Andrew H. Travers
University of Alberta
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Andrew H. Travers.
Circulation | 2010
John M. Field; Mary Fran Hazinski; Michael R. Sayre; Leon Chameides; Stephen M. Schexnayder; Robin Hemphill; Ricardo A. Samson; John Kattwinkel; Robert A. Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Diana M. Cave; Edward C. Jauch; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Robert W. Neumar; Mary Ann Peberdy; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Elizabeth Sinz; Andrew H. Travers; Marc D. Berg; John E. Billi; Brian Eigel; Robert W. Hickey; Monica E. Kleinman; Mark S. Link; Laurie J. Morrison; Robert E. O'Connor; Michael Shuster; Clifton W. Callaway; Brett Cucchiara; Jeffrey D. Ferguson
The goal of therapy for bradycardia or tachycardia is to rapidly identify and treat patients who are hemodynamically unstable or symptomatic due to the arrhythmia. Drugs or, when appropriate, pacing may be used to control unstable or symptomatic bradycardia. Cardioversion or drugs or both may be used to control unstable or symptomatic tachycardia. ACLS providers should closely monitor stable patients pending expert consultation and should be prepared to aggressively treat those with evidence of decompensation.
Circulation | 2010
Mary Fran Hazinski; Jerry P. Nolan; John E. Billi; Bernd W. Böttiger; Leo Bossaert; Allan R. de Caen; Charles D. Deakin; Saul Drajer; Brian Eigel; Robert W. Hickey; Ian Jacobs; Monica E. Kleinman; Walter Kloeck; Rudolph W. Koster; Swee Han Lim; Mary E. Mancini; William H. Montgomery; Peter Morley; Laurie J. Morrison; Vinay Nadkarni; Robert E. O'Connor; Kazuo Okada; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Michael R. Sayre; Michael Shuster; Jasmeet Soar; Kjetil Sunde; Andrew H. Travers; Jonathan Wyllie; David Zideman
The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) was founded on November 22, 1992, and currently includes representatives from the American Heart Association (AHA), the European Resuscitation Council (ERC), the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada (HSFC), the Australian and New Zealand Committee on Resuscitation (ANZCOR), Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa (RCSA), the InterAmerican Heart Foundation (IAHF), and the Resuscitation Council of Asia (RCA). Its mission is to identify and review international science and knowledge relevant to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and emergency cardiovascular care (ECC) and when there is consensus to offer treatment recommendations. Emergency cardiovascular care includes all responses necessary to treat sudden life-threatening events affecting the cardiovascular and respiratory systems, with a particular focus on sudden cardiac arrest. In 1999, the AHA hosted the first ILCOR conference to evaluate resuscitation science and develop common resuscitation guidelines. The conference recommendations were published in the International Guidelines 2000 for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care .1 Since 2000, researchers from the ILCOR member councils have evaluated resuscitation science in 5-year cycles. The conclusions and recommendations of the 2005 International Consensus Conference on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations were published at the end of 2005.2,3 The most recent International Consensus Conference was held in Dallas in February 2010, and this publication contains the consensus science statements and treatment recommendations developed with input from the invited participants. The goal of every resuscitation organization and resuscitation expert is to prevent premature cardiovascular death. When cardiac arrest or life-threatening emergencies occur, prompt and skillful response can make the difference between life and death and between intact survival and debilitation. This document summarizes the 2010 evidence evaluation of published science about the recognition and response to sudden life-threatening events, particularly sudden cardiac arrest and periarrest events in …
Circulation | 2010
Andrew H. Travers; Thomas D. Rea; Bentley J. Bobrow; Dana P. Edelson; Robert A. Berg; Michael R. Sayre; Marc D. Berg; Leon Chameides; Robert E. O'Connor; Robert A. Swor
