Why do some studies find that CPR fraction is not a predictor of survival?

INTRODUCTION: An 80% chest compression fraction (CCF) during resuscitation is recommended. However, heterogeneous results in CCF studies were found during the 2015 Consensus on Science (CoS), which may be because chest compressions are stopped for a wide variety of reasons including providing lifesaving care, provider distraction, fatigue, confusion, and inability to perform lifesaving skills efficiently. OBJECTIVE: The effect of confounding variables on CCF to predict cardiac arrest survival. METHODS: A secondary analysis of emergency medical services (EMS) treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients who received manual compressions. CCF (percent of time patients received compressions) was determined from electronic defibrillator files. Two Sample Wilcoxon Rank Sum or regression determined a statistical association between CCF and age, gender, bystander CPR, public location, witnessed arrest, shockable rhythm, resuscitation duration, study site, and number of shocks. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to determine CCF effect on survival. RESULTS: Of 2132 patients with manual compressions 1997 had complete data. Shockable rhythm (p<0.001), public location (p<0.004), treatment duration (p<0.001), and number of shocks (p<0.001) were associated with lower CCF. Univariate logistic regression found that CCF was inversely associated with survival (OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.01-0.36). Multivariate regression controlling for factors associated with survival and/or CCF found that increasing CCF was associated with survival (OR 6.34; 95% CI 1.02-39.5). CONCLUSION: CCF cannot be looked at in isolation as a predictor of survival, but in the context of other resuscitation activities. When controlling for the effects of other resuscitation activities, a higher CCF is predictive of survival. This may explain the heterogeneity of findings during the CoS review

Pre-shock chest compression pause effects on termination of ventricular fibrillation/tachycardia and return of organized rhythm within mechanical and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Contains fulltext : 153679.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: Shorter manual chest compression pauses prior to defibrillation attempts is reported to improve the defibrillation success rate. Mechanical load-distributing band (LDB-) CPR enables shocks without compression pause. We studied pre-shock pause and termination of ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia 5s post-shock (TOF) and return of organized rhythm (ROOR) with LDB and manual (M-) CPR. METHODS: In a secondary analysis from the Circulation Improving Resuscitation Care trial, patients with initial shockable rhythm and interpretable post-shock rhythms were included. Pre-shock rhythm, pause duration (if any), and post-shock rhythm were obtained for each shock. Associations between TOF/ROOR and pre-shock pause duration, including no pause shocks with LDB-CPR, were analyzed with Chi-square test. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: For TOF and ROOR analyses we included 417 LDB-CPR patients with 1476 and 1438 shocks, and 495 M-CPR patients with 1839 and 1796 shocks, respectively. For first shocks with LDB-CPR, pre-shock pause was associated with TOF (p=0.049) with lowest TOF (77%) for shocks given without pre-shock compression pause. This association was not significant when all shocks were included (p=0.07) and not for ROOR. With M-CPR there were no significant associations between shock-related chest compression pause duration and TOF or ROOR. CONCLUSION: For first shocks with LDB-CPR, termination of fibrillation was associated with pre-shock pause duration. There was no association for the rate of return of organized rhythm. For M-CPR, where no shocks were given during continuous chest compressions, there were no associations between pre-shock pause duration and TOF or ROOR

Minimizing pre-shock chest compression pauses in a cardiopulmonary resuscitation cycle by performing an earlier rhythm analysis

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend 2min of CPR after defibrillation attempts followed by ECG analysis during chest compression pause. This pause may reduce the likelihood of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival. We have evaluated the possibility of analysing the rhythm earlier in the CPR cycle in an attempt to replace immediate pre-shock rhythm analysis. METHODS AND RESULTS: The randomized Circulation Improving Resuscitation Care (CIRC) trial included patients with out of hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac aetiology. Defibrillator data were used to categorize ECG rhythms as shockable or non-shockable 1min post-shock and immediately before next shock. ROSC was determined from end-tidal CO2, transthoracic impedance (TTI), and patient records. TTI was used to identify chest compressions. Artefact free ECGs were categorized during periods without chest compressions. Episodes without ECG or TTI data or with undeterminable ECG rhythm were excluded. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Of 1657 patients who received 3409 analysable shocks, the rhythm was shockable in 1529 (44.9%) cases 1min post-shock, 13 (0.9%) of which were no longer shockable immediately prior to next possible shock. Of these, three had converted to asystole, seven to PEA and three to ROSC. CONCLUSION: While a shockable rhythm 1min post-shock was present also immediately before next possible defibrillation attempt in most cases, three patients had ROSC. Studies are needed to document if moving the pre-shock rhythm analysis will increase shocks delivered to organized rhythms, and if it will increase shock success and survival

Observed survival benefit of mild therapeutic hypothermia reanalysing the Circulation Improving Resuscitation Care trial

Contains fulltext : 182629.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Mild therapeutic hypothermia is argued being beneficial for outcome after cardiac arrest. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of Circulation Improving Resuscitation Care (CIRC) trial data to assess if therapeutic cooling to 33 +/- 1 degrees C core temperature had an association with survival. Of 4231 adult, out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of presumed cardiac origin initially enrolled, eligibility criteria for therapeutic hypothermia were met by 1812. Logistic regression was undertaken in a stepwise fashion to account for the impact on outcome of each significant difference and for the variable of interest between the groups. RESULTS: Out-of- and in-hospital cooled were 263 (15%), only after admission cooled were 230 (13%) and not cooled were 357 (20%) patients. The group cooled out of- and in hospital had 98 (37%) survivors as compared to the groups cooled in hospital only [80 (35%)] and of those not cooled [68 (19%)]. After adjusting for known covariates (sex, age, witnessed cardiac arrest, no- and low-flow time, shockable initial rhythm, random allocation, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and percutaneous coronary intervention), the odds ratio for survival comparing no cooling to out-of- plus in-hospital cooling was 0.53 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.61, P < 0.001], and comparing to in-hospital cooling only was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.50-0.89, P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Mild therapeutic hypothermia initiated out of hospital and/or in hospital was associated with improved survival within this secondary analysis of the CIRC cohort compared to no therapeutic hypothermia

The European Union Directive on Clinical Research: present status of implementation in EU member states’ legislations with regard to the incompetent patient

A European-wide response is slowly emerging to the European Union Directive on Clinical Research (2001/20/CE) establishing good practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products [1]. The Directive was to have been incorporated and made effective in member states’ national laws by 1 May 2004. Among many other aspects of this wide-ranging Directive passed by the European Parliament on 4 April 2001 is the requirement for prior informed consent by a legal representative for research involving incompetent patients. A preliminary survey conducted by this group in 2002 demonstrated that many states did not possess clear definitions for a legal representative in matters of health, and in the absence of a waiver of informed consent none could validly recruit patients to clinical trials in emergency situations. The Directive therefore had the potential to make clinical research very difficult in intensive care, and impossible in emergency situations such as cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We now report current progress among member states in implementing the Directive