Search

Aim: While intravenous (IV) vascular access for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) resuscitation is standard, humeral-intraosseous (IO) access is commonly used, despite few supporting data. We investigated the association between IV vs. humeral-IO and outcomes., Methods: We utilized BC Cardiac Arrest Registry data, including adult OHCA where the first-attempted intra-arrest vascular access route performed by advanced life support (ALS)-trained paramedics was IV or humeral-IO. We fit a propensity-score adjusted model with inverse probability treatment weighting to estimate the association between IV vs. humeral-IO routes and favorable neurological outcomes (CPC 1-2) and survival at hospital discharge. We repeated models within subgroups defined by initial cardiac rhythm., Results: We included 2,112 cases; the first-attempted route was IV (n = 1,575) or humeral-IO (n = 537). Time intervals from ALS-paramedic on-scene arrival to vascular access (6.6 vs. 6.9 min) and epinephrine administration (9.0 vs. 9.3 min) were similar between IV and IO groups, respectively. Among IV and humeral-IO groups, 98 (6.2%) and 20 (3.7%) had favorable neurological outcomes. Compared to humeral-IO, an IV-first approach was associated with improved hospital-discharge favorable neurological outcomes (AOR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.7) and survival (AOR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0-2.3). Among shockable rhythm cases, an IV-first approach was associated with improved favorable neurological outcomes (AOR 4.2; 95% CI 2.1-8.2), but not among non-shockable rhythm cases (AOR 0.73; 95% CI 0.39-1.4)., Conclusion: An IV-first approach, compared to humeral-IO, for intra-arrest resuscitation was associated with an improved odds of favorable neurological outcomes and survival to hospital discharge. This association was seen among an initial shockable rhythm, but not non-shockable rhythm, subgroups., 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.)

Background: Clinicians may make prognostication decisions for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) using historical details pertaining to non-prescription drug use. However, differences in outcomes between OHCAs with evidence of non-prescription drug use, compared to other OHCAs, have not been well described., Methods: We included emergency medical service-treated OHCA in the British Columbia Cardiac Arrest Registry (January/2019-June/2023). We classified cases as "non-prescription drug-associated cardiac arrests" (DA-OHCA) if there was evidence of non-prescription drug use preceding the OHCA, including witness accounts of use within 24 h or paraphernalia at the scene. We fit logistic regression models to investigate the association between DA-OHCA (vs. other cases) and favourable neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] 1-2) and survival at hospital discharge, and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC)., Results: Of 18,426 OHCA, 2,171 (12%) were classified as DA-OHCA. DA-OHCA tended to be younger, unwitnessed, occur during the evening or night, and present with a non-shockable rhythm, compared to other OHCA. DA-OHCA (221 [10%]) had a greater proportion (difference 1.8%; 95% CI 0.49-3.2) with favourable neurological outcomes compared to other OHCA (1,365 [8.4%]). Adjusted models did not identify an association of DA-OHCA with favourable neurological outcome (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.87-1.33) or survival to hospital discharge (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.93-1.38), but did demonstrate an association with ROSC (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.004-1.27)., Conclusion: In unadjusted models, DA-OHCA was associated with an improved odds of survival and favourable neurological outcomes at hospital discharge, compared to other OHCA. However, we did not detect an association in adjusted analyses., 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.)

Background: Multiple jurisdictions reported a significant increase in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) incidence over the past decade, however the reasons for this remain unclear. We investigated how drug-associated OHCA (DA-OHCA) contributed to overall OHCA incidence, and whether the likelihood of treatment by emergency medical services (EMS) was associated with DA-OHCA classification., Methods: Using a large provincial cardiac arrest registry, we included consecutive, non-traumatic adult OHCA from 2016-2022. We classified as drug-associated if there were historical accounts of non-prescription drug use within the preceding 24 hours or evidence of paraphernalia at the scene. We examined year-by-year trends in OHCA and DA-OHCA incidence. We also investigated the association between DA-OHCA and odds of EMS treatment using an adjusted logistic regression model., Results: Of 33,365 EMS-assessed cases, 1,985/18,591 (11%) of EMS-treated OHCA and 887/9,200 (9.6%) of EMS-untreated OHCA were DA-OHCA. Of EMS-treated DA-OHCA, the median age was 40 years (IQR 31-51), 1,059 (53%) had a known history of non-prescription drug use, and 570 (29%) were public-location. From 2016 to 2022, EMS-treated OHCA incidence increased from 60 to 79 per 100,000 person-years; EMS-treated DA-OHCA incidence increased from 3.7 to 9.1 per 100,000 person-years. The proportion of overall OHCA classified as DA-OHCA increased from 6.1% to 11.5%. DA-OHCA was associated with greater odds of EMS treatment (AOR 1.34; 95%CI 1.13-1.58)., Conclusion: Although EMS-treated DA-OHCA incidence increased by nearly three-fold, it comprised a minority of the overall OHCA increase during the study period. DA-OHCA was associated with an increased likelihood of EMS treatment., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)