Outcomes of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients Who Received Naloxone in an Emergency Medical Services System With a High Prevalence Of Opioid Overdose.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-associated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OA-OHCA) is a subset of cardiac arrests that could benefit from measures outside of standard Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS), such as naloxone. STUDY OBJECTIVES: In this study, we sought to examine whether OHCA patients chosen for naloxone therapy by emergency medical services (EMS) clinicians in a system with high rates of opioid overdose would have increased rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to hospital discharge. METHODS: The study took place in an urban EMS system with a high prevalence of opioid overdose. Paramedics could administer naloxone in cardiac arrest in addition to ACLS. It was often administered based on clinical gestalt for suspected OA-OHCA. The outcomes of OHCA patients who received naloxone were compared against those who received usual care in both an adjusted and unadjusted fashion. Lastly, we created a logistic regression model to test for an independent association of naloxone administration on ROSC and survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: A consecutive sample of 769 OHCA patients was obtained, of which 175 (23%) received naloxone. On average, patients who received naloxone had significantly fewer comorbidities and were younger. There was no difference in ROSC, survival to hospital discharge, or modified Rankin Scores. Using logistic regression modeling, there was no statistically significant effect of naloxone administration on these outcomes. CONCLUSION: OHCA patients who received naloxone, despite being younger and having fewer comorbidities, had similar outcomes compared to those who received usual care. The difference in baseline characteristics suggests that paramedic gestalt reasonably selected for OA-OHCA.

Adverse Effects After Prehospital Administration of Naloxone by Bystanders: A Preliminary Study.

OBJECTIVE: Opioid use disorder is a cause of significant morbidity and mortality. In order to reverse opioid overdose as quickly as possible, many institutions and municipalities have encouraged people with no professional medical training to carry and administer naloxone. This study sought to provide preliminary data for research into the rates of adverse effects of naloxone when administered by bystanders compared to Emergency Medical Services (EMS) personnel, since this question has not been studied previously. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study performed at an urban, tertiary, academic medical center that operates its own EMS service. A consecutive sample of patients presenting to EMS with opioid overdose requiring naloxone was separated into two groups based on whether naloxone was administered by bystanders or by EMS personnel. Each group was analyzed to determine the incidence of four pre-specified adverse events. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between the bystander (19%) and EMS (16%) groups (OR = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.63 - 2.32; P = .499) in this small sample. Based on these initial results, a study would need a sample size of 6,188 in order to reach this conclusion with 80% power. Similarly, there were no significant differences in the rates of any of the individual adverse events. Secondary analysis of patients' demographics showed differences between the two groups which generate hypotheses for further investigation of disparities in naloxone administration. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study provides foundational data for further investigation of naloxone administration by bystanders. Adverse events after the prehospital administration of naloxone are rare, and future studies will require large sample sizes. These preliminary data did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in adverse event rates when comparing naloxone administration by bystanders and EMS clinicians. This study provides data that will be useful for conducting further research on multiple facets of this topic.

Observational study of organisational responses of 17 US hospitals over the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has required significant modifications of hospital care. The objective of this study was to examine the operational approaches taken by US hospitals over time in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a prospective observational study of 17 geographically diverse US hospitals from February 2020 to February 2021. OUTCOMES AND ANALYSIS: We identified 42 potential pandemic-related strategies and obtained week-to-week data about their use. We calculated descriptive statistics for use of each strategy and plotted percent uptake and weeks used. We assessed the relationship between strategy use and hospital type, geographic region and phase of the pandemic using generalised estimating equations (GEEs), adjusting for weekly county case counts. RESULTS: We found heterogeneity in strategy uptake over time, some of which was associated with geographic region and phase of pandemic. We identified a body of strategies that were both commonly used and sustained over time, for example, limiting staff in COVID-19 rooms and increasing telehealth capacity, as well as those that were rarely used and/or not sustained, for example, increasing hospital bed capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic varied in resource intensity, uptake and duration of use. Such information may be valuable to health systems during the ongoing pandemic and future ones.

Using the National Incident Management System to Prepare Physicians for Rapid Responses: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to determine the feasibility of training physicians in the principles of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and Incident Command System (ICS) as applied to in-hospital rapid responses and to assess physicians' attitudes regarding rapid responses. METHODS: This was an educational pilot study. Resident physicians completed a pre-survey, followed by online training in the principles of NIMS and ICS, a knowledge test, and a post-survey. RESULTS: The number of residents who participated was 22. In the pre-survey, most (20/22) did not have a working understanding of NIMS/ICS. Participants (21/22) agreed that residents should have more training in resource organization. On the knowledge test, the median score was 9.5/10. In the post-survey, participants felt more comfortable clearing extra resources from the scene (P < 0.001) and that it would be easier to keep track of resources (P < 0.001). Most indicated that they had a working understanding of NIMS/ICS (P < 0.001) and felt more comfortable establishing command using NIMS/ICS (P < 0.001). All agreed that they would consider using an NIMS/ICS-based structure on their next rapid response. CONCLUSIONS: Training physicians in the principles of NIMS/ICS as they pertain to rapid responses is feasible and appears to change residents' attitudes about rapid responses.