Search

Aim: The cohort of patients in which cardiac arrest centres (CAC) in rural and suburban populations confer the greatest survival benefit remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess whether the transfer of resuscitated Utstein-comparator out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients direct to a CAC was associated with improved survival to hospital discharge compared to patients conveyed to non-specialist centres., Methods: A consecutive sample of adult (≥18 years old) Utstein-comparator patients (witnessed collapse and initial shockable rhythm) were included from the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust Utstein resuscitation registry; 2018-2022. Logistic regression was used to compare survival to discharge in patients transported to CACs compared with patients transported to non-specialist centres., Results: During the study period, resuscitation was attempted in 18,276 OHCA patients. N = 2448 (13.4%) met the Utstein-comparator definition and 1151 patients were included in the final analysis; per protocol. Survival was greater for patients conveyed directly to a CAC (n = 768, 60.7%) compared to non-specialist centres (n = 383, 47.3%); adjusted OR 1.44 (95%CI 1.07-1.94),p = 0.017. Amongst the centres analysed in this study, there was significant inter-hospital variability in survival between CACs (p = 0.017). There was no association between patient volume and survival (p = 0.850)., Conclusion: Direct transport to a cardiac arrest centre was associated with a 44% increase in the odds of survival compared to conveyance to a non-specialist centre for resuscitated adult patients presenting with witnessed collapse and initial shockable OHCA rhythm., 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 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To assess patient socio-demographic and disease characteristics associated with the initiation, timing, and completion of emergency care and treatment planning in a large UK-based hospital trust., Methods: Secondary retrospective analysis of data across 32 months extracted from digitally stored Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) plans within the electronic health record system of an acute hospital trust in England, UK., Results: Data analysed from ReSPECT plans (n = 23,729), indicate an increase in the proportion of admissions having a plan created from 4.2% in January 2019 to 6.9% in August 2021 (mean = 8.1%). Forms were completed a median of 41 days before death (a median of 58 days for patients with capacity, and 21 days for patients without capacity). Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation was more likely to be recorded for patients lacking capacity, with increasing age (notably for patients aged over 74 years), being female and the presence of multiple disease groups. 'Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation' was less likely to be recorded for patients having ethnicity recorded as Asian or Asian British and Black or Black British compared to White. Having a preferred place of death recorded as 'hospital' led to a five-fold increase in the likelihood of dying in hospital., Conclusion: Variation in the initiation, timing, and completion of ReSPECT plans was identified by applying an evaluation framework. Digital storage of ReSPECT plan data presents opportunities for assessing trends and completion of the ReSPECT planning process and benchmarking across sites. Further research is required to monitor and understand any inequity in the implementation of the ReSPECT process in routine care., 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 © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The AIRWAYS-2 cluster randomised controlled trial compared the i-gel supraglottic airway device (SGA) with tracheal intubation (TI) as the first advanced airway management (AAM) strategy used by Emergency Medical Service clinicians (paramedics) treating adult patients with non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). It showed no difference between the two groups in the primary outcome of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 30 days/hospital discharge. This paper reports outcomes to 6 months., Methods: Paramedics from four ambulance services in England were randomised 1:1 to use an i-gel SGA (759 paramedics) or TI (764 paramedics) as their initial approach to AAM. Adults who had a non-traumatic OHCA and were attended by a participating paramedic were enrolled automatically under a waiver of consent. Survivors were invited to complete questionnaires at three and six months after OHCA. Outcomes were analysed using regression methods., Results: 767/9296 (8.3%) enrolled patients survived to 30 days/hospital discharge and 317/767 survivors (41.3%) consented and were followed-up to six months. No significant differences were found between the two treatment groups in the primary outcome measure (mRS score: 3 months: odds ratio (OR) for good recovery (i-gel/TI, OR) 0.89, 95% CI 0.69-1.14; 6 months OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.71-1.16). EQ-5D-5L scores were also similar between groups and sensitivity analyses did not alter the findings., Conclusion: There were no statistically significant differences between the TI and i-gel groups at three and six months. We therefore conclude that the initially reported finding of no significant difference between groups at 30 days/hospital discharge was sustained when the period of follow-up was extended to six months., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: People living with severe mental illness (SMI) face significant health inequalities, including in palliative care. Advance Care Planning (ACP) is widely recommended by palliative care experts and could reduce inequalities. However, implementing ACP with this group is challenging. Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems such as Coordinate my Care (CMC) have been introduced to support documentation and sharing of ACP records with relevant healthcare providers. This study explores the use of CMC amongst those with SMI and aims to describe how those with a primary diagnosis of SMI who have used CMC for ACP, and makes recommendations for future research and policy. Method: A retrospective observational cohort analysis was completed of CMC records created 01/01/2010–31/09/2021 where the service user had a primary diagnosis of SMI, with no exclusions based on comorbidities. Descriptive statistics were used to report on characteristics including: age, diagnosis, individual prognosis and resuscitation status. Thematic analysis was used to report on the content of patients' statements of preference. Results: 1826 records were identified. Of this sample most (60.1%) had capacity to make treatment decisions, 47.8% were aged under 70, 86.7% were given a prognosis of 'years' and most (63.1%) remained for full cardio-pulmonary resuscitation in the event of cardio-pulmonary arrest. Records with completed statements of preferences (20.3%) contained information about preferences for physical and mental health treatment care as well as information about patient presentation and capacity, although most were brief and lacked expression of patient voice. Discussion: Compared to usual CMC users, the cohort of interest are relatively able, younger people using CMC to make long-term plans for active physical and mental health treatment. ADM is a service user-driven process, and so it was expected that authentic patient voice would be expressed within statements of preference, however this was mostly not achieved. Conclusions: This digital tool is being used by people with SMI but to plan for more than palliative care. This cohort and supporting professionals have used CMC to plan for longer term physical and mental healthcare. Future research and policy should focus on development of tailored digital tools for people with SMI to plan for palliative, physical and mental healthcare and support expression of patient voice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A number of international studies have explored the views of family members and healthcare professionals on the concept of family witnessed resuscitation (FWR). In contrast the perspective and preferences of patients have been under-researched, particularly in relation to those who have survived resuscitation., Objectives: To explore the views and preferences of resuscitation survivors and those admitted as emergency cases, as to whether family members should be present at their resuscitation., Design: This paper reports the qualitative findings of a study, whose aim was to explore and describe patients' views and preferences towards family witnessed resuscitation., Settings: Study sites included four acute hospitals in two large cities of the South-West of England., Participants: Based on specific criteria, patients (n=21) who had been successfully resuscitated and individuals presenting to hospital as emergency cases but without the experience of resuscitation (control group n=40) comprised the study population. The groups were matched by age and gender., Methods: To generate in-depth understanding about the phenomenon under inquiry, qualitative data were collected from face-to-face interviews. All responses were hand written and analysed using recognised qualitative techniques., Findings: From the analysis of data three main themes emerged which captured the experiences and perceptions of participants through: 'being there', 'welfare of others' and 'professionals'management of the event'. While the majority of participants supported the premise of having loved ones present during resuscitation, their motives varied and often related to the needs of families and occasionally themselves. Participants also recognised that healthcare professionals had to exercise discretionary judgements to manage the resuscitation, which could embrace shielding relatives from distressing scenes and dealing with issues of confidentiality., Conclusions: The study provides a unique understanding of patient preferences of FWR and some of their views begin to contest arguments in the literature. Patients' perspectives suggest both relatives and they themselves benefit in different ways. Although participants recognised that family members had emotional, informational and proximity needs, these had to be balanced with allowing the resuscitation team to manage the clinical emergency and make decisions. It is also evident that not all patients wish their families to be present. Healthcare professionals should therefore strive to identify the wishes of patients and relatives in respect to FWR and facilitate the presence of loved ones as appropriate. Further research into the area is still required.

