Rachael Fothergill

Increases in survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A five year study

OBJECTIVE This study reports improvements in survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in London over a five year period from 2007 to 2012 and explores the potential reasons for the very striking increases observed. METHODS Data from the London Ambulance Services cardiac arrest registry from 2007 to 2012 were analysed retrospectively for all patients who met the Utstein comparator group criteria (an arrest of a presumed cardiac cause that was bystander witnessed with an initial rhythm of VF/VT). RESULTS We observed an increase in survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the five year period, with incremental improvements each year from 12% to 32% for the Utstein comparator group of patients. CONCLUSION We suggest that a range of important changes made to pre-hospital cardiac care in London over the last five years have contributed to the observed increase in survival over the study period. In addition we advocate a range of further initiatives to continue improving survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Epidemiology and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in England

INTRODUCTION This study reports the epidemiology and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in England during 2014. METHODS Prospective observational study from the national OHCA registry. The incidence, demographic and outcomes of patients who were treated for an OHCA between 1st January 2014 and 31st December 2014 in 10 English ambulance service (EMS) regions, serving a population of almost 54 million, are reported in accordance with Utstein recommendations. RESULTS 28,729 OHCA cases of EMS treated cardiac arrests were reported (53 per 100,000 of resident population). The mean age was 68.6 (SD=19.6) years and 41.3% were female. Most (83%) occurred in a place of residence, 52.7% were witnessed by either the EMS or a bystander. In non-EMS witnessed cases, 55.2% received bystander CPR whilst public access defibrillation was used rarely (2.3%). Cardiac aetiology was the leading cause of cardiac arrest (60.9%). The initial rhythm was asystole in 42.4% of all cases and was shockable (VF or pVT) in 20.6%. Return of spontaneous circulation at hospital transfer was evident in 25.8% (n=6302) and survival to hospital discharge was 7.9%. CONCLUSION Cardiac arrest is an important cause of death in England. With less than one in ten patients surviving, there is scope to improve outcomes. Survival rates were highest amongst those who received bystander CPR and public access defibrillation.

Survival of resuscitated cardiac arrest patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) conveyed directly to a Heart Attack Centre by ambulance clinicians

OBJECTIVE This study reports survival outcomes for patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) subsequent to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), and who were conveyed directly by ambulance clinicians to a specialist Heart Attack Centre for expert cardiology assessment, angiography and possible percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS This is a retrospective descriptive review of data sourced from the London Ambulance Services OHCA registry over a one-year period. RESULTS We observed excellent survival rates for our cohort of patients with 66% of patients surviving to be discharged from hospital, the majority of whom were still alive after one year. Those who survived tended to be younger, to have had a witnessed arrest in a public place with an initial cardiac rhythm of VF/VT, and to have been transported to the specialist centre more quickly than those who did not. CONCLUSION A system allowing ambulance clinicians to autonomously convey OHCA STEMI patients who achieve a return of spontaneous circulation directly to a Heart Attack Centre is highly effective and yields excellent survival outcomes.

Pre-hospital Assessment of the Role of Adrenaline: Measuring the Effectiveness of Drug administration In Cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC-2): Trial protocol

Despite its use since the 1960s, the safety or effectiveness of adrenaline as a treatment for cardiac arrest has never been comprehensively evaluated in a clinical trial. Although most studies have found that adrenaline increases the chance of return of spontaneous circulation for short periods, many studies found harmful effects on the brain and raise concern that adrenaline may reduce overall survival and/or good neurological outcome. The PARAMEDIC-2 trial seeks to determine if adrenaline is safe and effective in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. This is a pragmatic, individually randomised, double blind, controlled trial with a parallel economic evaluation. Participants will be eligible if they are in cardiac arrest in the out-of-hospital environment and advanced life support is initiated. Exclusions are cardiac arrest as a result of anaphylaxis or life threatening asthma, and patient known or appearing to be under 16 or pregnant. 8000 participants treated by 5 UK ambulance services will be randomised between December 2014 and August 2017 to adrenaline (intervention) or placebo (control) through opening pre-randomised drug packs. Clinical outcomes are survival to 30 days (primary outcome), hospital discharge, 3, 6 and 12 months, health related quality of life, and neurological and cognitive outcomes (secondary outcomes). Trial registration (ISRCTN73485024).

