Chest Compressions Cause Recurrence of Ventricular Fibrillation After the First Successful Conversion by Defibrillation in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background-Unlike Resuscitation Guidelines (GL) 2000, GL2005 advise resuming cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) immediately after defibrillation. We hypothesized that immediate CPR resumption promotes earlier recurrence of ventricular fibrillation (VF). Methods and Results-This study used data of a prospective per-patient randomized controlled trial. Automated external defibrillators used by first responders were randomized to either (1) perform postshock analysis and prompt rescuers to a pulse check (GL2000), or (2) resume CPR immediately after defibrillation (GL2005). Continuous recordings of ECG and impedance signals were collected from all patients with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to whom a randomized automated external defibrillator was applied. We included patients with VF as their initial rhythm in whom CPR onset could be determined from the ECG and impedance signals. Time intervals are presented as median (Q1-to-Q3). Of 361 patients, 136 met the inclusion criteria: 68 were randomly assigned to GL2000 and 68 to GL2005. Rescuers resumed CPR 30 (21-to-39) and 8 (7-to-9) seconds, respectively, after the first shock that successfully terminated VF (P <0.001); VF recurred after 40 (21-to-76) and 21 (10-to-80) seconds, respectively (P <0.001). The time interval between start of CPR and VF recurrence was 6 (0-to-67) and 8 (3-to-61) seconds, respectively (P=0.88). The hazard ratio for VF recurrence in the first 2 seconds of CPR was 15.5 (95% confidence interval, 5.63 to 57.7) compared with before CPR resumption. After more than 8 seconds of CPR, the hazard of VF recurrence was similar to before CPR resumption. Conclusions-Early CPR resumption after defibrillation causes early VF recurrenc

Barsten in het rookverbod in horecagelegenheden

The first exemption to the comprehensive ban on smoking in public places in the Netherlands was made on 14 May 2009. The exemption was based on a technicality in the wording of the law, and could potentially lead to further exemptions to the smoking ban being made. The authors argue that focusing solely on the wording is a sidetrack in the main discussion. Furthermore, they argue that the smoking ban only bans smoking in public places and that the individual's right to perform actions potentially hazardous to their own health should not be limited, as long as it puts no-one else at risk. That is exactly what smoking in public places does. They also argue that other legislative measures comparable to the smoking ban are already in effect. In conclusion, the ban on smoking in public places does not remove the right to smoke, but serves to create a healthier social environment for everyon

Time needed for a regional emergency medical system to implement resuscitation Guidelines 2005-The Netherlands experience

Introduction: In December 2005, updated resuscitation Guidelines (G) were introduced worldwide and will be revised again in 2010. This study sought to elucidate how long it takes to implement new guidelines. Methods: This was a prospective observational study. From July 2005 to January 2008, we included all patients with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of suspected cardiac cause. We analyzed Emergency Medical System (EMS) Guideline usage via defibrillator recordings of the continuous ECG and impedance signals. We excluded patients with missing or otherwise unusable ECGs. All shocks and CPR cycles were individually classified. The same Guideline needed to be applied for at least 75% of all shocks and CPR cycles. if no shocks had been given, continuous ECGs were classified by its CPR status only. Continuous ECGs were classified as G1992, G2000 or G2005. If at least 75% of the shocks were given according to G2000 and at least 75% of the CPR was according to G2005, the Guideline protocol was classified as intermediate. All analyses that did not fulfil any Guideline criteria were classified as indeterminate. Results: Of 1672 analyzable resuscitations, 31 (2%) used G1992, 826 (49%) G2000, 608 (36%) G2005, and 125 (7%) intermediate Guidelines. The Guideline protocol could not be identified for the remaining 81 (5%) patients. It took 17 months (from publication) until EMS personnel applied GL2005 in over 80% of cases. Conclusion: Our experience shows it took one-and-a-half years to effectively implement new resuscitation Guidelines. We believe improvements in implementation can shorten this to six months. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserve

Global incidences of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and survival rates: Systematic review of 67 prospective studies