Sepsis is not a new challenge facing the health care team, it remains a complex disease, which is difficult to identify and treat. Mortality from sepsis remains high and continues to be a common cause of death among critically ill patients, despite advances in critical care. Sepsis accounts for an estimated 27% of all intensive care admissions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and accounted for 46% of all intensive care bed days. Recent research studies and the surviving sepsis campaign have shown that identifying and providing key interventions to patients with severe sepsis and septic shock prior to their admission to the intensive care unit significantly improve outcomes. The aim of this paper was to identify how the Critical Care Outreach Team at one local hospital implemented the severe sepsis resuscitation care bundle for patients in the emergency department (ED) and on the general wards. It will include a presentation on the various ways the team raised the profile of severe sepsis and the care bundle at hospital and at national level. It also includes audit data that have been collected. The results showed that if the resuscitation care bundle was implemented within the first 24 h of hospital admission, mortality was 29%, whereas if the care bundle was instigated after this time mortality was more than at 49%. Audit data showed that the commonest sign of severe sepsis seen in patients in the ED and on wards was tachypnoea. This article discusses the successful implementation of the severe sepsis resuscitation care bundle and the positive impact an Outreach team can have in changing practice in the way patients are managed with severe sepsis. The audit data support the need for regular physiological observations and the use of a Patient At Risk Trigger scoring tool to identify patients at risk of deterioration. This allows referral to the Outreach team, who assess the patient and if appropriate initiate the care bundle.

This paper reports on a research study carried out in an independent hospital in the south east of England. The aim of the study was to assess the basic life support skills of nurses in order to compare the results with those reported for nurses in public hospitals. The findings show that the basic life support skills of the nurses studied are poor but no worse than those of their public sector colleagues.

Aims: To explore healthcare professionals' experiences of patient‐witnessed resuscitation in hospital. Design: Descriptive phenomenology. Methods: Healthcare professionals involved in hospital resuscitation activities were recruited from medical, intensive care, resuscitation and education departments in a university hospital in England. Data were collected through face‐to‐face and focus group interviews, between August 2018 and January 2019. Data were analysed using Giorgi's phenomenological approach. Results: Nine registered nurses, four healthcare assistants and seven doctors participated in four individual interviews and three focus groups. Findings were related to three themes: (1) Protecting patients from witnessing resuscitation: healthcare professionals used curtains to shield patients during resuscitation, but this was ineffective. Thus, they experienced challenges in explaining resuscitation events to the other patients and communicating sensitively. (2) Emotional impact of resuscitation: healthcare professionals recognized that witnessing resuscitation impacted patients, but they also felt emotionally affected from performing resuscitation and needed coping strategies and support. (3) Supporting patients who witnessed resuscitation: healthcare professionals recognized the importance of patients' well‐being, but they felt unable to provide effective and timely support while providing life‐saving care. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals involved in hospital resuscitation require specific support, guidance and education to care effectively for patients witnessing resuscitation. Improving communication, implementing regular debriefing for staff, and allocating a dedicated professional to support patients witnessing resuscitation must be addressed to improve clinical practice. Impact The WATCH study uncovers patients' and healthcare professionals' experiences of patient‐witnessed resuscitation, a phenomenon still overlooked in nursing research and practice. The main findings highlight that, in common with patients, healthcare professionals are subject to the emotional impact of resuscitation events and encounter challenges in supporting patients who witness resuscitation. Embedding the recommendations from this research into clinical guidelines will impact the clinical practice of healthcare professionals involved in hospital resuscitation and the quality and timeliness of care delivered to patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why you should read this article: • To understand the vulnerability of people with learning disabilities to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) • To find out about COVID-19-related deaths in patients with learning disabilities at one hospital • To enhance your awareness of the need to obtain more clinical awareness of the needs of the learning disability population There is evidence that people with learning disabilities are more vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) than the general population, but there is a need to understand