Does a Transition to Single-Occupancy Patient Rooms Affect the Incidence and Outcome of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrests?

Background: It is proposed that patients in single-occupancy patient rooms (SPRs) carry a risk of less surveillance by nursing and medical staff and that resuscitation teams need longer to arrive in case of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). Higher incidences of IHCA and worse outcomes after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may be the result.Objectives: Our study examines whether there is a difference in incidence and outcomes of IHCA before and after the transition from a hospital with multibedded rooms to solely SPRs.Methods: In this prospective observational study in a Dutch university hospital, as a part of the Resuscitation Outcomes in the Netherlands study, we reviewed all cases of IHCA on general adult wards in a period of 16.5 months before to 16.5 months after the transition to SPRs.Results: During the study period, 102 CPR attempts were performed: 51 in the former hospital and 51 in the new hospital. Median time between last-seen-well and start basic life support did not differ significantly, nor did median time to arrival of the CPR team. Survival rates to hospital discharge were 30.0% versus 29.4% of resuscitated patients (p = 1.00), with comparable neurological outcomes: 86.7% of discharged patients in the new hospital had Cerebral Performance Category 1 (good cerebral performance) versus 46.7% in the former hospital (p = .067). When corrected for telemetry monitoring, these differences were still nonsignificant.Conclusions: The transition to a 100% SPR hospital had no negative impact on incidence, survival rates, and neurological outcomes of IHCAs on general adult wards

One-year survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: In-hospital cardiac arrest is a major adverse event with an incidence of 1–6/1000 admissions. It has been poorly researched and data on survival is limited. The outcome of interest in IHCA research is predominantly survival to discharge, however recent guidelines warrant for more long-term outcomes. In this systematic review we sought to quantitatively summarize one-year survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis we performed a systematic search of all published data on one-year survival after IHCA up to March 9th, 2018. Results of the meta-analyses are presented as pooled proportions with corresponding 95% prediction intervals (95%PI). Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistic and the DerSimonian–Laird estimator for τ2. Subgroup analyses were performed for cardiac and non-

Eligibility of cardiac arrest patients for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation and their clinical characteristics:a retrospective two-centre study

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Sudden cardiac arrest has a high incidence and often leads to death. A treatment option that might improve the outcomes in refractory cardiac arrest is Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (ECPR).OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the number of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients eligible to ECPR and identifies clinical characteristics that may help to identify which patients benefit the most from ECPR.DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective two-centre study was conducted in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. All IHCA and OHCA patients between 1 January 2017 and 1 January 2020 were screened for eligibility to ECPR. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients eligible to ECPR and patients treated with ECPR. The secondary outcome was the comparison of the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients eligible to ECPR treated with conventional Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CCPR) vs. those of patients treated with ECPR.MAIN RESULTS: Out of 1246 included patients, 412 were IHCA patients and 834 were OHCA patients. Of the IHCA patients, 41 (10.0%) were eligible to ECPR, of whom 20 (48.8%) patients were actually treated with ECPR. Of the OHCA patients, 83 (9.6%) were eligible to ECPR, of whom 23 (27.7%) were actually treated with ECPR. In the group IHCA patients eligible to ECPR, no statistically significant difference in survival was found between patients treated with CCPR and patients treated with ECPR (hospital survival 19.0% vs. 15.0% respectively, 4.0% survival difference 95% confidence interval -21.3 to 28.7%). In the group OHCA patients eligible to ECPR, no statistically significant difference in-hospital survival was found between patients treated with CCPR and patients treated with ECPR (13.3% vs. 21.7% respectively, 8.4% survival difference 95% confidence interval -30.3 to 10.2%).CONCLUSION: This retrospective study shows that around 10% of cardiac arrest patients are eligible to ECPR. Less than half of these patients eligible to ECPR were actually treated with ECPR in both IHCA and OHCA.</p

Cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation after in-hospital cardiac arrest

Background: This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest treatment. Methods: A decision tree and Markov model were constructed based on current literature. The model was conditional on age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and sex. Three treatment strategies were considered: ECPR for patients with an Age-Combined Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI) below different thresholds (2–4), ECPR for everyone (EALL), and ECPR for no one (NE). Cost-effectiveness was assessed with costs per quality-of-life adjusted life years (QALY). Measurements and main results: Treating eligible patients with an ACCI below 2 points costs 8394 (95% CI: 4922–14,911) euro per extra QALY per IHCA patient; treating eligible patients with an ACCI below 3 costs 8825 (95% CI: 5192–15,777) euro per extra QALY per IHCA patient; treating eligible patients with an ACCI below 4 costs 9311 (95% CI: 5478–16,690) euro per extra QALY per IHCA patient; treating every eligible patient with ECPR costs 10,818 (95% CI: 6357–19,400) euro per extra QALY per IHCA patient. For WTP thresholds of 0–9500 euro, NE has the highest probability of being the most cost-effective strategy. For WTP thresholds between 9500 and 12,500, treating eligible patients with an ACCI below 4 has the highest probability of being the most cost-effective strategy. For WTP thresholds of 12,500 or higher, EALL was found to have the highest probability of being the most cost-effective strategy. Conclusions: Given that conventional WTP thresholds in Europe and North-America lie between 50,000–100,000 euro or U.S. dollars, ECPR can be considered a cost-effective treatment after in-hospital cardiac arrest from a healthcare perspective. More research is necessary to validate the effectiveness of ECPR, with a focus on the long-term effects of complications of ECPR

Resuscitation Outcomes in the Netherlands: or ROUTINE- project

This thesis describes the epidemiology, practices and outcomes associated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation for in-hospital cardiac arrest. Outcomes are described in terms of survival and health-related quality of life. The thesis also desbribes differences between patient categories and between various hospitals in terms of chances of survival

Does a Transition to Single-Occupancy Patient Rooms Affect the Incidence and Outcome of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrests?

Background: It is proposed that patients in single-occupancy patient rooms (SPRs) carry a risk of less surveillance by nursing and medical staff and that resuscitation teams need longer to arrive in case of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). Higher incidences of IHCA and worse outcomes after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may be the result.Objectives: Our study examines whether there is a difference in incidence and outcomes of IHCA before and after the transition from a hospital with multibedded rooms to solely SPRs.Methods: In this prospective observational study in a Dutch university hospital, as a part of the Resuscitation Outcomes in the Netherlands study, we reviewed all cases of IHCA on general adult wards in a period of 16.5 months before to 16.5 months after the transition to SPRs.Results: During the study period, 102 CPR attempts were performed: 51 in the former hospital and 51 in the new hospital. Median time between last-seen-well and start basic life support did not differ significantly, nor did median time to arrival of the CPR team. Survival rates to hospital discharge were 30.0% versus 29.4% of resuscitated patients (p = 1.00), with comparable neurological outcomes: 86.7% of discharged patients in the new hospital had Cerebral Performance Category 1 (good cerebral performance) versus 46.7% in the former hospital (p = .067). When corrected for telemetry monitoring, these differences were still nonsignificant.Conclusions: The transition to a 100% SPR hospital had no negative impact on incidence, survival rates, and neurological outcomes of IHCAs on general adult wards