Search

BACKGROUND Guidelines recommend normocapnia for adults with coma who are resuscitated after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, mild hypercapnia increases cerebral blood flow and may improve neurologic outcomes. METHODS We randomly assigned adults with coma who had been resuscitated after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac or unknown cause and admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in a 1:1 ratio to either 24 hours of mild hypercapnia (target partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide [Paco ], 50 to 55 mm Hg) or 2 normocapnia (target Paco2, 35 to 45 mm Hg). The primary outcome was a favorable neurologic outcome, defined as a score of 5 indicating lower moderate disability) or higher, as assessed with the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale–Extended (range, 1 death] to 8, with higher scores indicating better neurologic outcome) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included death within 6 months. RESULTS A total of 1700 patients from 63 ICUs in 17 countries were recruited, with 847 pa- tients assigned to targeted mild hypercapnia and 853 to targeted normocapnia. A favorable neurologic outcome at 6 months occurred in 332 of 764 patients (43.5%) in the mild hypercapnia group and in 350 of 784 (44.6%) in the normocapnia group (relative risk, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.11; P=0.76). Death within 6 months after randomization occurred in 393 of 816 patients (48.2%) in the mild hypercapnia group and in 382 of 832 (45.9%) in the normocapnia group (relative risk, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.16). The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with coma who were resuscitated after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, targeted mild hypercapnia did not lead to better neurologic outcomes at 6 months than targeted normocapnia.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

Background: Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is still low. For every minute without resuscitation the likelihood of survival decreases. One critical step is initiation of immediate, high quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The aim of this subgroup analysis of data collected for the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest Study number 2 (EuReCa TWO) was to investigate the association between OHCA survival and two types of bystander CPR namely: chest compression only CPR (CConly) and CPR with chest compressions and ventilations (FullCPR). Method: In this subgroup analysis of EuReCa TWO, all patients who received bystander CPR were included. Outcomes were return of spontaneous circulation and survival to 30-days or hospital discharge. A multilevel binary logistic regression analysis with survival as the dependent variable was performed. Results: A total of 5884 patients were included in the analysis, varying between countries from 21 to 1444. Survival was 320 (8%) in the CConly group and 174 (13%) in the FullCPR group. After adjustment for age, sex, location, rhythm, cause, time to scene, witnessed collapse and country, patients who received FullCPR had a significantly higher survival rate when compared to those who received CConly (adjusted odds ration 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.17-1.83). Conclusion: In this analysis, FullCPR was associated with higher survival compared to CConly. Guidelines should continue to emphasise the importance of compressions and ventilations during resuscitation for patients who suffer OHCA and CPR courses should continue to teach both.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled "European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers " (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled "European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers " (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled "European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers " (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled "European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers " (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

Background: Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is still low. For every minute without resuscitation the likelihood of survival decreases. One critical step is initiation of immediate, high quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The aim of this subgroup analysis of data collected for the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest Study number 2 (EuReCa TWO) was to investigate the association between OHCA survival and two types of bystander CPR namely: chest compression only CPR (CConly) and CPR with chest compressions and ventilations (FullCPR). Method: In this subgroup analysis of EuReCa TWO, all patients who received bystander CPR were included. Outcomes were return of spontaneous circulation and survival to 30-days or hospital discharge. A multilevel binary logistic regression analysis with survival as the dependent variable was performed. Results: A total of 5884 patients were included in the analysis, varying between countries from 21 to 1444. Survival was 320 (8%) in the CConly group and 174 (13%) in the FullCPR group. After adjustment for age, sex, location, rhythm, cause, time to scene, witnessed collapse and country, patients who received FullCPR had a significantly higher survival rate when compared to those who received CConly (adjusted odds ration 1.46, 95% confidence interval 1.17-1.83). Conclusion: In this analysis, FullCPR was associated with higher survival compared to CConly. Guidelines should continue to emphasise the importance of compressions and ventilations during resuscitation for patients who suffer OHCA and CPR courses should continue to teach both.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled “European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers” (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey re-quest for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12–59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0–7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was re-flected in different AED use and survival., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Andreja Sinkovic,1 Andrej Markota,1 Manja Krasevec,2 David Suran,3 Martin Marinsek1 1Department of Medical Intensive Care, University Clinical Centre Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia; 2Medical Faculty of University Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia; 3Department of Cardiology, University Clinical Centre Maribor, Maribor, SloveniaCorrespondence: Andreja SinkovicDepartment of Medical Intensive Care, University Clinical Centre Maribor, Ljubljanska 5, Maribor, 2000, SloveniaTel +38641337822Email andreja.sinkovic@guest.arnes.siBackground: Air pollution with increased concentrations of fine (< 2.5 μm) particulate matter (PM2.5) increases the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Even short-term increase of PM2.5 may help trigger ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and heart failure (HF) in susceptible individuals, even in areas with good air quality.Purpose: To evaluate the role of PM2.5 levels ≥ 20 μg/m3 in admission acute HF in STEMI patients.Materials and Methods: In 290 STEMI patients with the leading reperfusion strategy primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), we retrospectively studied independent predictors of admission acute HF and included admission demographic and clinical data as well as ambient PM2.5 levels ≥ 20 μg/m3. We defined admission acute HF in STEMI patients as classes II–IV by Killip Kimball classification.Results: Acute admission HF was observed in 34.5% of STEMI patients. PPCI was performed in 87.1% of acute admission HF patients and in 94.7% non-HF patients (p= 0.037). Significant independent predictors of acute admission HF were prior diabetes (OR 2.440, 95% CI 1.100 to 5.400, p=0.028), admission LBBB (OR 10.190, 95% CI 1.160 to 89.360, p=0.036), prior resuscitation (OR 2.530, 95% CI 1.010 to 6.340, p=0.048), admission troponin I≥ 5μg/l (OR 3.390, 95% CI 1.740 to 6.620, p< 0.001), admission eGFR levels (0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72, p < 0.001), and levels of PM2.5 ≥ 20 μg/m3 (OR 2.140, 95% CI 1.005 to 4.560, p=0.