better how COVID-19 has affected that patient group. This article details a retrospective comparison study exploring the response of one acute hospital to COVID-19 in the learning disability population. A wide range of data were collected for the period between March 2020 and March 2021 about patients with learning disabilities, including admissions and deaths, do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) orders, ceilings of care and input from the learning disabilities acute liaison team. Data from the five years preceding the study were also collected. These data were compared with data about the general population, in the hospital and nationally. The data show that there had been no significant increase in the number of deaths of people with learning disabilities at the hospital during the first 13 months of the pandemic. However, this could be because fewer people attended hospital and more died in the community. Wider and more in-depth investigation is needed to understand the factors that may increase the risk of COVID-19-related death for people with learning disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To map current practice regarding discussions around resuscitation across England and Scotland in patients with cancer admitted acutely to hospital and to demonstrate the value of medical students in rapidly collecting national audit data. Methods: Collaborators from the Macmillan medical student network collected data from 251 patient encounters across eight hospitals in England and Scotland. Data were collected to identify whether discussion regarding resuscitation was documented as having taken place during inpatient admission to acute oncology. As an audit standard, it was expected that all patients should be invited to discuss resuscitation within 24 hr of admission. Results: Resuscitation discussions were had in 43.1% of admissions and of these 64.0% were within 24 hr; 27.6% of all admissions. 6.5% of patients had a "do not attempt resuscitation" order prior to admission with a difference noted between patients receiving palliative and curative treatment (8.5% and 0.39%, respectively, p <.05). Discussions regarding escalation of care took place in only 29.3% of admissions. Conclusions: These data highlight deficiencies in the number of discussions regarding resuscitation that are being conducted with cancer patients that become acutely unwell. It also demonstrates the value of medical student collaboration in rapidly collecting national audit data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of the intravenous (IV) and intraosseous (IO) routes for drug administration in adults with a cardiac arrest enrolled in the Pre-Hospital Assessment of the Role of Adrenaline: Measuring the Effectiveness of Drug Administration in Cardiac Arrest (PARAMEDIC2) randomised, controlled trial.Methods: Patients were recruited from five National Health Service Ambulance Services in England and Wales from December 2014 through October 2017. Patients with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who were unresponsive to initial resuscitation attempts were randomly assigned to 1 mg adrenaline or matching placebo. Intravascular access was established as soon as possible, and IO access was considered if IV access was not possible after two attempts.Results: Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 3631 received adrenaline and 3686 received placebo. Amongst these, 1116 (30.1%) and 1121 (30.4%) received the study drug via the IO route. The odds ratios were similar in the IV and IO groups for return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) at hospital handover [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.07 (95% CI 3.42-4.85) and (aOR 3.98 (95% CI 2.86-5.53), P value for interaction 0.90]; survival to 30 days [aOR 1.67 (1.18-2.35) versus 0.9 (0.4-2.05), P = 0.18]; and favourable neurological outcome [aOR 1.39 (0.93-2.06) versus 0.62 (0.23-1.67), P = 0.14].Conclusion: There was no significant difference in treatment effect (adrenaline versus placebo) on ROSC at hospital handover between drugs administered by the intraosseous route or by the intravenous route. We could not detect any difference in the treatment effect between the IV and IO routes on the longer term outcomes of 30-day survival or favourable neurological outcome at discharge (ISRCTN73485024). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Advanced Nursing (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.) is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses a study conducted to determine the role of advancing age in the decision by clinicians to complete a do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation order. Topics discussed include design, research method and conclusion of the study, which found age as a highly significant independent factor to withhold cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

The author reflects on the court case Tracey vs Cambridge University Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust and others focusing on the significance of informing the patient and family members about the Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACR) policy. He mentions while the physicians may know what is appropriate for the individual, the kin should be consulted on implementing the emergency procedure to avoid the infringement of human rights. An overview of the legal case is also discussed.