Comilla Sasson

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics'2017 Update: A Report from the American Heart Association

WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FAHA Michael J. Blaha, MD, MPH Stephanie E. Chiuve, ScD Mary Cushman, MD, MSc, FAHA Sandeep R. Das, MD, MPH, FAHA Rajat Deo, MD, MTR Sarah D. de Ferranti, MD, MPH James Floyd, MD, MS Myriam Fornage, PhD, FAHA Cathleen Gillespie, MS Carmen R. Isasi, MD, PhD, FAHA Monik C. Jiménez, ScD, SM Lori Chaffin Jordan, MD, PhD Suzanne E. Judd, PhD Daniel Lackland, DrPH, FAHA Judith H. Lichtman, PhD, MPH, FAHA Lynda Lisabeth, PhD, MPH, FAHA Simin Liu, MD, ScD, FAHA Chris T. Longenecker, MD Rachel H. Mackey, PhD, MPH, FAHA Kunihiro Matsushita, MD, PhD, FAHA Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, FAHA Michael E. Mussolino, PhD, FAHA Khurram Nasir, MD, MPH, FAHA Robert W. Neumar, MD, PhD, FAHA Latha Palaniappan, MD, MS, FAHA Dilip K. Pandey, MBBS, MS, PhD, FAHA Ravi R. Thiagarajan, MD, MPH Mathew J. Reeves, PhD Matthew Ritchey, PT, DPT, OCS, MPH Carlos J. Rodriguez, MD, MPH, FAHA Gregory A. Roth, MD, MPH Wayne D. Rosamond, PhD, FAHA Comilla Sasson, MD, PhD, FAHA Amytis Towfighi, MD Connie W. Tsao, MD, MPH Melanie B. Turner, MPH Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, FAHA Jenifer H. Voeks, PhD Joshua Z. Willey, MD, MS John T. Wilkins, MD Jason HY. Wu, MSc, PhD, FAHA Heather M. Alger, PhD Sally S. Wong, PhD, RD, CDN, FAHA Paul Muntner, PhD, MHSc On behalf of the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update

Predictors of Survival From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background—Prior studies have identified key predictors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but differences exist in the magnitude of these findings. In this meta-analysis, we evaluated the strength of associations between OHCA and key factors (event witnessed by a bystander or emergency medical services [EMS], provision of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR], initial cardiac rhythm, or the return of spontaneous circulation). We also examined trends in OHCA survival over time. Methods and Results—An electronic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane DSR, DARE, ACP Journal Club, and CCTR was conducted (January 1, 1950 to August 21, 2008) for studies reporting OHCA of presumed cardiac etiology in adults. Data were extracted from 79 studies involving 142 740 patients. The pooled survival rate to hospital admission was 23.8% (95% CI, 21.1 to 26.6) and to hospital discharge was 7.6% (95% CI, 6.7 to 8.4). Stratified by baseline rates, survival to hospital discharge was more likely among those: witnessed by a bystander (6.4% to 13.5%), witnessed by EMS (4.9% to 18.2%), who received bystander CPR (3.9% to 16.1%), were found in ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia (14.8% to 23.0%), or achieved return of spontaneous circulation (15.5% to 33.6%). Although 53% (95% CI, 45.0% to 59.9%) of events were witnessed by a bystander, only 32% (95% CI, 26.7% to 37.8%) received bystander CPR. The number needed to treat to save 1 life ranged from 16 to 23 for EMS-witnessed arrests, 17 to 71 for bystander-witnessed, and 24 to 36 for those receiving bystander CPR, depending on baseline survival rates. The aggregate survival rate of OHCA (7.6%) has not significantly changed in almost 3 decades. Conclusions—Overall survival from OHCA has been stable for almost 30 years, as have the strong associations between key predictors and survival. Because most OHCA events are witnessed, efforts to improve survival should focus on prompt delivery of interventions of known effectiveness by those who witness the event.

Rapid Response Teams: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Although rapid response teams (RRTs) increasingly have been adopted by hospitals, their effectiveness in reducing hospital mortality remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effect of RRTs on reducing cardiopulmonary arrest and hospital mortality rates. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of studies published from January 1, 1950, through November 31, 2008, using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, and all Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews. Randomized clinical trials and prospective studies of RRTs that reported data on changes in the primary outcome of hospital mortality or the secondary outcome of cardiopulmonary arrest cases were included. RESULTS Eighteen studies from 17 publications (with 1 treated as 2 separate studies) were identified, involving nearly 1.3 million hospital admissions. Implementation of an RRT in adults was associated with a 33.8% reduction in rates of cardiopulmonary arrest outside the intensive care unit (ICU) (relative risk [RR], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.80) but was not associated with lower hospital mortality rates (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.84-1.09). In children, implementation of an RRT was associated with a 37.7% reduction in rates of cardiopulmonary arrest outside the ICU (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46-0.84) and a 21.4% reduction in hospital mortality rates (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.98). The pooled mortality estimate in children, however, was not robust to sensitivity analyses. Moreover, studies frequently found evidence that deaths were prevented out of proportion to reductions in cases of cardiopulmonary arrest, raising questions about mechanisms of improvement. CONCLUSION Although RRTs have broad appeal, robust evidence to support their effectiveness in reducing hospital mortality is lacking.

