Search

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations on basic life support summarizes evidence evaluations performed for 20 topics that were prioritized by the Basic Life Support Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. The evidence reviews include 16 systematic reviews, 3 scoping reviews, and 1 evidence update. Per agreement within the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, new or revised treatment recommendations were only made after a systematic review. Systematic reviews were performed for the following topics: dispatch diagnosis of cardiac arrest, use of a firm surface for CPR, sequence for starting CPR (compressions-airway-breaths versus airway-breaths-compressions), CPR before calling for help, duration of CPR cycles, hand position during compressions, rhythm check timing, feedback for CPR quality, alternative techniques, public access automated external defibrillator programs, analysis of rhythm during chest compressions, CPR before defibrillation, removal of foreign-body airway obstruction, resuscitation care for suspected opioid-associated emergencies, drowning, and harm from CPR to victims not in cardiac arrest. The topics that resulted in the most extensive task force discussions included CPR during transport, CPR before calling for help, resuscitation care for suspected opioid-associated emergencies, feedback for CPR quality, and analysis of rhythm during chest compressions. After discussion of the scoping reviews and the evidence update, the task force prioritized several topics for new systematic reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Survey items on the Healthy Work Environment Scales (HWES) for nurse leaders (NLs) and direct care nurses (DCNs) were developed using statements from 2 qualitative research studies conducted in a healthcare system. PURPOSE: The purposes of 2 quantitative studies were to develop items on the HWES for NLs and DCNs, to assess the validity and reliability of these new tools, and to describe the NLs and DCNs perceptions of a healthy work environment (HWE) using nonexperimental descriptive designs. METHODS: Each research study had 2 separate phases. In phase 1 of the studies, NLs and DCNs assigned each item to 1 of the 8 characteristics of an HWE to assess face validity. Content validity was determined by calculating the scale content validity and item content validity indices. Based on these results, the items were revised or deleted to obtain version 3 of both tools. In phase 2 of the studies, principal component analysis (PCA) assessed the validity of the tools, Cronbach's a served as the test for reliability, and the NLs and DCNs perceptions of an HWE were measured. RESULTS: Samples included 314 subjects for the HWES for NL study and 986 subjects for the HWES for DCN study. Principal component analysis for the HWES for NLs (version 3) revealed 40 items comprising 4 components, and PCA for the HWES for DCNs (version 3) revealed 39 items comprising 5 components. Internal consistencies of the tools were 0.974 and 0.957, respectively. Based on the findings of these studies, the tools demonstrated promising psychometric properties to measure a HWE in acute care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Survey items on the Healthy Work Environment Scales (HWES) for nurse leaders (NLs) and direct care nurses (DCNs) were developed using statements from 2 qualitative research studies conducted in a healthcare system. PURPOSE: The purposes of 2 quantitative studies were to develop items on the HWES for NLs and DCNs, to assess the validity and reliability of these new tools, and to describe the NLs and DCNs perceptions of a healthy work environment (HWE) using nonexperimental descriptive designs. METHODS: Each research study had 2 separate phases. In phase 1 of the studies, NLs and DCNs assigned each item to 1 of the 8 characteristics of an HWE to assess face validity. Content validity was determined by calculating the scale content validity and item content validity indices. Based on these results, the items were revised or deleted to obtain version 3 of both tools. In phase 2 of the studies, principal component analysis (PCA) assessed the validity of the tools, Cronbach's α served as the test for reliability, and the NLs and DCNs perceptions of an HWE were measured. RESULTS: Samples included 314 subjects for the HWES for NL study and 986 subjects for the HWES for DCN study. Principal component analysis for the HWES for NLs (version 3) revealed 40 items comprising 4 components, and PCA for the HWES for DCNs (version 3) revealed 39 items comprising 5 components. Internal consistencies of the tools were 0.974 and 0.957, respectively. Based on the findings of these studies, the tools demonstrated promising psychometric properties to measure a HWE in acute care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses updates for healthcare providers facing difficulty in decision making for emergency cardiovascular care, as stated in the U.S. nonprofit organization American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. An overview on the ethical principles surrounding autonomy and decision making for patient care, is provided. Also investigated is the advancement in resuscitation efforts and their ethical implications.