Rudolph W. Koster
European Resuscitation Council
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Rudolph W. Koster.
Resuscitation | 2010
Charles D. Deakin; Jerry P. Nolan; Jasmeet Soar; Kjetil Sunde; Rudolph W. Koster; Gary B. Smith; Gavin D. Perkins
Cardiothoracic Anaesthesia, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Oslo University Hospital Ulleval, Oslo, Norway Department of Cardiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Critical Care and Resuscitation, University of Warwick, Warwick Medical School, Warwick, UK
Resuscitation | 2010
Rudolph W. Koster; Michael Baubin; Leo Bossaert; Antonio Caballero; Pascal Cassan; Maaret Castrén; Cristina Granja; Anthony J. Handley; Koenraad G. Monsieurs; Gavin D. Perkins; Violetta Raffay; Claudio Sandroni
Basic life support (BLS) refers to maintaining airway patency and supporting breathing and the circulation, without the use of equipment other than a protective device.(1) This section contains the guidelines for adult BLS by lay rescuers and for the use of an automated external defibrillator (AED). It also includes recognition of sudden cardiac arrest, the recovery position and management of choking (foreign-body airway obstruction). Guidelines for in-hospital BLS and the use of manual defibrillators may be found in Sections 3 and 4b.
Resuscitation | 2010
Jerry P. Nolan; Jasmeet Soar; David Zideman; Dominique Biarent; Leo Bossaert; Charles D. Deakin; Rudolph W. Koster; Jonathan Wyllie; Bernd W. Böttiger
Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK Paediatric Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Universite Libre de Bruxelles, Queen Fabiola Children’s University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium Cardiology and Intensive Care, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium Cardiac Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Southampton University Hospital NHS Trust, Southampton, UK Department of Cardiology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Neonatology and Paediatrics, The James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK any Anasthesiologie und Operative Intensivmedizin, Universitatsklinikum Koln, Koln, Germ
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 …
Resuscitation | 2010
Charles D. Deakin; Jerry P. Nolan; Kjetil Sunde; Rudolph W. Koster
The importance of early, uninterrupted chest compressions is emphasised throughout these guidelines. Much greater emphasis on minimising the duration of the preshock and post-shock pauses. The continuation of compressions during charging of the defibrillator is recommended. Immediate resumption of chest compressions following defibrillation is also emphasised; in combination with continuation of compressions during defibrillator charging, the delivery of defibrillation should be achievable with an interruption in chest compressions of no more than 5 s. Safety of the rescuer remains paramount, but there is recognition in these guidelines that the risk of harm to a rescuer from a defibrillator is very small, particularly if the rescuer is wearing gloves. The focus is now on a rapid safety check to minimise the pre-shock pause. When treating out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, emergency medical services (EMS) personnel should provide good-quality CPR while a defibrillator is retrieved, applied and charged, but routine delivery of a pre-specified period of CPR (e.g., 2 or 3min) before rhythm analysis and a shock is delivered is no longer recommended. For some emergency medical services that have already fully implemented a pre-specified period of chest compressions before defibrillation, given the lack of convincing data either supporting or refuting this strategy, it is reasonable for them to continue this practice. The use of up to three-stacked shocks may be considered if ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VF/VT)
Resuscitation | 2003
Anouk P. van Alem; Fred W. Chapman; Paula Lank; Augustinus A.M. Hart; Rudolph W. Koster
BACKGROUND Evidence suggests that biphasic waveforms are more effective than monophasic waveforms for defibrillation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), yet their performance has only been compared in un-blinded studies. METHODS AND RESULTS We compared the success of biphasic truncated exponential (BTE) and monophasic damped sine (MDS) shocks for defibrillation in OHCA in a prospective, randomised, double blind clinical trial. First responders were equipped with MDS and BTE automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in a random fashion. Patients in ventricular fibrillation (VF) received BTE or MDS first shocks of 200 J. The ECG was recorded for subsequent analysis continuously. The success of the first shock as a primary endpoint was removal of VF and required a return of an organized rhythm for at least two QRS complexes, with an interval of <5 s, within 1 min after the first shock. The secondary endpoint was termination of VF at 5 s. VF was the initial recorded rhythm in 120 patients in OHCA, 51 patients received BTE and 69 received MDS shocks. The success rate of 200 J first shocks was significantly higher for BTE than for MDS shocks, 35/51 (69%) and 31/69 (45%), P=0.01. In a logistic regression model the odds ratio of success for a BTE shock was 4.01 (95% CI 1.01-10.0), adjusted for baseline cardiopulmonary resuscitation, VF-amplitude and time between collapse and first shock. No difference was found with respect to the secondary endpoint, termination of VF at 5 s (RR 1.07 95% CI: 0.99-1.11) and with respect to survival to hospital discharge (RR 0.73 95% CI: 0.31-1.70). CONCLUSION BTE-waveform AEDs provide significantly higher rates of successful defibrillation with return of an organized rhythm in OHCA than MDS waveform AEDs.