A randomised tRial of expedited transfer to a cardiac arrest centre for non-ST elevation ventricular fibrillation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest : the ARREST pilot randomised trial

BACKGROUND Wide variation exists in inter-hospital survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Regionalisation of care into cardiac arrest centres (CAC) may improve this. We report a pilot randomised trial of expedited transfer to a CAC following OHCA without ST-elevation. The objective was to assess the feasibility of performing a large-scale randomised controlled trial. METHODS Adult witnessed ventricular fibrillation OHCA of presumed cardiac cause were randomised 1:1 to either: (1) treatment: comprising expedited transfer to a CAC for goal-directed therapy including access to immediate reperfusion, or (2) control: comprising current standard of care involving delivery to the geographically closest hospital. The feasibility of randomisation, protocol adherence and data collection of the primary (30-day all-cause mortality) and secondary (cerebral performance category (CPC)) and in-hospital major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) clinical outcome measures were assessed. RESULTS Between November 2014 and April 2016, 118 cases were screened, of which 63 patients (53%) met eligibility criteria and 40 of the 63 patients (63%) were randomised. There were no protocol deviations in the treatment arm. Data collection of primary and secondary outcomes was achieved in 83%. There was no difference in baseline characteristics between the groups: 30-day mortality (Intervention 9/18, 50% vs. Control 6/15, 40%; P=0.73), CPC 1/2 (Intervention: 9/18, 50% vs. Control 7/14, 50%; P>0.99) or MACCE (Intervention: 9/18, 50% vs. Control 6/15, 40%; P=0.73). CONCLUSIONS These findings support the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a large-scale randomised controlled trial of expedited transfer to CAC following OHCA to address a remaining uncertainty in post-arrest care.

Frequent callers to the ambulance service: patient profiling and impact of case management on patient utilisation of the ambulance service.

Background A minority of patients make frequent and excessive calls to the ambulance service, placing a significant burden on limited resources at a time when demand on urgent and emergency care systems is steadily increasing. Little is known about the reasons underlying frequent caller behaviour or the best way to manage this group of patients. Objectives The present study aimed to (i) profile frequent callers to the ambulance service and (ii) evaluate the impact of a case management interventional approach on frequent caller behaviour. Methods A retrospective review of data from a 2-year period (from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2011) was conducted. Patients were included in the analysis if they had been accepted for case management intervention by the Patient-Centred Action Team during this period and met the study inclusion criteria. Results The review identified 110 frequent callers who met the study inclusion criteria. The majority of frequent callers (86%) had multiple and complex reasons for calling, including frequent medical need, acute or chronic mental health condition, older age and unmet personal or social care needs. In the majority of cases (82%), multiple interventional strategies were required. A significant reduction in median call volume was observed from preintervention to postintervention (from five calls/month to zero calls/month). Conclusions Effective management of this complex patient group requires an individualised case management approach in order to identify and tackle the underlying causes of behaviour.

Paramedic Assessment of Older Adults After Falls, Including Community Care Referral Pathway: Cluster Randomized Trial

