Search

Aims: Conflicting results have been reported regarding the effect of beta-blockers on first-registered heart rhythm in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We aimed to establish whether the use of beta-blockers influences first-registered rhythm in OHCA., Methods and Results: We included patients with OHCA of presumed cardiac cause from two large independent OHCA-registries from Denmark and the Netherlands. Beta-blocker use was defined as exposure to either non-selective beta-blockers, β1-selective beta-blockers, or α-β-dual-receptor blockers within 90 days prior to OHCA. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for the association of beta-blockers with first-registered heart rhythm using multivariable logistic regression. We identified 23 834 OHCA-patients in Denmark and 1584 in the Netherlands: 7022 (29.5%) and 519 (32.8%) were treated with beta-blockers, respectively. Use of non-selective beta-blockers, but not β1-selective blockers, was more often associated with non-shockable rhythm than no use of beta-blockers [Denmark: OR 1.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-2.52; the Netherlands: OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.15-5.49]. Non-selective beta-blocker use was associated with higher proportion of pulseless electrical activity (PEA) than of shockable rhythm (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.01-5.65); the association with asystole was of similar magnitude, although not statistically significant compared with shockable rhythm (OR 2.34, 95% CI 0.89-6.18; data on PEA and asystole were only available in the Netherlands). Use of α-β-dual-receptor blockers was significantly associated with non-shockable rhythm in Denmark (OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.03-1.42) and not significantly in the Netherlands (OR 1.37; 95% CI 0.61-3.07)., Conclusion: Non-selective beta-blockers, but not β1-selective beta-blockers, are associated with non-shockable rhythm in OHCA., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The epidemiology and outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) varies across Europe. Following on from EuReCa ONE, the aim of this study was to further explore the incidence of and outcomes from OHCA in Europe and to improve understanding of the role of the bystander., Methods: This prospective, multicentre study involved the collection of registry-based data over a three-month period (1st October 2017 to 31st December 2017). The core study dataset complied with the Utstein-style. Primary outcomes were return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to hospital admission. Secondary outcome was survival to hospital discharge., Results: All 28 countries provided data, covering a total population of 178,879,118. A total of 37,054 OHCA were confirmed, with CPR being started in 25,171 cases. The bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) rate ranged from 13% to 82% between countries (average: 58%). In one third of cases (33%) ROSC was achieved and 8% of patients were discharged from hospital alive. Survival to hospital discharge was higher in patients when a bystander performed CPR with ventilations, compared to compression-only CPR (14% vs. 8% respectively)., Conclusion: In addition to increasing our understanding of the role of bystander CPR within Europe, EuReCa TWO has confirmed large variation in OHCA incidence, characteristics and outcome, and highlighted the extent to which OHCA is a public health burden across Europe. Unexplained variation remains and the EuReCa network has a continuing role to play in improving the quality management of resuscitation., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In Europe, survival rates after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) vary widely. Presence/absence and differences in implementation of systems dispatching First Responders (FR) in order to arrive before Emergency Medical Services (EMS) may contribute to this variation. A comprehensive overview of the different types of FR-systems used across Europe is lacking., Methods: A mixed-method survey and information retrieved from national resuscitation councils and national EMS services were used as a basis for an inventory. The survey was sent to 51 OHCA experts across 29 European countries., Results: Forty-seven (92%) OHCA experts from 29 countries responded to the survey. More than half of European countries had at least one region with a FR-system. Four categories of FR types were identified: (1) firefighters (professional/voluntary); (2) police officers; (3) citizen-responders; (4) others including off-duty EMS personnel (nurses, medical doctors), taxi drivers. Three main roles for FRs were identified: (a) complementary to EMS; (b) part of EMS; (c) instead of EMS. A wide variation in FR-systems was observed, both between and within countries., Conclusions: Policies relating to FRs are commonly implemented on a regional level, leading to a wide variation in FR-systems between and within countries. Future research should focus on identifying the FR-systems that most strongly influence survival. The large variation in local circumstances across regions suggests that it is unlikely that there will be a 'one-size fits all' FR-system for Europe, but examining the role of FRs in the Chain of Survival is likely to become an increasingly important aspect of OHCA research.