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a series of lifesaving actions that improve the chance of survival following cardiac arrest.1 Although the optimal approach to CPR may vary, depending on the rescuer, the victim, and the available resources, the fundamental challenge remains: how to achieve early and effective CPR. Given this challenge, recognition of arrest and prompt action by the rescuer continue to be priorities for the 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC. This chapter provides an overview of cardiac arrest epidemiology, the principles behind each link in the Chain of Survival, an overview of the core components of CPR (see Table 1), and the approaches of the 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC to improving the quality of CPR. The goal of this chapter is to integrate resuscitation science with real-world practice in order to improve the outcomes of CPR. View this table: Table 1. Summary of Key BLS Components for Adults, Children and Infants Despite important advances in prevention, cardiac arrest remains a substantial public health problem and a leading cause of death in many parts of the world.2 Cardiac arrest occurs both in and out of the hospital. In the US and Canada, approximately 350 000 people/year (approximately half of them in-hospital) suffer a cardiac arrest and receive attempted resuscitation.3,–,7 This estimate does not include the substantial number of victims who suffer an arrest without attempted resuscitation. While attempted resuscitation is not always appropriate, there are many lives and life-years lost because appropriate resuscitation is not attempted. The estimated incidence of EMS-treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the US and Canada is about 50 to 55/100 000 persons/year and approximately 25% of these present with pulseless ventricular arrhythmias.3,8 The estimated incidence of in-hospital cardiac arrest is 3 to 6/1000 admissions4,– …
Circulation | 2010
John M. Field; Mary Fran Hazinski; Michael R. Sayre; Leon Chameides; Stephen M. Schexnayder; Robin Hemphill; Ricardo A. Samson; John Kattwinkel; Robert A. Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Diana M. Cave; Edward C. Jauch; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Robert W. Neumar; Mary Ann Peberdy; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Elizabeth Sinz; Andrew H. Travers; Marc D. Berg; John E. Billi; Brian Eigel; Robert W. Hickey; Monica E. Kleinman; Mark S. Link; Laurie J. Morrison; Robert E. O'Connor; Michael Shuster; Clifton W. Callaway; Brett Cucchiara; Jeffrey D. Ferguson
Mary Fran Hazinski, Co-Chair*; Jerry P. Nolan, Co-Chair*; John E. Billi; Bernd W. Böttiger; Leo Bossaert; Allan R. de Caen; Charles D. Deakin; Saul Drajer; Brian Eigel; Robert W. Hickey; Ian Jacobs; Monica E. Kleinman; Walter Kloeck; Rudolph W. Koster; Swee Han Lim; Mary E. Mancini; William H. Montgomery; Peter T. Morley; Laurie J. Morrison; Vinay M. Nadkarni; Robert E. O’Connor; Kazuo Okada; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Michael R. Sayre; Michael Shuster; Jasmeet Soar; Kjetil Sunde; Andrew H. Travers; Jonathan Wyllie; David Zideman
Circulation | 2015
Mary Fran Hazinski; Jerry P. Nolan; Richard Aickin; Farhan Bhanji; John E. Billi; Clifton W. Callaway; Maaret Castrén; Allan R. de Caen; Jose Maria E. Ferrer; Judith Finn; Lana M. Gent; Russell E. Griffin; Sandra Iverson; Eddy Lang; Swee Han Lim; Ian Maconochie; William H. Montgomery; Peter Morley; Vinay Nadkarni; Robert W. Neumar; Nikolaos I. Nikolaou; Gavin D. Perkins; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Eunice M. Singletary; Jasmeet Soar; Andrew H. Travers; Michelle Welsford; Jonathan Wyllie; David Zideman
The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Advanced Life Support (ALS) Task Force performed detailed systematic reviews based on the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies1 and using the methodological approach proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group.2 Questions to be addressed (using the PICO [population, intervention, comparator, outcome] format)3 were prioritized by ALS Task Force members (by voting). Prioritization criteria included awareness of significant new data and new controversies or questions about practice. Questions about topics no longer relevant to contemporary practice or where little new research has occurred were given lower priority. The ALS Task Force prioritized 42 PICO questions for review. With the assistance of information specialists, a detailed search for relevant articles was performed in each of 3 online databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library). By using detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria, articles were screened for further evaluation. The reviewers for each question created a reconciled risk of bias assessment for each of the included studies, using state-of-the-art tools: Cochrane for randomized controlled trials (RCTs),4 Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 for studies of diagnostic accuracy,5 and GRADE for observational studies that inform both therapy and prognosis questions.6 GRADE evidence profile tables7 were then created to facilitate an evaluation of the evidence in support of each of the critical and important outcomes. The quality of the evidence (or confidence in the estimate of the effect) was categorized as high, moderate, low, or very low,8 based on the study methodologies and the 5 core GRADE domains of risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and other considerations (including publication bias).9 These evidence profile tables were then used to create a …
