Search

Aim: This study aimed to investigate trends over time in pre-hospital factors for pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (pOHCA) and long-term neurological and neuropsychological outcomes. These have not been described before in large populations., Methods: Non-traumatic arrest patients, 1 day-17 years old, presented to the Sophia Children's Hospital from January 2002 to December 2020, were eligible for inclusion. Favorable neurological outcome was defined as Pediatric Cerebral Performance Categories (PCPC) 1-2 or no difference with pre-arrest baseline. The trend over time was tested with multivariable logistic and linear regression models with year of event as independent variable., Findings: Over a nineteen-year study period, the annual rate of long-term favorable neurological outcome, assessed at a median 2.5 years follow-up, increased significantly (OR 1.10, 95%-CI 1.03-1.19), adjusted for confounders. Concurrently, annual automated external defibrillator (AED) use and, among adolescents, initial shockable rhythm increased significantly (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.10-1.33 and OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.29, respectively), adjusted for confounders. For generalizability purposes, only the total intelligence quotient (IQ) was considered for trend analysis of all tested domains. Total IQ scores and bystander basic life support (BLS) rate did not change significantly over time., Interpretation: Long-term favorable neurological outcome, assessed at a median 2.5 years follow-up, improved significantly over the study period. Total IQ scores did not significantly change over time. Furthermore, AED use (OR 1.21, 95%CI 1.10-1.33) and shockable rhythms among adolescents (OR1.15, 95%CI 1.02-1.29) increased over time., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Chan has received research funding from the American Heart Association (AHA) and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). Dr Djärv is the chair of Swedish Resuscitation Council and the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) First Aid Task Force. A. Doll is employed by the Resuscitation Academy. Dr Edelson has equity interest and employment in AgileMD. Dr Girotra receives funding from the National Institutes of Health (R01HL160734, R56HL158803, and R01HL166305). He also receives a stipend from AHA for editorial work. Dr Greif is chair of ILCOR Education, Implementation and Team Task Force and the European Resuscitation Council board birector of guidelines. Dr Lauridsen serves as an ERC Science and Education Committee member and member of the ILCOR EIT Task Force. Dr Moskowitz receives funding from NHLBI (R33HL162980). M.C. Myburgh serves on the ILCOR Pediatric Task Force. Dr Neumar is the ILCOR cochair. J.P. Nolan is the editor in chief of Resuscitation and receives National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) grant funding. Dr Olasveengen is a board member of the Laerdal Foundation. Dr Perkins receives grant funding from the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands, Resuscitation Council United Kingdom, Laerdal Foundation, and the British Heart Foundation and serves on the boards for the European Resuscitation Council, Resuscitation Council UK, ILCOR, and University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire. He also serves as an editor for Resuscitation and Resuscitation Plus. J.K. Previdi serves as the AHA Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee chair and is an AHA product consultant. Dr Vaillancourt is a member of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada Resuscitation Advisory Committee and receives funding from The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization. Dr Montgomery serves as the ILCOR consultant. Dr Sasson is employed by AHA. Dr Nallamothu has been a principal investigator or coinvestigator on research grants from the NIH, AHA, Janssen, and Apple, Inc. He also receives compensation as an editor in chief of Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. Finally, he is a coinventor on the US Utility Patent Number US15/356012 (US20170148158A1) entitled “Automated Analysis of Vasculature in Coronary Angiograms” that uses software technology with signal processing and machine learning to automate the reading of coronary angiograms, held by the University of Michigan. The patent is licensed to AngioInsight, Inc, in which he holds ownership shares and receives consultancy fees. Dr Nadkarni receives research funding to his institution from the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, US Department of Defense, American Heart Association, Zoll Medical, RQI Partners, and Laerdal Foundation; he also serves as the President of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) 2023-2024. The views expressed in the manuscript are his, and not intended to represent the views of the SCCM. The other authors report no conflicts.