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.
Resuscitation | 2003
Anouk P. van Alem; Jelle Post; Rudolph W. Koster
BACKGROUND Refibrillation after successful defibrillation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a frequent event. Little is known of factors that predispose to the occurrence of refibrillation. The effect of recurrence of ventricular fibrillation (VF) on survival is not known. METHODS Data of patients in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were collected in a combined first responder and paramedic programme in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Continuous recorded rhythm data of 322 patients covering the entire out-of-hospital resuscitation attempt was included in the analysis. Recurrence of VF was recorded, the patient and process characteristics were analysed in relation to the occurrence of refibrillation. The number of refibrillations was related to survival. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION Of the studied patients 79% had at least one recurrence of VF, and a median number of two times 25-75%; one to four times). The median time from successful first shock to VF recurrence was 45 s (25-75%: 23-115 s). A significant inverse relation was found between the number of refibrillations and survival of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The recurrence of VF was independent of the underlying cardiac disorder, the time to defibrillation, the defibrillation waveform and other characteristics of the patient and the process. Anti-arrhythmics should be considered in all patients found in VF to reduce the number of recurrences.
Resuscitation | 2014
Jolande Zijlstra; Remy Stieglis; Frank Riedijk; Martin Smeekes; Wim Van der Worp; Rudolph W. Koster
AIM Public access defibrillation rarely reaches out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients in residential areas. We developed a text message (TM) alert system, dispatching local lay rescuers (TM-responders). We analyzed the functioning of this system, focusing on response times and early defibrillation in relation to other responders. METHODS In July 2013, 14112 TM-responders and 1550 automated external defibrillators (AEDs) were registered in a database residing with the dispatch center of two regions of the Netherlands. TM-responders living <1000m radius of the patient received a TM to go to the patient directly, or were directed to retrieve an AED first. We analyzed 1536 OHCA patients where a defibrillator was connected from February 2010 until July 2013. Electrocardiograms from all defibrillators were analyzed for connection and defibrillation time. RESULTS Of all OHCAs, the dispatcher activated the TM-alert system 893 times (58.1%). In 850 cases ≥1 TM-responder received a TM-alert and in 738 cases ≥1 AED was available. A TM-responder AED was connected in 184 of all OHCAs (12.0%), corresponding with 23.1% of all connected AEDs. Of all used TM-responder AEDs, 87.5% were used in residential areas, compared to 71.6% of all other defibrillators. TM-responders with AEDs defibrillated mean 2:39 (min:sec) earlier compared to emergency medical services (median interval 8:00 [25-75th percentile, 6:35-9:49] vs. 10:39 [25-75th percentile, 8:18-13:23], P<0.001). Of all shocking TM-responder AEDs, 10.5% delivered a shock ≤6min after call. CONCLUSION A TM-alert system that includes local lay rescuers and AEDs contributes to earlier defibrillation in OHCA, particularly in residential areas.