Circulation | 2010
Robert E. O'Connor; William J. Brady; Steven C. Brooks; Deborah B. Diercks; Jonathan R. Egan; Chris A. Ghaemmaghami; Venu Menon; Brian J. O'Neil; Andrew H. Travers; Demetris Yannopoulos
There has been tremendous progress in reducing disability and death from ACS. But many patients still die before reaching the hospital because patients and family members fail to recognize the signs of ACS and fail to activate the EMS system. Once the patient with ACS contacts the healthcare system, providers must focus on support of cardiorespiratory function, rapid transport, and early classification of the patient based on ECG characteristics. Patients with STEMI require prompt reperfusion; the shorter the interval from symptom onset to reperfusion, the greater the benefit. In the STEMI population, mechanical reperfusion with percutaenous coronary intervention improves survival and decreases major cardiovascular events compared to fibrinolysis. Patients with UA/NSTEMI (non-STEMI ACS) or nonspecific or normal ECGs require risk stratification and appropriate monitoring and therapy. Healthcare providers can improve survival rates and myocardial function of patients with ACS by providing skilled, efficient, and coordinated out-of-hospital and in-hospital care.
Circulation | 2015
Robert W. Neumar; Michael Shuster; Clifton W. Callaway; Lana M. Gent; Dianne L. Atkins; Farhan Bhanji; Steven C. Brooks; Allan R. de Caen; Michael W. Donnino; Jose Maria E. Ferrer; Monica E. Kleinman; Steven L. Kronick; Eric J. Lavonas; Mark S. Link; Mary E. Mancini; Laurie J. Morrison; Robert E. O'Connor; Ricardo A. Samson; Steven M. Schexnayder; Eunice M. Singletary; Elizabeth Sinz; Andrew H. Travers; Myra H. Wyckoff; Mary Fran Hazinski
Publication of the 2015 American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) marks 49 years since the first CPR guidelines were published in 1966 by an Ad Hoc Committee on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation established by the National Academy of Sciences of the National Research Council.1 Since that time, periodic revisions to the Guidelines have been published by the AHA in 1974,2 1980,3 1986,4 1992,5 2000,6 2005,7 2010,8 and now 2015. The 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC provided a comprehensive review of evidence-based recommendations for resuscitation, ECC, and first aid. The 2015 AHA Guidelines Update for CPR and ECC focuses on topics with significant new science or ongoing controversy, and so serves as an update to the 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC rather than a complete revision of the Guidelines. The purpose of this Executive Summary is to provide an overview of the new or revised recommendations contained in the 2015 Guidelines Update. This document does not contain extensive reference citations; the reader is referred to Parts 3 through 9 for more detailed review of the scientific evidence and the recommendations on which they are based. There have been several changes to the organization of the 2015 Guidelines Update compared with 2010. “Part 4: Systems of Care and Continuous Quality Improvement” is an important new Part that focuses on the integrated structures and processes that are necessary to create systems of care for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital resuscitation capable of measuring and improving quality and patient outcomes. This Part replaces the “CPR Overview” Part of the 2010 Guidelines. Another new Part of the 2015 Guidelines Update is “Part 14: Education,” which focuses on evidence-based recommendations to facilitate widespread, consistent, efficient and effective implementation …
Circulation | 2010
Michael R. Sayre; Rudolph W. Koster; Martin Botha; Diana M. Cave; Michael T. Cudnik; Antony J Handley; Tetsuo Hatanaka; Mary Fran Hazinski; Ian Jacobs; Koenraad G. Monsieurs; Peter Morley; Jerry P. Nolan; Andrew H. Travers
Note From the Writing Group: Throughout this article, the reader will notice combinations of superscripted letters and numbers (eg, “Initial Recognition ”). These callouts are hyperlinked to evidence-based worksheets, which were used in the development of this article. An appendix of worksheets, applicable to this article, is located at the end of the text. The worksheets are available in PDF format and are open access.