Introduction: Simulation tools to assess prehospital team performance and identify patient safety events are lacking. We adapted a simulation model and checklist tool of individual paramedic performance to assess prehospital team performance and tested interrater reliability., Methods: We used a modified Delphi process to adapt 3 simulation cases (cardiopulmonary arrest, seizure, asthma) and checklist to add remote physician direction, target infants, and evaluate teams of 2 paramedics and 1 physician. Team performance was assessed with a checklist of steps scored as complete/incomplete by raters using direct observation or video review. The composite performance score was the percentage of completed steps. Interrater percent agreement was compared with the original tool. The tool was modified, and raters trained in iterative rounds until composite performance scoring agreement was 0.80 or greater (scale <0.20 = poor; 0.21-0.39 = fair, 0.40-0.59 = moderate; 0.60-0.79 = good; 0.80-1.00 = very good)., Results: We achieved very good interrater agreement for scoring composite performance in 2 rounds using 6 prehospital teams and 4 raters. The original 175 step tool was modified to 171 steps. Interrater percent agreement for the final modified tool approximated the original tool for the composite checklist (0.80 vs. 0.85), cardiopulmonary arrest (0.82 vs. 0.86), and asthma cases (0.80 vs. 0.77) but was lower for the seizure case (0.76 vs. 0.91). Most checklist items (137/171, 80%) had good-very good agreement. Among 34 items with fair-moderate agreement, 15 (44%) related to patient assessment, 9 (26%) equipment use, 6 (18%) medication delivery, and 4 (12%) cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality., Conclusions: The modified checklist has very good agreement for assessing composite prehospital team performance and can be used to test effects of patient safety interventions., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Simulation in Healthcare.)

Objective: A national survey found prehospital telemedicine had potential clinical applications but lacked provider opinion on its use for pediatric emergency care. We aimed to (1) estimate prehospital telemedicine use, (2) describe perceived benefits and risks of pediatric applications, and (3) identify preferred utilization strategies by paramedics., Methods: We administered a 14-question survey to a convenience sample of 25 Massachusetts paramedics attending a regional course in 2018. Volunteer participants were offered a gift card. We compared respondents to a state database for sample representativeness. We present descriptive statistics and summarize qualitative responses., Results: Twenty-five paramedics completed the survey (100% response); 23 (96%) were male, 21 (84%) 40 years or older, and 23 (92%) in urban practice. Respondents were older and more experienced than the average Massachusetts paramedic. Few had used prehospital telemedicine for patients younger than 12 years (8%; 95% confidence interval, 10-26%). Potential benefits included paramedic training (80%), real-time critical care support (68%), risk mitigation (68%), patient documentation (72%), decision support for hospital team activation (68%), and scene visualization (76%). Time delays from telemedicine equipment use (76%) and physician consultation (64%), broadband reliability (52%), and cost (56%) were potential risks. Respondents preferred video strategies for scene visualization, physician-assisted assessment and care. More respondents felt pediatric telemedicine applications would benefit rural/suburban settings than urban ones., Conclusions: Paramedics reported prehospital telemedicine is underutilized for children but identified potential benefits including provider telesupport, training, situational awareness, and documentation. Concerns included transportation delays, cost, and broadband availability. Video was preferred for limited pediatric exposure settings. These results inform which telemedicine applications and strategies paramedics favor for children., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Shockable rhythm following pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (pOHCA) is consistently associated with hospital and short-term survival. Little is known about the relationship between shockable rhythm and long-term outcomes (>1 year) after pOHCA. The aim was to investigate the association between first documented rhythm and long-term outcomes in a pOHCA cohort over 18 years., Methods: All children aged 1 day-18 years who experienced non-traumatic pOHCA between 2002-2019 and were subsequently admitted to the emergency department (ED) or pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of Erasmus MC-Sophia Children's Hospital were included. Data was abstracted retrospectively from patient files, (ground) ambulance and Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) records, and follow-up clinics. Long-term outcome was determined using a Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category (PCPC) score at the longest available follow-up interval through august 2020. The primary outcome measure was survival with favorable neurologic outcome, defined as PCPC 1-2 or no difference between pre- and post-arrest PCPC. The association between first documented rhythm and the primary outcome was calculated in a multivariable regression model., Results: 369 children were admitted, nine children were lost to follow-up. Median age at arrest was age 3.4 (IQR 0.8-9.9) years, 63% were male and 14% had a shockable rhythm (66% non-shockable, 20% unknown or return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) before emergency medical service (EMS) arrival). In adolescents (aged 12-18 years), 39% had shockable rhythm. 142 (39%) of children survived to hospital discharge. On median follow-up interval of 25 months (IQR 5.1-49.6), 115/142 (81%) of hospital survivors had favorable neurologic outcome. In multivariable analysis, shockable rhythm was associated with survival with favorable long-term neurologic outcome (OR 8.9 [95%CI 3.1-25.9])., Conclusion: In children with pOHCA admitted to ED or PICU shockable rhythm had significantly higher odds of survival with long-term favorable neurologic outcome compared to non-shockable rhythm. Survival to hospital discharge after pOHCA was 39% over the 18-year study period. Of survivors to discharge, 81% had favorable long-term (median 25 months, IQR 5.1-49.6) neurologic outcome. Efforts for improving outcome of pOHCA should focus on early recognition and treatment of shockable pOHCA at scene., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation.Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children., (© 2020 American Heart Association, Inc. Reprinted with permission of the American Heart Association, Inc. This article has been published in Circulation. https://www.ahajournals.org/journal/circ.)