Introduction: The rapid use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is crucial for increased survival after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Many factors could play a role in limiting the chance of an AED use. We aimed to verify the situation regarding AED legislation, the AED mapping system and first responders (FRs) equipped with an AED across European countries. Methods: We performed a survey across Europe entitled "European Study about AED Use by Lay Rescuers " (ENSURE), asking the national coordinators of the European Registry of Cardiac Arrest (EuReCa) program to complete it. Results: Nineteen European countries replied to the survey request for a population covering 128,297,955 inhabitants. The results revealed that every citizen can use an AED in 15 countries whereas a training certificate was required in three countries. In one country, only EMS personnel were allowed to use an AED. An AED mapping system and FRs equipped with an AED were available in only 11 countries. The AED use rate was 12-59% where AED mapping and FR systems were implemented, which was considerably higher than in other countries (0-7.9%), reflecting the difference in OHCA survival. Conclusions: Our survey highlighted a heterogeneity in AED legislation, AED mapping systems and AED use in Europe, which was reflected in different AED use and survival.

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.

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.

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., SCOPUS: ar.j, DecretOANoAutActif, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Catecholamines have been the mainstay of pharmacological treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS). Recently, use of epinephrine has been associated with detrimental outcomes. In the present study we aimed to evaluate the association between epinephrine use and short-term mortality in all-cause CS patients. We performed a meta-analysis of individual data with prespecified inclusion criteria: (1) patients in non-surgical CS treated with inotropes and/or vasopressors and (2) at least 15% of patients treated with epinephrine administrated alone or in association with other inotropes/vasopressors. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. Fourteen published cohorts and two unpublished data sets were included. We studied 2583 patients. Across all cohorts of patients, the incidence of epinephrine use was 37% (17-76%) and short-term mortality rate was 49% (21-69%). A positive correlation was found between percentages of epinephrine use and short-term mortality in the CS cohort. The risk of death was higher in epinephrine-treated CS patients (OR [CI] = 3.3 [2.8-3.9]) compared to patients treated with other drug regimens. Adjusted mortality risk remained striking in epinephrine-treated patients (n = 1227) (adjusted OR = 4.7 [3.4-6.4]). After propensity score matching, two sets of 338 matched patients were identified and epinephrine use remained associated with a strong detrimental impact on short-term mortality (OR = 4.2 [3.0-6.0]). In this very large cohort, epinephrine use for hemodynamic management of CS patients is associated with a threefold increase of risk of death.

Because of a technical error, the code corresponding to the outcome for the Basir et al. cohort was mis-implemented in the original version of our article. Characteristics of the cohort are in fact the followings.

Catecholamines have been the mainstay of pharmacological treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS). Recently, use of epinephrine has been associated with detrimental outcomes. In the present study we aimed to evaluate the association between epinephrine use and short-term mortality in all-cause CS patients. We performed a meta-analysis of individual data with prespecified inclusion criteria: (1) patients in non-surgical CS treated with inotropes and/or vasopressors and (2) at least 15% of patients treated with epinephrine administrated alone or in association with other inotropes/vasopressors. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. Fourteen published cohorts and two unpublished data sets were included. We studied 2583 patients. Across all cohorts of patients, the incidence of epinephrine use was 37% (17-76%) and short-term mortality rate was 49% (21-69%). A positive correlation was found between percentages of epinephrine use and short-term mortality in the CS cohort. The risk of death was higher in epinephrine-treated CS patients (OR [CI] = 3.3 [2.8-3.9]) compared to patients treated with other drug regimens. Adjusted mortality risk remained striking in epinephrine-treated patients (n = 1227) (adjusted OR = 4.7 [3.4-6.4]). After propensity score matching, two sets of 338 matched patients were identified and epinephrine use remained associated with a strong detrimental impact on short-term mortality (OR = 4.2 [3.0-6.0]). In this very large cohort, epinephrine use for hemodynamic management of CS patients is associated with a threefold increase of risk of death.