Objective: There is international variation in the rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). 'Bystander CPR' is defined in the Utstein definitions, however, differences in interpretation may contribute to the variation reported. The aim of this cross-sectional survey was to understand how the term 'bystander CPR' is interpreted in Emergency Medical Service (EMS) across Europe, and to contribute to a better definition of 'bystander' for future reference., Methods: During analysis of the EuReCa ONE study, uncertainty about the definition of a 'bystander' emerged. Sixty scenarios were developed, addressing the interpretation of 'bystander CPR'. An electronic version of the survey was sent to 27 EuReCa National Coordinators, who distributed it to EMS representatives in their countries. Results were descriptively analysed., Results: 362 questionnaires were received from 23 countries. In scenarios where a layperson arrived on scene by chance and provided CPR, up to 95% of the participants agreed that 'bystander CPR' had been performed. In scenarios that included community response systems, firefighters and/or police personnel, the percentage of agreement that 'bystander CPR' had been performed ranged widely from 16% to 91%. Even in scenarios that explicitly matched examples provided in the Utstein template there was disagreement on the definition., Conclusion: In this survey, the interpretation of 'bystander CPR' varied, particularly when community response systems including laypersons, firefighters, and/or police personnel were involved. It is suggested that the definition of 'bystander CPR' should be revised to reflect changes in treatment of OHCA, and that CPR before arrival of EMS is more accurately described., (Copyright © 2018 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.)

Background: There is substantial variation in the incidence, likelihood of attempted resuscitation and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) across Europe. A European, multi-centre study provides the opportunity to uncover differences throughout Europe and may help find explanations for these differences. Results may also have potential to support the development of quality benchmarking between European Emergency Medical Services (EMS)., Methods/design: This prospective European study involves 27 different countries. It provides a common Utstein-based dataset, data collection tool and a common data collection period for all participants. Study research questions will address the following: OHCA incidence in different European regions; incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR); initial presenting rhythm in patients where bystanders or EMS start CPR or any other resuscitation intervention; proportion of patients with any return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC); patient status at the end of pre-hospital treatment i.e. ROSC at handover to hospital, ongoing CPR, dead; proportion of patients still alive 30 days after OHCA; proportion of patients discharged alive from hospital. All patients who suffered an OHCA during October 2014 and were attended and/or treated by an EMS and documented in one of the participating registries will be included in the study. Each National Coordinator is responsible for data collection and quality control in his/her country and will transfer unprocessed anonymised data via secure electronic transfer. Descriptive analysis will be performed at European, national and registry level. For endpoints like ROSC, admission or survival, multivariate logistic regression analysis will be performed., Discussion: Documenting differences in epidemiology, treatment and outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest throughout Europe is a first step in finding explanations for these differences. Study results might also support the development of quality benchmarking between Emergency Medical Services (EMS) which in turn will facilitate initiatives to improve OHCA outcome in Europe., Trial Registration: The EuReCa ONE Study is registered by ClinicalTrials.gov National Coordinator T02236819 ).

Background: Knowledge about the epidemiology of cardiac arrest in Europe is inadequate., Aim: To describe the first attempt to build up a Common European Registry of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, called EuReCa., Methods: After approaching key persons in participating countries of the European Resuscitation Council, five countries or areas within countries (Belgium, Germany, Andalusia, North Holland, Sweden) agreed to participate. A standardized questionnaire including 28 items, that identified various aspects of resuscitation, was developed to explore the nature of the regional/national registries. This comprises inclusion criteria, data sources, and core data, as well as technical details of the structure of the databases., Results: The participating registers represent a population of 35 million inhabitants in Europe. During 2008, 12,446 cardiac arrests were recorded. The structure as well as the level of complexity varied markedly between the 5 regional/national registries. The incidence of attempted resuscitation ranged between registers from 17 to 53 per 100,000 inhabitants each year whilst the number of patients admitted to hospital alive ranged from 5 to 18 per 100,000 inhabitants each year. Bystander CPR varied 3-fold from 20% to 60%., Conclusion: Five countries agreed to participate in an attempt to build up a common European Registry for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. These regional/national registries show a marked difference in terms of structure and complexity. A marked variation was found between countries in the number of reported resuscitation attempts, the number of patients brought to hospital alive, and the proportion that received bystander CPR. At present, we are unable to explain the reason for the variability but our first findings could be a 'wake-up-call' for building up a high quality registry that could provide answers to this and other key questions in relation to the management of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)