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation. Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation. Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed, published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the third annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. It addresses the most recent published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. This summary addresses the role of cardiac arrest centers and dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the role of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults and children, vasopressors in adults, advanced airway interventions in adults and children, targeted temperature management in children after cardiac arrest, initial oxygen concentration during resuscitation of newborns, and interventions for presyncope by first aid providers. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the certainty of the evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence to Decision Framework Highlights sections. The task forces also listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

Utstein-style reporting templates provide a structured framework with which to compare systems of care for cardiac arrest. The 2004 Utstein reporting template encompassed both out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest. A 2015 update of the Utstein template focused on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, which makes this update of the in-hospital template timely. Representatives of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation developed an updated in-hospital Utstein reporting template iteratively by meeting face-to-face, by teleconference, and by online surveys between 2013 and 2018. Data elements were grouped by hospital factors, patient variables, pre-event factors, cardiac arrest and postresuscitation processes, and outcomes. Elements were classified as core or supplemental by use of a modified Delphi process. Variables were described as core if they were considered essential. Core variables should enable reasonable comparisons between systems and are considered essential for quality improvement programs. Together with core variables, supplementary variables are considered useful for research.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a near-continuous review of cardiopulmonary resuscitation science that replaces the previous 5-year cyclic batch-and-queue approach process. This is the first of an annual series of International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations summary articles that will include the cardiopulmonary resuscitation science reviewed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation in the previous year. The review this year includes 5 basic life support and 1 pediatric Consensuses on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Each of these includes a summary of the science and its quality based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force members are provided in Values and Preferences sections. Finally, the task force members have prioritized and listed the top 3 knowledge gaps for each population, intervention, comparator, and outcome question., Competing Interests: The American Heart Association makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may arise as a result of an outside relationship or a personal, professional, or business interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing group are required to complete and submit a Disclosure Questionnaire showing all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc., and European Resuscitation Council.)

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a near-continuous review of cardiopulmonary resuscitation science that replaces the previous 5-year cyclic batch-and-queue approach process. This is the first of an annual series of International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations summary articles that will include the cardiopulmonary resuscitation science reviewed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation in the previous year. The review this year includes 5 basic life support and 1 paediatric Consensuses on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Each of these includes a summary of the science and its quality based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force members are provided in Values and Preferences sections. Finally, the task force members have prioritised and listed the top 3 knowledge gaps for each population, intervention, comparator, and outcome question., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Utstein-style guidelines contribute to improved public health internationally by providing a structured framework with which to compare emergency medical services systems. Advances in resuscitation science, new insights into important predictors of outcome from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and lessons learned from methodological research prompted this review and update of the 2004 Utstein guidelines. Representatives of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation developed an updated Utstein reporting framework iteratively by meeting face to face, by teleconference, and by Web survey during 2012 through 2014. Herein are recommendations for reporting out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Data elements were grouped by system factors, dispatch/recognition, patient variables, resuscitation/postresuscitation processes, and outcomes. Elements were classified as core or supplemental using a modified Delphi process primarily based on respondents' assessment of the evidence-based importance of capturing those elements, tempered by the challenges to collect them. New or modified elements reflected consensus on the need to account for emergency medical services system factors, increasing availability of automated external defibrillators, data collection processes, epidemiology trends, increasing use of dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, emerging field treatments, postresuscitation care, prognostication tools, and trends in organ recovery. A standard reporting template is recommended to promote standardized reporting. This template facilitates reporting of the bystander-witnessed, shockable rhythm as a measure of emergency medical services system efficacy and all emergency medical services system-treated arrests as a measure of system effectiveness. Several additional important subgroups are identified that enable an estimate of the specific contribution of rhythm and bystander actions that are key determinants of outcome., (Copyright © 2014 European Resuscitation Council and American Heart Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The process for evaluating the resuscitation science has evolved considerably over the past 2 decades. The current process, which incorporates the use of the GRADE methodology, culminated in the 2015 CoSTR publication, which in turn will inform the international resuscitation councils’ guideline development processes. Over the next few years, the process will continue to evolve as ILCOR moves toward a more continuous evaluation of the resuscitation science.