Study objective: We aim to determine clinical and cost‐effectiveness of a paramedic protocol for the care of older people who fall. Methods: We undertook a cluster randomized trial in 3 UK ambulance services between March 2011 and June 2012. We included patients aged 65 years or older after an emergency call for a fall, attended by paramedics based at trial stations. Intervention paramedics could refer the patient to a community‐based falls service instead of transporting the patient to the emergency department. Control paramedics provided care as usual. The primary outcome was subsequent emergency contacts or death. Results: One hundred five paramedics based at 14 intervention stations attended 3,073 eligible patients; 110 paramedics based at 11 control stations attended 2,841 eligible patients. We analyzed primary outcomes for 2,391 intervention and 2,264 control patients. One third of patients made further emergency contacts or died within 1 month, and two thirds within 6 months, with no difference between groups. Subsequent 999 call rates within 6 months were lower in the intervention arm (0.0125 versus 0.0172; adjusted difference –0.0045; 95% confidence interval –0.0073 to –0.0017). Intervention paramedics referred 8% of patients (204/2,420) to falls services and left fewer patients at the scene without any ongoing care. Intervention patients reported higher satisfaction with interpersonal aspects of care. There were no other differences between groups. Mean intervention cost was

A Randomized Trial of Epinephrine in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

23 per patient, with no difference in overall resource use between groups at 1 or 6 months. Conclusion: A clinical protocol for paramedics reduced emergency ambulance calls for patients attended for a fall safely and at modest cost.

Barriers and facilitators to public access defibrillation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review

BACKGROUND Concern about the use of epinephrine as a treatment for out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest led the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation to call for a placebocontrolled trial to determine whether the use of epinephrine is safe and effective in such patients. METHODS In a randomized, double‐blind trial involving 8014 patients with out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest in the United Kingdom, paramedics at five National Health Service ambulance services administered either parenteral epinephrine (4015 patients) or saline placebo (3999 patients), along with standard care. The primary outcome was the rate of survival at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included the rate of survival until hospital discharge with a favorable neurologic outcome, as indicated by a score of 3 or less on the modified Rankin scale (which ranges from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]). RESULTS At 30 days, 130 patients (3.2%) in the epinephrine group and 94 (2.4%) in the placebo group were alive (unadjusted odds ratio for survival, 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06 to 1.82; P = 0.02). There was no evidence of a significant difference in the proportion of patients who survived until hospital discharge with a favorable neurologic outcome (87 of 4007 patients [2.2%] vs. 74 of 3994 patients [1.9%]; unadjusted odds ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.61). At the time of hospital discharge, severe neurologic impairment (a score of 4 or 5 on the modified Rankin scale) had occurred in more of the survivors in the epinephrine group than in the placebo group (39 of 126 patients [31.0%] vs. 16 of 90 patients [17.8%]). CONCLUSIONS In adults with out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest, the use of epinephrine resulted in a significantly higher rate of 30‐day survival than the use of placebo, but there was no significant between‐group difference in the rate of a favorable neurologic outcome because more survivors had severe neurologic impairment in the epinephrine group. (Funded by the U.K. National Institute for Health Research and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN73485024.)

Variation in epidemiology and outcomes from cardiac arrest

Public access defibrillation initiatives make automated external defibrillators available to the public. This facilitates earlier defibrillation of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims and could save many lives. It is currently only used for a minority of cases. The aim of this systematic review was to identify barriers and facilitators to public access defibrillation. A comprehensive literature review was undertaken defining formal search terms for a systematic review of the literature in March 2017. Studies were included if they considered reasons affecting the likelihood of public access defibrillation and presented original data. An electronic search strategy was devised searching MEDLINE and EMBASE, supplemented by bibliography and related-article searches. Given the low-quality and observational nature of the majority of articles, a narrative review was performed. Sixty-four articles were identified in the initial literature search. An additional four unique articles were identified from the electronic search strategies. The following themes were identified related to public access defibrillation: knowledge and awareness; willingness to use; acquisition and maintenance; availability and accessibility; training issues; registration and regulation; medicolegal issues; emergency medical services dispatch-assisted use of automated external defibrillators; automated external defibrillator-locator systems; demographic factors; other behavioural factors. In conclusion, several barriers and facilitators to public access defibrillation deployment were identified. However, the evidence is of very low quality and there is not enough information to inform changes in practice. This is an area in urgent need of further high-quality research if public access defibrillation is to be increased and more lives saved. PROSPERO registration number CRD42016035543.