Prehospital Termination of Resuscitation in Cases of Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

CONTEXT Identifying patients in the out-of-hospital setting who have no realistic hope of surviving an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest could enhance utilization of scarce health care resources. OBJECTIVE To validate 2 out-of-hospital termination-of-resuscitation rules developed by the Ontario Prehospital Life Support (OPALS) study group, one for use by responders providing basic life support (BLS) and the other for those providing advanced life support (ALS). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Retrospective cohort study using surveillance data prospectively submitted by emergency medical systems and hospitals in 8 US cities to the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES) between October 1, 2005, and April 30, 2008. Case patients were 7235 adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; of these, 5505 met inclusion criteria. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Specificity and positive predictive value of each termination-of-resuscitation rule for identifying patients who likely will not survive to hospital discharge. RESULTS The overall rate of survival to hospital discharge was 7.1% (n = 392). Of 2592 patients (47.1%) who met BLS criteria for termination of resuscitation efforts, only 5 (0.2%) patients survived to hospital discharge. Of 1192 patients (21.7%) who met ALS criteria, none survived to hospital discharge. The BLS rule had a specificity of 0.987 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.970-0.996) and a positive predictive value of 0.998 (95% CI, 0.996-0.999) for predicting lack of survival. The ALS rule had a specificity of 1.000 (95% CI, 0.991-1.000) and positive predictive value of 1.000 (95% CI, 0.997-1.000) for predicting lack of survival. CONCLUSION In this validation study, the BLS and ALS termination-of-resuscitation rules performed well in identifying patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who have little or no chance of survival.

American Heart Association Guide for Improving Cardiovascular Health at the Community Level, 2013 Update A Scientific Statement for Public Health Practitioners, Healthcare Providers, and Health Policy Makers

The goal of this American Heart Association Guide for Improving Cardiovascular Health at the Community Level (AHA Community Guide) is to provide a comprehensive inventory of evidence-based goals, strategies, and recommendations for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and stroke prevention that can be implemented on a community level. This guide advances the 2003 AHA Community Guide1 and the 2005 AHA statement on guidance for implementation2 by incorporating new evidence for community interventions gained over the past decade, expanding the target audience to include a broader range of community advocates, aligning with the concepts and terminology of the AHA 2020 Impact Goals, and recognizing the contributions of new public and private sector programs involving community interventions. In recent years, expanding arrays of programs and policies have been implemented in increasingly diverse communities to provide tools, strategies, and other best practices to potentially reduce the incidence of initial and recurrent cardiovascular events. The AHA Community Guide complements the AHA statement entitled “Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits”3 and supports the AHA 2020 goal4 to “improve the cardiovascular health of all Americans by 20%, while reducing deaths from CVDs and stroke by 20%.” The present AHA Community Guide supports the AHA 2020 goal by identifying exemplary regional or national programs that encourage cardiovascular health behaviors and health factors (formerly addressing risk behaviors and risk factors) from which communities might acquire proven strategies, expertise, and technical assistance for improving cardiovascular health. The AHA Community Guide seeks to prevent the onset of disease (primary prevention) and to maintain optimal cardiovascular health (primordial prevention) among broader segments of the population. Prior research indicates that using public health strategies such as sodium reduction in processed foods to lower blood pressure,5–8 tobacco laws to promote smoking cessation,9–11 and modification of …

Impact of telemedicine intensive care unit coverage on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Although remote intensive care unit (ICU) coverage is rapidly being adopted to enhance access to intensivists, its effect on patient outcomes is unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the impact of telemedicine ICU (tele-ICU) coverage on mortality and length of stay (LOS). METHODS We conducted a systematic review of studies published from January 1, 1950, through September 30, 2010, using PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Global Health, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and conference abstracts. We included studies that reported data on the primary outcomes of ICU and in-hospital mortality or on the secondary outcomes of ICU and hospital LOS. RESULTS We identified 13 eligible studies involving 35 ICUs. All the studies used a before-and-after design. The studies included 41 374 patients (15 667 pre-tele-ICU and 25 707 post-tele-ICU patients). Tele-ICU coverage was associated with a reduction in ICU mortality (pooled odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-0.97; P = .02) but not in-hospital mortality for patients admitted to an ICU (pooled odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.03; P = .08). Similarly, tele-ICU coverage was associated with a reduction in ICU LOS (mean difference, -1.26 days; 95% CI, -2.21 to -0.30; P = .01) but not hospital LOS (mean difference, -0.64; 95% CI, -1.52 to 0.25; P = .16). CONCLUSION Tele-ICU coverage is associated with lower ICU mortality and LOS but not with lower in-hospital mortality or hospital LOS.