Aim: The aim of this investigation was to estimate and contrast the global incidence and outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) to provide a better understanding of the variability in risk and survival of OHCA. Methods: We conducted a review of published English-language articles about incidence of OHCA, available through MEDLINE and EmBase. For studies including adult patients and both adult and paediatric patients, we used Utstein data reporting guidelines to calculate, summarize and compare incidences per 100,000 person-years of attended OHCAs, treated OHCAs, treated OHCAs with a cardiac cause, treated OHCA with ventricular fibrillation (VF), and survival-to-hospital discharge rates following OHCA. Results: Sixty-seven studies from Europe, North America, Asia or Australia met inclusion criteria. The weighted incidence estimate was significantly higher in studies including adults than in those including adults and paediatrics for treated OHCAs (62.3 vs 34.7; P <0.001); and for treated OHCAs with a cardiac cause (54.6 vs 40.8; P = 0.004). Neither survival to discharge rates nor VF survival to discharge rates differed statistically significant among studies. The incidence of treated OHCAs was higher in North America (54.6) than in Europe (35.0), Asia (28.3), and Australia (44.0) (P <0.001). In Asia, the percentage of VF and survival to discharge rates were lower (11% and 2%, respectively) than those in Europe (35% and 9%, respectively), North America (28% and 6%, respectively), or Australia (40% and 11%. respectively) (P <0.001, P <0.001). Conclusions: OHCA incidence and outcome varies greatly around the globe. A better understanding of the variability is fundamental to improving OHCA prevention and resuscitation. (c) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserve

Importance of the First Link Description and Recognition of an Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in an Emergency Call

Background-The content of emergency calls for suspected cardiac arrest is rarely analyzed. This study investigated the recognition of a cardiac arrest by dispatchers and its influence on survival rates. Methods and Results-During 8 months, voice recordings of 14 800 consecutive emergency calls were collected to audit content and cardiac arrest recognition. The presence of cardiac arrest during the call was assessed from the ambulance crew report. Included calls were placed by laypersons on site and did not involve trauma. Prevalence of cardiac arrest was 3.0%. Of the 285 cardiac arrests, 82 (29%) were not recognized during the call, and 64 of 267 suspected calls (24%) were not cardiac arrest. We analyzed a random sample (n = 506) of 9230 control calls. Three-month survival was 5% when a cardiac arrest was not recognized versus 14% when it was recognized (P=0.04). If the dispatcher did not recognize the cardiac arrest, the ambulance was dispatched a mean of 0.94 minute later (P <0.001) and arrived 1.40 minutes later on scene (P=0.01) compared with recognized calls. The main reason for not recognizing the cardiac arrest was not asking if the patient was breathing (42 of 82) and not asking to describe the type of breathing (16 of 82). Normal breathing was never mentioned in true cardiac arrest calls. A logistic regression model identified spontaneous trigger words like facial color that could contribute to cardiac arrest recognition (odds ratio, 7.8 to 9.7). Conclusions-Not recognizing a cardiac arrest during emergency calls decreases survival. Spontaneous words that the caller uses to describe the patient may aid in faster and better recognition of a cardiac arrest. (Circulation. 2009; 119: 2096-2102.

Time in Recurrent Ventricular Fibrillation and Survival After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background-Current resuscitation guidelines (2005 guidelines [G2005]) accelerate ventricular fibrillation (VF) recurrence. We investigated whether patients resuscitated under G2005 spend more time in VF and have better survival rates than patients treated under the 2000 guidelines (G2000). Methods and Results-We analyzed continuous ECG recordings of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests prospectively collected from January 2006 to January 2008. Patients treated according to G2000 (n = 82) or G2005 (n = 240) with VF as initial rhythm were included. We measured the total time a patient was in recurrent VF (the sum of all intervals from each onset of recurrent VF to each next successful shock) and the time a patient was in initial VF (time interval from rescuer arrival to first effective shock). The primary outcome measure was neurologically intact survival to discharge. The median time in recurrent VF was 2.7 minutes (quartile 1 to 3, 0.4 to 9.0 minutes) under G2000 versus 4.0 minutes (quartile 1 to 3, 0.2 to 11.6 minutes) under G2005 (P = 0.03). Median time in initial VF was 2.7 minutes (quartile 1 to 3, 1.7 to 4.3 minutes) versus 3.9 minutes (quartile 1 to 3, 2.3 to 6.5 minutes), respectively (P <0.001). Increased time in recurrent VF was significantly associated with decreased neurologically intact survival in both G2000 use (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 0.97; P=0.001) and G2005 use (odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.90 to 0.99; P=0.02). Neurologically intact survival decreased significantly with increasing time in initial VF under G2000 (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.99; P=0.04). This observation was nonexistent in patients treated under G2005. Neurologically intact survival was 29% (82 of 282) under G2000 versus 27% (65 of 240) under G2005 (P=0.61). Conclusions-With G2005, the time in recurrent VF remains associated with worse outcome. Studies of immediate defibrillation for recurrent VF are warranted. (Circulation. 2010;122:1101-1108.