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) was formed in 1992 to provide a forum for resuscitation organizations worldwide. According to its mission, ILCOR provides a mechanism by which international science and knowledge that are relevant to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and emergency cardiovascular care (ECC) can be identified, reviewed, and evaluated. Every 5 years, based on a rigorous review of the published, peer-reviewed science, ILCOR develops a consensus on resuscitation science and carries that forward into internationally agreed-on treatment recommendations. As part of the 2010 evidence-evaluation process, ILCOR published an updated consensus on science and treatment recommendations (CoSTR). Based on the CoSTR, the American Heart Association (AHA) developed and disseminated guidelines for ECC and CPR. Nursing has unique responsibilities in the chain of survival. This article reviews the major elements of AHA's 2010 guidelines and discusses the critical role that nurses play in the development, dissemination, and implementation of resuscitation science. By making the connection in resuscitation science, nurses can help to save more lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The '2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care' increased the focus on methods to ensure that high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed in all resuscitation attempts. There are 5 critical components of high-quality CPR: minimize interruptions in chest compressions, provide compressions of adequate rate and depth, avoid leaning between compressions, and avoid excessive ventilation. Although it is clear that high-quality CPR is the primary component in influencing survival from cardiac arrest, there is considerable variation in monitoring, implementation, and quality improvement. As such, CPR quality varies widely between systems and locations. Victims often do not receive high-quality CPR because of provider ambiguity in prioritization of resuscitative efforts during an arrest. This ambiguity also impedes the development of optimal systems of care to increase survival from cardiac arrest. This consensus statement addresses the following key areas of CPR quality for the trained rescuer: metrics of CPR performance; monitoring, feedback, and integration of the patient's response to CPR; team-level logistics to ensure performance of high-quality CPR; and continuous quality improvement on provider, team, and systems levels. Clear definitions of metrics and methods to consistently deliver and improve the quality of CPR will narrow the gap between resuscitation science and the victims, both in and out of the hospital, and lay the foundation for further improvements in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The "2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care" increased the focus on methods to ensure that high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed in all resuscitation attempts. There are 5 critical components of high-quality CPR: minimize interruptions in chest compressions, provide compressions of adequate rate and depth, avoid leaning between compressions, and avoid excessive ventilation. Although it is clear that high-quality CPR is the primary component in influencing survival from cardiac arrest, there is considerable variation in monitoring, implementation, and quality improvement. As such, CPR quality varies widely between systems and locations. Victims often do not receive high-quality CPR because of provider ambiguity in prioritization of resuscitative efforts during an arrest. This ambiguity also impedes the development of optimal systems of care to increase survival from cardiac arrest. This consensus statement addresses the following key areas of CPR quality for the trained rescuer: metrics of CPR performance; monitoring, feedback, and integration of the patient's response to CPR; team-level logistics to ensure performance of high-quality CPR; and continuous quality improvement on provider, team, and systems levels. Clear definitions of metrics and methods to consistently deliver and improve the quality of CPR will narrow the gap between resuscitation science and the victims, both in and out of the hospital, and lay the foundation for further improvements in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: cardiopulmonary resuscitation EN cardiopulmonary resuscitation e933 e943 11 06/25/20 20200623 NES 200623 Existing American Heart Association cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines do not address the challenges of providing resuscitation in the setting of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic, wherein rescuers must continuously balance the immediate needs of the patients with their own safety. Healthcare systems and EMS agencies should institute policies to guide frontline providers in determining the appropriateness of starting and terminating CPR for patients with COVID-19, taking into account patient risk factors to estimate the likelihood of survival. Summary of adjustments to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) algorithms in patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). If unable to safely transition the patient to a supine position, place the defibrillator pads in the anterior-posterior position and provide CPR with the patient remaining prone with hands in the standard position over the T7/10 vertebral bodies.