Because of a technical error, the code corresponding to the outcome for the Basir et al. cohort was mis-implemented in the original version of our article. Characteristics of the cohort are in fact the followings.

Introduction: The aim of the EuReCa ONE study was to determine the incidence, process, and outcome for out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) throughout Europe. Methods: This was an international, prospective, multi-centre one-month study. Patients who suffered an OHCA during October 2014 who were attended and/or treated by an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) were eligible for inclusion in the study. Data were extracted from national, regional or local registries. Results: Data on 10,682 confirmed OHCAs from 248 regions in 27 countries, covering an estimated population of 174 million. In 7146 (66%) cases, CPR was started by a bystander or by the EMS. The incidence of CPR attempts ranged from 19.0 to 104.0 per 100,000 population per year. 1735 had ROSC on arrival at hospital (25.2%), Overall, 662/6414 (10.3%) in all cases with CPR attempted survived for at least 30 days or to hospital discharge. Conclusion: The results of EuReCa ONE highlight that OHCA is still a major public health problem accounting for a substantial number of deaths in Europe. EuReCa ONE very clearly demonstrates marked differences in the processes for data collection and reported outcomes following OHCA all over Europe. Using these data and analyses, different countries, regions, systems, and concepts can benchmark themselves and may learn from each other to further improve survival following one of our major health care events. (C) 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Introduction: The aim of the EuReCa ONE study was to determine the incidence, process, and outcome for out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) throughout Europe. Methods: This was an international, prospective, multi-centre one-month study. Patients who suffered an OHCA during October 2014 who were attended and/or treated by an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) were eligible for inclusion in the study. Data were extracted from national, regional or local registries. Results: Data on 10,682 confirmed OHCAs from 248 regions in 27 countries, covering an estimated population of 174 million. In 7146 (66%) cases, CPR was started by a bystander or by the EMS. The incidence of CPR attempts ranged from 19.0 to 104.0 per 100,000 population per year. 1735 had ROSC on arrival at hospital (25.2%), Overall, 662/6414 (10.3%) in all cases with CPR attempted survived for at least 30 days or to hospital discharge. Conclusion: The results of EuReCa ONE highlight that OHCA is still a major public health problem accounting for a substantial number of deaths in Europe. EuReCa ONE very clearly demonstrates marked differences in the processes for data collection and reported outcomes following OHCA all over Europe. Using these data and analyses, different countries, regions, systems, and concepts can benchmark themselves and may learn from each other to further improve survival following one of our major health care events. (C) 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

Introduction: The aim of the EuReCa ONE study was to determine the incidence, process, and outcome for out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) throughout Europe. Methods: This was an international, prospective, multi-centre one-month study. Patients who suffered an OHCA during October 2014 who were attended and/or treated by an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) were eligible for inclusion in the study. Data were extracted from national, regional or local registries. Results: Data on 10,682 confirmed OHCAs from 248 regions in 27 countries, covering an estimated population of 174 million. In 7146 (66%) cases, CPR was started by a bystander or by the EMS. The incidence of CPR attempts ranged from 19.0 to 104.0 per 100,000 population per year. 1735 had ROSC on arrival at hospital (25.2%), Overall, 662/6414 (10.3%) in all cases with CPR attempted survived for at least 30 days or to hospital discharge. Conclusion: The results of EuReCa ONE highlight that OHCA is still a major public health problem accounting for a substantial number of deaths in Europe. EuReCa ONE very clearly demonstrates marked differences in the processes for data collection and reported outcomes following OHCA all over Europe. Using these data and analyses, different countries, regions, systems, and concepts can benchmark themselves and may learn from each other to further improve survival following one of our major health care events. (C) 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

The authors regret that the following contributors were not acknowledged in the original manuscript: Ondrej Franek (Czech Republic); Nuria López Cabeza (Spain); José M. Navalpotro Pascual (Spain). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused., SCOPUS: er.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Introduction The aim of the EuReCa ONE study was to determine the incidence, process, and outcome for out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) throughout Europe. Methods This was an international, prospective, multi-centre one-month study. Patients who suffered an OHCA during October 2014 who were attended and/or treated by an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) were eligible for inclusion in the study. Data were extracted from national, regional or local registries. Results Data on 10,682 confirmed OHCAs from 248 regions in 27 countries, covering an estimated population of 174 million. In 7146 (66%) cases, CPR was started by a bystander or by the EMS. The incidence of CPR attempts ranged from 19.0 to 104.0 per 100,000 population per year. 1735 had ROSC on arrival at hospital (25.2%), Overall, 662/6414 (10.3%) in all cases with CPR attempted survived for at least 30 days or to hospital discharge. Conclusion The results of EuReCa ONE highlight that OHCA is still a major public health problem accounting for a substantial number of deaths in Europe. EuReCa ONE very clearly demonstrates marked differences in the processes for data collection and reported outcomes following OHCA all over Europe. Using these data and analyses, different countries, regions, systems, and concepts can benchmark themselves and may learn from each other to further improve survival following one of our major health care events., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published