Documentation of ethically relevant information in out-of-hospital resuscitation is rare: a Danish nationwide observational study of 16,495 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests

Abstract Background Decision-making in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest should ideally include clinical and ethical factors. Little is known about the extent of ethical considerations and their influence on prehospital resuscitation. We aimed to determine the transparency in medical records regarding decision-making in prehospital resuscitation with a specific focus on ethically relevant information and consideration in resuscitation providers’ documentation. Methods This was a Danish nationwide retrospective observational study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests from 2016 through 2018. After an initial screening using broadly defined inclusion criteria, two experienced philosophers performed a qualitative content analysis of the included medical records according to a preliminary codebook. We identified ethically relevant content in free-text fields and categorised the information according to Beauchamp and Childress’ four basic bioethical principles: autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. Results Of 16,495 medical records, we identified 759 (4.6%) with potentially relevant information; 710 records (4.3%) contained ethically relevant information, whereas 49 did not. In general, the documentation was vague and unclear. We identified four kinds of ethically relevant information: patients’ wishes and perspectives on life; relatives’ wishes and perspectives on patients’ life; healthcare professionals’ opinions and perspectives on resuscitation; and do-not-resuscitate orders. We identified some “best practice” examples that included all perspectives of decision-making. Conclusions There is sparse and unclear evidence on ethically relevant information in the medical records documenting resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. However, the “best practice” examples show that providing sufficient documentation of decision-making is, in fact, feasible. To ensure transparency surrounding prehospital decisions in cardiac arrests, we believe that it is necessary to ensure more systematic documentation of decision-making in prehospital resuscitation

Documentation of ethically relevant information in out-of-hospital resuscitation is rare: a Danish nationwide observational study of 16,495 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests

Abstract Background Decision-making in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest should ideally include clinical and ethical factors. Little is known about the extent of ethical considerations and their influence on prehospital resuscitation. We aimed to determine the transparency in medical records regarding decision-making in prehospital resuscitation with a specific focus on ethically relevant information and consideration in resuscitation providers’ documentation. Methods This was a Danish nationwide retrospective observational study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests from 2016 through 2018. After an initial screening using broadly defined inclusion criteria, two experienced philosophers performed a qualitative content analysis of the included medical records according to a preliminary codebook. We identified ethically relevant content in free-text fields and categorised the information according to Beauchamp and Childress’ four basic bioethical principles: autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. Results Of 16,495 medical records, we identified 759 (4.6%) with potentially relevant information; 710 records (4.3%) contained ethically relevant information, whereas 49 did not. In general, the documentation was vague and unclear. We identified four kinds of ethically relevant information: patients’ wishes and perspectives on life; relatives’ wishes and perspectives on patients’ life; healthcare professionals’ opinions and perspectives on resuscitation; and do-not-resuscitate orders. We identified some “best practice” examples that included all perspectives of decision-making. Conclusions There is sparse and unclear evidence on ethically relevant information in the medical records documenting resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. However, the “best practice” examples show that providing sufficient documentation of decision-making is, in fact, feasible. To ensure transparency surrounding prehospital decisions in cardiac arrests, we believe that it is necessary to ensure more systematic documentation of decision-making in prehospital resuscitation

Decision on non-conveyance of patients suspected of COVID-19 in a novel arrangement with assessment visits by paramedics at home

Abstract Background During the first weeks of the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the North Denmark emergency medical services authorised paramedics to assess patients suspected of COVID-19 at home, and then decide if conveyance to a hospital was required. The aim of this study was to describe the cohort of patients who were assessed at home and their outcomes in terms of subsequent hospital visits and short-term mortality. Methods This was a historical cohort study in the North Denmark Region with consecutive inclusion of patients suspected of COVID-19 who were referred to a paramedic’s assessment visit by their general practitioner or an out-of-hours general practitioner. The study was conducted from 16 March to 20 May 2020. The outcomes were the proportion of non-conveyed patients who subsequently visited a hospital within 72 hours of the paramedic’s assessment visit and mortality at 3, 7 and 30 days. Mortality was estimated using a Poisson regression model with robust variance estimation. Results During the study period, 587 patients with a median age of 75 (IQR 59–84) years were referred to a paramedic’s assessment visit. Three of four patients (76.5%, 95% CI 72.8;79.9) were non-conveyed, and 13.1% (95% CI 10.2;16.6) of the non-conveyed patients were subsequently referred to a hospital within 72 hours of the paramedic’s assessment visit. Within 30 days from the paramedic’s assessment visit, mortality was 11.1% [95% CI 6.9;17.9] among patients directly conveyed to a hospital and 5.8% [95% CI 4.0;8.5] among non-conveyed patients. Medical record review revealed that deaths in the non-conveyed group had happened among patients with ‘do-not-resuscitate’ orders, palliative care plans, severe comorbidities, age ≥ 90 years or nursing home residents. Conclusions The majority (87%) of the non-conveyed patients did not visit a hospital for the following three days after a paramedic’s assessment visit. The study implies that this newly established prehospital arrangement served as a kind of gatekeeper for the region’s hospitals in regard to patients suspected of COVID-19. The study also demonstrates that implementation of non-conveyance protocols should be accompanied by careful and regular evaluation to ensure patient safety