[18] Postarrest Patients Consult local infection control practices concerning transport after resuscitation. [Extracted from the article]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To understand whether the science to date has focused on single or multiple chest compression components and identify the evidence related to chest compression components to determine the need for a full systematic review.Methods: This review was undertaken by members of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation and guided by a specific methodological framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were peer-reviewed human studies that examined the effect of different chest compression depths or rates, or chest wall or leaning, on physiological or clinical outcomes. The databases searched were MEDLINE complete, Embase, and Cochrane.Results: Twenty-two clinical studies were included in this review: five observational studies involving 879 patients examined both chest compression rate and depth; eight studies involving 14,285 patients examined chest compression rate only; seven studies involving 12001 patients examined chest compression depth only, and two studies involving 1848 patients examined chest wall recoil. No studies were identified that examined chest wall leaning. Three studies reported an inverse relationship between chest compression rate and depth.Conclusion: This scoping review did not identify sufficient new evidence that would justify conducting new systematic reviews or reconsideration of current resuscitation guidelines. This scoping review does highlight significant gaps in the research evidence related to chest compression components, namely a lack of high-level evidence, paucity of studies of in-hospital cardiac arrest, and failure to account for the possibility of interactions between chest compression components. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What We Already Know About This Topic: Rapid response to witnessed, pulseless cardiac arrest is associated with increased survival.What This Article Tells Us That Is New: Assessment of witnessed, pulseless cardiac arrests occurring at 538 hospitals during a 9-yr period indicates that CPR did not occur immediately at 0 min in 5.7% of patients despite guidelines for instantaneous initiation. Delay in initiation of CPR was associated with significantly decreased survival.Time to initiation of CPR and subsequent time to initiation of administration of defibrillation shock (for shockable arrhythmias) and epinephrine were both associated with reduced patient survival.Background: Because the extent to which delays in initiating cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus the time from CPR to defibrillation or epinephrine treatment affects survival remains unknown, it was hypothesized that all three independently decrease survival in in-hospital cardiac arrest.Methods: Witnessed, index cases of cardiac arrest from the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation Database occurring between 2000 and 2008 in 538 hospitals were included in this analysis. Multivariable risk-adjusted logistic regression examined the association of time to initiation of CPR and time from CPR to either epinephrine treatment or defibrillation with survival to discharge.Results: In the overall cohort of 57,312 patients, there were 9,802 survivors (17.1%). Times to initiation of CPR greater than 2 min were associated with a survival of 14.7% (91 of 618) as compared with 17.1% (9,711 of 56,694) if CPR was begun in 2 min or less (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.68 [0.54 to 0.87]; P < 0.002). Times from CPR to either defibrillation or epinephrine treatment of 2 min or less were associated with a survival of 18.0% (7,654 of 42,475), as compared with 15.0% (1,680 of 11,227) for 3 to 5 min (reference, 0 to 2 min; adjusted odds ratios [95% CI], 0.83 [0.78 to 0.88]; P < 0.001), 12.8% (382 of 2,983) for 6 to 8 min (0.67 [0.60 to 0.76], P < 0.001), and 13.7% (86 of 627) for 9 to 11 min (0.54 [0.42 to 0.69], P < 0.001).Conclusions: Delays in the initiation of CPR and from CPR to defibrillation or epinephrine treatment were each associated with lower survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the revised recommendations contained in the 2015 Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care from U.S. nonprofit organization American Heart Association (AHA). An overview on the detailed review of the scientific evidence and evaluation process in evaluation of daily patient care, is offered. Several charts are also presented that lists disclosures for guidelines update.

The article focuses on the management of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Topics discussed include the importance of health management, the quality of life management, and the training for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Also mentioned are the social aspects of health management, the guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and the improvement of resuscitation system.