Midazolam Versus Diazepam for the Treatment of Status Epilepticus in Children and Young Adults: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND Rapid treatment of status epilepticus (SE) is associated with better outcomes. Diazepam and midazolam are commonly used, but the optimal agent and administration route is unclear. OBJECTIVES The objective was to determine by systematic review if nonintravenous (non-IV) midazolam is as effective as diazepam, by any route, in terminating SE seizures in children and adults. Time to seizure cessation and respiratory complications was examined. METHODS We performed a search of PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts for studies published January 1, 1950, through July 4, 2009. English language quasi-experimental or randomized controlled trials comparing midazolam and diazepam as first-line treatment for SE, and meeting the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)-based quality measures, were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion and extracted outcomes data. Administration routes were stratified as non-IV (buccal, intranasal, intramuscular, rectal) or IV. Fixed-effects models generated pooled statistics. RESULTS Six studies with 774 subjects were included. For seizure cessation, midazolam, by any route, was superior to diazepam, by any route (relative risk [RR] = 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27 to 1.82). Non-IV midazolam is as effective as IV diazepam (RR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.19 to 3.36), and buccal midazolam is superior to rectal diazepam in achieving seizure control (RR = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.29 to 1.85). Midazolam was administered faster than diazepam (mean difference = 2.46 minutes; 95% CI = 1.52 to 3.39 minutes) and had similar times between drug administration and seizure cessation. Respiratory complications requiring intervention were similar, regardless of administration route (RR = 1.49; 95% CI = 0.25 to 8.72). CONCLUSIONS Non-IV midazolam, compared to non-IV or IV diazepam, is safe and effective in treating SE. Comparison to lorazepam, evaluation in adults, and prospective confirmation of safety and efficacy is needed.

Association of Neighborhood Characteristics with Bystander-Initiated CPR

BACKGROUND For persons who have an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the probability of receiving bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may be influenced by neighborhood characteristics. METHODS We analyzed surveillance data prospectively submitted from 29 U.S. sites to the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival between October 1, 2005, and December 31, 2009. The neighborhood in which each cardiac arrest occurred was determined from census-tract data. We classified neighborhoods as high-income or low-income on the basis of a median household income threshold of

Increasing Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Provision in Communities With Low Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Rates A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association for Healthcare Providers, Policymakers, Public Health Departments, and Community Leaders

40,000 and as white or black if more than 80% of the census tract was predominantly of one race. Neighborhoods without a predominant racial composition were classified as integrated. We analyzed the relationship between the median income and racial composition of a neighborhood and the performance of bystander-initiated CPR. RESULTS Among 14,225 patients with cardiac arrest, bystander-initiated CPR was provided to 4068 (28.6%). As compared with patients who had a cardiac arrest in high-income white neighborhoods, those in low-income black neighborhoods were less likely to receive bystander-initiated CPR (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.58). The same was true of patients with cardiac arrest in neighborhoods characterized as low-income white (odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.82), low-income integrated (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.70), and high-income black (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.86). The odds ratio for bystander-initiated CPR in high-income integrated neighborhoods (1.03; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.65) was similar to that for high-income white neighborhoods. CONCLUSIONS In a large cohort study, we found that patients who had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in low-income black neighborhoods were less likely to receive bystander-initiated CPR than those in high-income white neighborhoods. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and others.).

A Validated Prediction Tool for Initial Survivors of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

There are approximately 360 000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) in the United States each year, accounting for 15% of all deaths.1 Striking geographic variation in OHCA outcomes has been observed, with survival rates varying from 0.2% in Detroit, MI,2 to 16% in Seattle, WA.3 Survival variation can be explained in part by differing rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), a vital link in improving survival for victims of OHCA. For every 30 people who receive bystander CPR, 1 additional life is saved.4 Communities that have increased rates of bystander CPR have experienced improvements in OHCA survival5,6; therefore, a promising approach to increasing OHCA survival is to increase the provision of bystander CPR. Yet provision of bystander CPR varies dramatically by locale, with rates ranging from 10% to 65% in the United States.7,8 On average, however, bystander CPR is provided in only approximately one fourth of all OHCA events in the United States despite public education campaigns and promotion of CPR as a best practice by organizations such as the American Heart Association and American Red Cross.9–11 Internationally, similar variation exists, with rates of bystander CPR reported to be as low as 1%12 and as high as 44%.13 Therefore, it is important to understand why certain communities have low bystander CPR rates and to provide recommendations for how to increase bystander CPR provision in these communities. Four critical steps are involved in providing bystander CPR as part of a coordinated community emergency response (Figure 1). First, the potential rescuer must recognize that the victim needs assistance. Early recognition may include the bystander recognizing that the victim has had a cardiac arrest, or simply that the victim needs assistance from emergency medical services (EMS). Second, the …