Acute care pathways for patients calling the out-of-hours services

Abstract Background In Western countries, patients with acute illness or injury out-of-hours (OOH) can call either emergency medical services (EMS) for emergencies or primary care services (OOH-PC) in less urgent situations. Callers initially choose which service to contact; whether this choice reflect the intended differences in urgency and severity is unknown. Hospital diagnoses and admission rates following an OOH service contact could elucidate this. We aimed to investigate and compare the prevalence of patient contacts, subsequent hospital contacts, and the age-related pattern of hospital diagnoses following an out-of-hours contact to EMS or OOH-PC services in Denmark. Methods Population-based observational cohort study including patients from two Danish regions with contact to EMS or OOH-PC in 2016. Hospital contacts were defined as short

Decision on non-conveyance of patients suspected of COVID-19 in a novel arrangement with assessment visits by paramedics at home

Abstract Background During the first weeks of the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the North Denmark emergency medical services authorised paramedics to assess patients suspected of COVID-19 at home, and then decide if conveyance to a hospital was required. The aim of this study was to describe the cohort of patients who were assessed at home and their outcomes in terms of subsequent hospital visits and short-term mortality. Methods This was a historical cohort study in the North Denmark Region with consecutive inclusion of patients suspected of COVID-19 who were referred to a paramedic’s assessment visit by their general practitioner or an out-of-hours general practitioner. The study was conducted from 16 March to 20 May 2020. The outcomes were the proportion of non-conveyed patients who subsequently visited a hospital within 72 hours of the paramedic’s assessment visit and mortality at 3, 7 and 30 days. Mortality was estimated using a Poisson regression model with robust variance estimation. Results During the study period, 587 patients with a median age of 75 (IQR 59–84) years were referred to a paramedic’s assessment visit. Three of four patients (76.5%, 95% CI 72.8;79.9) were non-conveyed, and 13.1% (95% CI 10.2;16.6) of the non-conveyed patients were subsequently referred to a hospital within 72 hours of the paramedic’s assessment visit. Within 30 days from the paramedic’s assessment visit, mortality was 11.1% [95% CI 6.9;17.9] among patients directly conveyed to a hospital and 5.8% [95% CI 4.0;8.5] among non-conveyed patients. Medical record review revealed that deaths in the non-conveyed group had happened among patients with ‘do-not-resuscitate’ orders, palliative care plans, severe comorbidities, age ≥ 90 years or nursing home residents. Conclusions The majority (87%) of the non-conveyed patients did not visit a hospital for the following three days after a paramedic’s assessment visit. The study implies that this newly established prehospital arrangement served as a kind of gatekeeper for the region’s hospitals in regard to patients suspected of COVID-19. The study also demonstrates that implementation of non-conveyance protocols should be accompanied by careful and regular evaluation to ensure patient safety

Acute care pathways for patients calling the out-of-hours services

Abstract Background In Western countries, patients with acute illness or injury out-of-hours (OOH) can call either emergency medical services (EMS) for emergencies or primary care services (OOH-PC) in less urgent situations. Callers initially choose which service to contact; whether this choice reflect the intended differences in urgency and severity is unknown. Hospital diagnoses and admission rates following an OOH service contact could elucidate this. We aimed to investigate and compare the prevalence of patient contacts, subsequent hospital contacts, and the age-related pattern of hospital diagnoses following an out-of-hours contact to EMS or OOH-PC services in Denmark. Methods Population-based observational cohort study including patients from two Danish regions with contact to EMS or OOH-PC in 2016. Hospital contacts were defined as short

Additional file 1 of Development of a multivariable prognostic PREdiction model for 1-year risk of FALLing in a cohort of community-dwelling older adults aged 75 years and above (PREFALL)

Additional file 1. Data supplements. The data supplement provides appendices 1–4 as referenced in the manuscript text

Additional file 2 of Acute care pathways for patients calling the out-of-hours services

Additional file 2 Patient age for short hospital contacts and admissions. Patient age (years) for short hospital contacts and admissions (mean (SD) N = 412,119

Additional file 1 of Acute care pathways for patients calling the out-of-hours services

Additional file 1 Top five most frequent subcategory diagnoses for short hospital contacts and admissions stratified by OOH service. Top five most frequent subcategory diagnoses for short hospital contacts and admissions stratified by OOH service, (%), (N = 404,202

Additional file 1 of Association between intravenous iron therapy and short-term mortality risk in older patients undergoing hip fracture surgery: an observational study

Additional file 1: Table S1. Causes of death among the patients who died within 30-days postoperatively. Table S2. Demographics of patients who died before hemoglobin level between day 14 to 30 was measured