Abstract: Objective: Advanced life support (ALS) guidelines are widely adopted for healthcare provider training with recommendations for retraining every two years or longer. This systematic review studies the retention of adult ALS knowledge and skills following completion of an ALS course in healthcare providers. Methods: We retrieved original articles using Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and PubMed, and reviewed reference citations to identify additional studies. We extracted data from included articles using a structured approach and organized outcomes by evaluation method, and knowledge and skills retention. Results: Among 336 articles retrieved, 11 papers were included. Most studies used multiple-choice questionnaires to evaluate knowledge retention and cardiac arrest simulation or other skills tests to evaluate skills retention. All studies reported variable rates of knowledge or skills deterioration over time, from 6 weeks to 2 years after training. Two studies noted retention of knowledge at 18 months and up to 2 years, and one reported skills retention at 3 months. Clinical experience, either prior to or after the courses, has a positive impact on retention of knowledge and skills. Conclusion: There is a lack of large well-designed studies examining the retention of adult ALS knowledge and skills in healthcare providers. The available evidence suggests that ALS knowledge and skills decay by 6 months to 1 year after training and that skills decay faster than knowledge. Additional studies are needed to help provide evidence-based recommendations for assessment of current knowledge and skills and need for refresher training to maximize maintenance of ALS competency. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article focuses on a study which evaluated the association between automated external defibrillators (AEDs) use and survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest. The researchers examined 11,695 hospitalized patients who experienced cardiac arrests between January 1, 2000 to August 26, 2008 at U.S. hospitals following the introduction of AEDs on general and hospital wards. Study results indicated that hospitalized patients with cardiac arrest and use of AED were not associated with improved survival.

Context: Cardiac arrests in adults are often due to ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT), which are associated with better outcomes than asystole or pulseless electrical activity (PEA). Cardiac arrests in children are typically asystole or PEA. Objective: To test the hypothesis that children have relatively fewer in-hospital cardiac arrests associated with VF or pulseless VT compared with adults and, therefore, worse survival outcomes. Design, Setting, and Patients: A prospective observational study from a multicenter registry (National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) of cardiac arrests in 253 US and Canadian hospitals between January 1, 2000, and March 30, 2004. A total of 36 902 adults ( 18 years) and 880 children (<18 years) with pulseless cardiac arrests requiring chest compressions, defibrillation, or both were assessed. Cardiac arrests occurring in the delivery department, neonatal intensive care unit, and in the out-of-hospital setting were excluded. Main Outcome Measure: Survival to hospital discharge. Results: The rate of survival to hospital discharge following pulseless cardiac arrest was higher in children than adults (27% [236/880] vs 18% [6485/36 902]; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.95-2.68). Of these survivors, 65% (154/236) of children and 73% (4737/6485) of adults had good neurological outcome. The prevalence of VF or pulseless VT as the first documented pulseless rhythm was 14% (120/880) in children and 23% (8361/36 902) in adults (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44-0.65; P<.001). The prevalence of asystole was 40% (350) in children and 35% (13 024) in adults (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.40; P = .006), whereas the prevalence of PEA was 24% (213) in children and 32% (11 963) in adults (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.78; P<.001). After adjustment for differences in preexisting conditions, interventions in place at time of arrest, witnessed and/or monitored status, time to defibrillation of VF or pulseless VT, intensive care unit location of arrest, and duration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, only first documented pulseless arrest rhythm remained significantly associated with differential survival to discharge (24% [135/563] in children vs 11% [2719/24 987] in adults with asystole and PEA; adjusted OR, 2.73; 95% CI, 2.23-3.32). Conclusions: In this multicenter registry of in-hospital cardiac arrest, the first documented pulseless arrest rhythm was typically asystole or PEA in both children and adults. Because of better survival after asystole and PEA, children had better outcomes than adults despite fewer cardiac arrests due to VF or pulseless VT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]