Objectives: To determine if the quality of CPR had a significant interaction with the primary study intervention in the NIH PRIMED trial., Design: The public access database from the NIH PRIMED trial was accessed to determine if there was an interaction between quality of CPR performance, intervention, and outcome (survival to hospital discharge with modified Rankin Score (mRS) ≤ 3)., Setting: Multi-centered prehospital care systems across North America., Patients: Of 8719 adult patients enrolled, CPR quality was electronically recorded for compression rate, depth, and fraction in 6199 (71.1%), 3750 (43.0%) and 6204 (71.2%) subjects, respectively. "Acceptable" quality CPR was defined prospectively as simultaneous provision of a compression rate of 100/min (± 20%), depth of 5 cm (± 20%) and fraction of > 50%. Significant interaction was considered as p < 0.05., Intervention: Standard CPR with an activated versus sham (inactivated) ITD., Measurements and Main Results: Overall, 848 and 827 patients, respectively, in the active and sham-ITD groups had "acceptable" CPR quality performed (n = 1675). There was a significant interaction between the active and sham-ITD and compression rate, depth and fraction as well as their combinations. The strongest interaction was seen with all three parameters combined (unadjusted and adjusted interaction p-value, < 0.001). For all presenting rhythms, when "acceptable" quality of CPR was performed, use of an active-ITD increased survival to hospital discharge with mRS ≤ 3 compared to sham (61/848 [7.2%] versus 34/827 [4.1%], respectively; p = 0.006). The opposite was true for patients that did not receive "acceptable" quality of CPR. In those patients, use of an active - ITD led to significantly worse survival to hospital discharge with mRS ≤ 3 compared to sham (34/1012 [3.4%] versus 62/1061 [5.8%], p = 0.007)., Conclusions: There was a statistically significant interaction between the quality of CPR provided, intervention, and survival to hospital discharge with mRS ≤ 3 in the NIH PRIMED trial. Quality of CPR delivered can be an underestimated effect modifier in CPR clinical trials., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The relationship between survival rate following pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) and time of day or day of week is unknown., Methods: A nationwide, prospective, population-based observational investigation of consecutive witnessed pediatric OHCAs (<18 years) with resuscitation attempts was conducted from January 2005 to December 2011. Days were defined as 9:00 am to 4:59 pm, nights as 5:00 pm to 8:59 am, weekdays as Mondays to Fridays, and weekends as Saturdays, Sundays, and national holidays. Primary outcome was one-month survival and secondary outcome was survival with favorable neurologic outcome, defined as cerebral performance category 1 or 2., Results: A total of 3278 bystander-witnessed pediatric OHCAs were registered. One month survival rate was significantly lower during nights than days (15.5% [95% CI: 13.8-17.2%] versus 23.3% [95% CI: 21.1-25.6%]; P<0.001 and during weekends/holidays (15.7% [95% CI: 13.6-18.0%] than weekdays (20.4% [95% CI: 18.7-22.2%]; P=0.001. Survival rate with favorable neurologic outcome was substantially lower during nights 7.5% [95% CI: 6.3-8.8%] than days (12.2% [95% CI: 10.6-14.1%]; P<0.001), and during weekends/holidays (7.7% [95% CI: 6.2-9.5%] than weekdays (10.4% [95% CI: 9.2-11.8%]; P=0.012). After adjusting for potential confounding factors, one-month survival rate remained significantly lower during nights compared to days (odds ratio 0.68; 95% CI: 0.56-0.82), and during weekends/holidays compared to weekdays (odds ratio 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65-0.97)., Conclusions: One-month survival rate following bystander-witnessed pediatric OHCAs was lower during nights and weekends/holidays than days and weekdays, even when adjusted for potentially confounding factors., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Children have better outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) than adults. However, little is known about the difference in outcomes between children and adults after OHCA due to drowning., Objectives: The aim of this study is to assess the outcome after OHCA due to drowning between children and adults. Our hypothesis is that outcomes after OHCA due to drowning would be in better among children (<18 years old) compared with adults (≥18 years old)., Method: This prospective population-based, observational study included all emergency medical service-treated OHCA due to drowning in Osaka, Japan, between 1999 and 2010 (excluding 2004). Outcomes were evaluated between younger children (0-4 years old), older children (5-17 years old), and adults (≥18 years old). Major outcome measures were one-month survival and neurologically favorable one-month survival defined as cerebral performance category 1 or 2. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to account for potential confounders., Results: During the study period, 66,716 OHCAs were documented, and resuscitation was attempted for 62,048 patients (1300 children [2%] and 60,748 adults [98%]). Among these OHCAs, 1737 (3% of OHCAs) were due to drowning (36 younger children [2%], 32 older children [2%], and 1669 adults [96%]). The odds of one-month survival were significantly higher for younger children (28% [10/36]; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 20.20 [95% confidence interval {CI} 7.45-54.78]) and older children (9% [3/32]; AOR, 4.47 [95% CI 1.04-19.27]) when compared with adults (2% [28/1669]). However, younger children (6% [2/36]; AOR, 5.23 [95% CI 0.52-51.73]) and older children (3% [1/32]; AOR, 2.53 [95% CI 0.19-34.07]) did not have a higher odds of neurologically favorable outcome than adults (1% [11/1669])., Conclusion: In this large OHCA registry, children had better one-month survival rates after OHCA due to drowning compared with adults. Most survivors in all groups had unfavorable neurological outcomes., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: The guidelines presented in this consensus statement are intended to serve researchers, clinicians, reviewers, and regulators in the selection of the most appropriate primary outcome for a clinical trial of cardiac arrest therapies. The American Heart Association guidelines for the treatment of cardiac arrest depend on high-quality clinical trials, which depend on the selection of a meaningful primary outcome. Because this selection process has been the subject of much controversy, a consensus conference was convened with national and international experts, the National Institutes of Health, and the US Food and Drug Administration., Methods: The Research Working Group of the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee nominated subject leaders, conference attendees, and writing group members on the basis of their expertise in clinical trials and a diverse perspective of cardiovascular and neurological outcomes (see the online-only Data Supplement). Approval was obtained from the Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the American Heart Association Manuscript Oversight Committee. Preconference position papers were circulated for review; the conference was held; and postconference consensus documents were circulated for review and comments were invited from experts, conference attendees, and writing group members. Discussions focused on (1) when after cardiac arrest the measurement time point should occur; (2) what cardiovascular, neurological, and other physiology should be assessed; and (3) the costs associated with various end points. The final document underwent extensive revision and peer review by the Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee, the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee, and oversight committees., Results: There was consensus that no single primary outcome is appropriate for all studies of cardiac arrest. The best outcome measure is the pairing of a time point and physiological condition that will best answer the question under study. Conference participants were asked to assign an outcome to each of 4 hypothetical cases; however, there was not complete agreement on an ideal outcome measure even after extensive discussion and debate. There was general consensus that it is appropriate for earlier studies to enroll fewer patients and to use earlier time points such as return of spontaneous circulation, simple "alive versus dead," hospital mortality, or a hemodynamic parameter. For larger studies, a longer time point after arrest should be considered because neurological assessments fluctuate for at least 90 days after arrest. For large trials designed to have a major impact on public health policy, longer-term end points such as 90 days coupled with neurocognitive and quality-of-life assessments should be considered, as should the additional costs of this approach. For studies that will require regulatory oversight, early discussions with regulatory agencies are strongly advised. For neurological assessment of post-cardiac arrest patients, researchers may wish to use the Cerebral Performance Categories or modified Rankin Scale for global outcomes., Conclusions: Although there is no single recommended outcome measure for trials of cardiac arrest care, the simple Cerebral Performance Categories or modified Rankin Scale after 90 days provides a reasonable outcome parameter for many trials. The lack of an easy-to-administer neurological functional outcome measure that is well validated in post-cardiac arrest patients is a major limitation to the field and should be a high priority for future development.