Circulation | 2015
Andrew H. Travers; Gavin D. Perkins; Robert A. Berg; Maaret Castrén; Julie Considine; Raffo Escalante; Raúl J. Gazmuri; Rudolph W. Koster; Swee Han Lim; Kevin J. Nation; Theresa M. Olasveengen; Tetsuya Sakamoto; Michael R. Sayre; Alfredo Sierra; Michael A. Smyth; David Stanton; Christian Vaillancourt; Joost Bierens; Emmanuelle Bourdon; Hermann Brugger; Jason E. Buick; Manya Charette; Sung Phil Chung; Keith Couper; Mohamud Daya; Ian R. Drennan; Jan Thorsten Gräsner; Ahamed H. Idris; E. Brooke Lerner; Husein Lockhat
This review comprises the most extensive literature search and evidence evaluation to date on the most important international BLS interventions, diagnostics, and prognostic factors for cardiac arrest victims. It reemphasizes that the critical lifesaving steps of BLS are (1) prevention, (2) immediate recognition and activation of the emergency response system, (3) early high-quality CPR, and (4) rapid defibrillation for shockable rhythms. Highlights in prevention indicate the rational and judicious deployment of search-and-rescue operations in drowning victims and the importance of education on opioid-associated emergencies. Other 2015 highlights in recognition and activation include the critical role of dispatcher recognition and dispatch-assisted chest compressions, which has been demonstrated in multiple international jurisdictions with consistent improvements in cardiac arrest survival. Similar to the 2010 ILCOR BLS treatment recommendations, the importance of high quality was reemphasized across all measures of CPR quality: rate, depth, recoil, and minimal chest compression pauses, with a universal understanding that we all should be providing chest compressions to all victims of cardiac arrest. This review continued to focus on the interface of BLS sequencing and ensuring high-quality CPR with other important BLS interventions, such as ventilation and defibrillation. In addition, this consensus statement highlights the importance of EMS systems, which employ bundles of care focusing on providing high-quality chest compressions while extricating the patient from the scene to the next level of care. Highlights in defibrillation indicate the global importance of increasing the number of sites with public-access defibrillation programs. Whereas the 2010 ILCOR Consensus on Science provided important direction for the “what” in resuscitation (ie, what to do), the 2015 consensus has begun with the GRADE methodology to provide direction for the quality of resuscitation. We hope that resuscitation councils and other stakeholders will be able to translate this body of knowledge of international consensus statements to build their own effective resuscitation guidelines.
Circulation | 2012
E. Brooke Lerner; Thomas D. Rea; Bentley J. Bobrow; Joe E. Acker; Robert A. Berg; Steven C. Brooks; David C. Cone; Lana M. Gent; Greg Mears; Vinay Nadkarni; Robert E. O'Connor; Jerald Potts; Michael R. Sayre; Robert A. Swor; Andrew H. Travers
Each year, millions of people around the world experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), a condition characterized by unexpected cardiovascular collapse.1,2 OHCA is a leading cause of death. The incidence of treated OHCA is ≈50 to 60 per 100 000 person-years and is comparable throughout many parts of the world. Resuscitation of these patients is challenging and requires a coordinated set of rescuer actions termed the “Chain of Survival.” The links in the Chain of Survival are immediate recognition of cardiac arrest and activation of the emergency response system, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), rapid defibrillation, effective advanced life support, and integrated post–cardiac arrest care.3 These actions involve the participation of a spectrum of rescuers, including family members, bystanders, emergency medical service (EMS) dispatchers, pre–hospital care providers, and hospital-based personnel; each group of rescuers has specific motivations, responsibilities, and skills. Unfortunately, in most communities in the United States and Canada, only 5% to 10% of all OHCA patients in whom resuscitation is attempted survive to discharge from the hospital. In contrast, survival rates can approach 20% (50% for witnessed ventricular fibrillation) in communities where the Chain of Survival is strong.4 Efforts to improve survival from OHCA should be aimed at strengthening each link in the Chain of Survival. An important underpinning of successful resuscitation is the interdependence of each of these links. Specifically, the early links, those involving bystanders (immediate emergency activation and early bystander CPR), are essential for the effectiveness of subsequent links. Thus, efforts that can improve early recognition of OHCA and increase bystander CPR are likely to improve survival from OHCA. When a bystander calls the community emergency response number (eg, 911 in the United States) to request medical aid, the call creates an opportunity to improve both identification of OHCA and provision of …