, parallel-group superiority trial and economic evaluation. Costs are expressed in Great British pounds and reported in 2016/17 prices. SETTING: This trial was set in five NHS ambulance services in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Adults treated for an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were included. Patients were ineligible if they were pregnant, if they were aged < 16 years, if the cardiac arrest had been caused by anaphylaxis or life-threatening asthma, or if adrenaline had already been given. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to either adrenaline (1 mg) or placebo in a 1 : 1 allocation ratio by the opening of allocation-concealed treatment packs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was survival to 30 days. The secondary outcomes were survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, survival at 3, 6 and 12 months, neurological outcomes and health-related quality of life through to 6 months. The economic evaluation assessed the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services. Participants, clinical teams and those assessing patient outcomes were masked to the treatment allocation. RESULTS: From December 2014 to October 2017, 8014 participants were assigned to the adrenaline (n = 4015) or to the placebo (n = 3999) arm. At 30 days, 130 out of 4012 participants (3.2%) in the adrenaline arm and 94 out of 3995 (2.4%) in the placebo arm were alive (adjusted odds ratio for survival 1.47, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.97). For secondary outcomes, survival to hospital admission was higher for those receiving adrenaline than for those receiving placebo (23.6% vs. 8.0%; adjusted odds ratio 3.83, 95% confidence interval 3.30 to 4.43). The rate of favourable neurological outcome at hospital discharge was not significantly different between the arms (2.2% vs. 1.9%; adjusted odds ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.68). The pattern of improved survival but no significant improvement in neurological outcomes continued through to 6 months. By 12 months, survival in the adrenaline arm was 2.7%, compared with 2.0% in the placebo arm (adjusted odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.92). An adjusted subgroup analysis did not identify significant interactions. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for adrenaline was estimated at £1,693,003 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest event and £81,070 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the lifetime of survivors. Additional economic analyses estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for adrenaline at £982,880 per percentage point increase in overall survival and £377,232 per percentage point increase in neurological outcomes over the first 6 months after the cardiac arrest. LIMITATIONS: The estimate for survival with a favourable neurological outcome is imprecise because of the small numbers of patients surviving with a good outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Adrenaline improved long-term survival, but there was no evidence that it significantly improved neurological outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year exceeds the threshold of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year usually supported by the NHS. FUTURE WORK: Further research is required to better understand patients' preferences in relation to survival and neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and to aid interpretation of the trial findings from a patient and public perspective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73485024 and EudraCT 2014-000792-11. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cardiac arrest is a medical emergency that happens when the heart suddenly stops pumping effectively. When cardiac arrest happens, awareness is lost within seconds. If emergency treatment is not started quickly, the person will die. The first treatments of cardiac arrest involve pressing on the chest, giving rescue breaths and defibrillation (electric shocks applied to the heart). If these treatments do not work, ambulance paramedics use a drug called adrenaline to try to restart the heart. Although this treatment has been used for many years, some recent research suggests that it may cause more harm than good. In this research study, we compared the effects of giving adrenaline with the effects of not giving adrenaline to people who had a cardiac arrest in the community. The research showed that adrenaline was effective at restarting the heart, so more people survived long enough to be admitted to hospital. Thirty days later, 130 out of 4012 patients (3.2%) who received adrenaline and 94 out of 3995 (2.4%) who did not receive adrenaline were alive. However, adrenaline did not improve the number of patients who went home from hospital having made a good recovery and were able to care for themselves. The evidence suggests that adrenaline represents a poor use of NHS funds on cost-effectiveness grounds. In a community survey, 95% of people who responded thought that long-term survival with good brain function was more important than just being alive. Further research exploring the opinions of patients and the public will help to understand the results of this research for the NHS.

Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in London during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: There is an emerging potential link between the COVID-19 pandemic and incidence and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We aimed to describe the incidence, characteristics and outcomes from OHCA in London, UK during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: We examined data for all OHCA patients attended by the London Ambulance Service from 1st March to 30th April 2020 and compared our findings to the previous year. We also compared OHCA characteristics and short-term outcomes for those suspected or confirmed to have COVID-19 with those who were not. Additionally, we investigated the relationship between daily COVID-19 cases and OHCA incidents. RESULTS: We observed an 81% increase in OHCAs during the pandemic, and a strong correlation between the daily number of COVID-19 cases and OHCA incidents (r = 0.828, p < 0.001). We report an increase in OHCA occurring in a private location (92.9% vs 85.5%, p < 0.001) and an increased bystander CPR (63.3% vs 52.6%, p < 0.001) during the pandemic, as well as fewer resuscitation attempts (36.4% vs 39.6%, p = 0.03) and longer EMS response times (9.3 vs 7.2 min, p < 0.001). Survival at 30 days post-arrest was poorer during the pandemic (4.4% vs 10.6%, p < 0.001) and amongst patients where COVID-19 was considered likely (1.0% vs 6.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in London, we saw a dramatic rise in the incidence of OHCA, accompanied by a significant reduction in survival. The pattern of increased incidence and mortality closely reflected the rise in confirmed COVID-19 infections in the city.

Tele-Rehabilitation for People with Dementia during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case-Study from England.

Introduction: The Promoting Activity, Independence and Stability in Early Dementia (PrAISED) is delivering an exercise programme for people with dementia. The Lincolnshire partnership National Health Service (NHS) foundation Trust successfully delivered PrAISED through a video-calling platform during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: This qualitative case-study aimed to identify participants that video delivery worked for, to highlight its benefits and its challenges. Interviews were conducted between May and August 2020 with five participants with dementia and their caregivers (n = 10), as well as five therapists from the Lincolnshire partnership NHS foundation Trust. The interviews were analysed through thematic analysis. RESULTS: Video delivery worked best when participants had a supporting caregiver and when therapists showed enthusiasm and had an established rapport with the client. Benefits included time efficiency of sessions, enhancing participants' motivation, caregivers' dementia awareness, and therapists' creativity. Limitations included users' poor IT skills and resources. DISCUSSION: The COVID-19 pandemic required innovative ways of delivering rehabilitation. This study supports that people with dementia can use tele-rehabilitation, but success is reliant on having a caregiver and an enthusiastic and known therapist.