Background: The American Heart Association recommends cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by bystanders with chest compression only for adults who have cardiac arrests, but not for children. We assessed the effect of CPR (conventional with rescue breathing or chest compression only) by bystanders on outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in children., Methods: In a nationwide, prospective, population-based, observational study, we enrolled 5170 children aged 17 years and younger who had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from Jan 1, 2005, to Dec 31, 2007. Data collected included age, cause, and presence and type of CPR by bystander. The primary endpoint was favourable neurological outcome 1 month after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, defined as Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category 1 or 2., Findings: 3675 (71%) children had arrests of non-cardiac causes and 1495 (29%) cardiac causes. 1551 (30%) received conventional CPR and 888 (17%) compression-only CPR. Data for type of CPR by bystander were not available for 12 children. Children who were given CPR by a bystander had a significantly higher rate of favourable neurological outcome than did those not given CPR (4.5% [110/2439] vs 1.9% [53/2719]; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.59, 95% CI 1.81-3.71). In children aged 1-17 years who had arrests of non-cardiac causes, favourable neurological outcome was more common after bystander CPR than no CPR (5.1% [51/1004] vs 1.5% [20/1293]; OR 4.17, 2.37-7.32). However, conventional CPR produced more favourable neurological outcome than did compression-only CPR (7.2% [45/624] vs 1.6% [six of 380]; OR 5.54, 2.52-16.99). In children aged 1-17 years who had arrests of cardiac causes, favourable neurological outcome was more common after bystander CPR than no CPR (9.5% [42/440] vs 4.1% [14/339]; OR 2.21, 1.08-4.54), and did not differ between conventional and compression-only CPR (9.9% [28/282] vs 8.9% [14/158]; OR 1.20, 0.55-2.66). In infants (aged <1 year), outcomes were uniformly poor (1.7% [36/2082] with favourable neurological outcome)., Interpretation: For children who have out-of-hospital cardiac arrests from non-cardiac causes, conventional CPR (with rescue breathing) by bystander is the preferable approach to resuscitation. For arrests of cardiac causes, either conventional or compression-only CPR is similarly effective., Funding: Fire and Disaster Management Agency and the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (Japan)., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Privacy Rule, a follow-up to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, limits distribution of protected health information. Compliance with the Privacy Rule is particularly challenging for prehospital research, because investigators often seek data from multiple emergency medical services (EMS) and receiving hospitals., Objective: To describe the impact of the Privacy Rule on prehospital research and to present strategies to optimize data collection in compliance with the Privacy Rule. Methods. The CanAm Pediatric Cardiopulmonary Arrest Study Group has previously conducted a multicentered observational study involving children with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In the current study, we used a survey to assess site-specific methods of compliance with the Privacy Rule and the extent to which such strategies were successful., Results: The previously conducted observational study included collection of data from a total of 66 EMS agencies (range of 1-37 per site). Data collection from EMS providers was complicated by the lack of a systematic approval mechanism for the research use of EMS records and by incomplete resuscitation records. Agencies approached for approval to release EMS data for study purposes included Department of Health Institutional Review Boards, Fire Commissioners, and Commissioners of Health. The observational study included collection of data from a total of 164 receiving hospitals (range of 1-63 per site). Data collection from receiving hospitals was complicated by the varying requirements of receiving hospitals for the release of patient survival data., Conclusions: Obtaining complete EMS and hospital data is challenging but is vital to the conduct of prehospital research. Obtaining approval from city or state level IRBs or Privacy Boards may help optimize data collection. Uniformity of methods to adhere to regulatory requirements would ease the conduct of prehospital research.