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., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

For this 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations, the Education, Implementation, and Teams Task Force applied the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, study design, time frame format and performed 15 systematic reviews, applying the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidance. Furthermore, 4 scoping reviews and 7 evidence updates assessed any new evidence to determine if a change in any existing treatment recommendation was required. The topics covered included training for the treatment of opioid overdose; basic life support, including automated external defibrillator training; measuring implementation and performance in communities, and cardiac arrest centers; advanced life support training, including team and leadership training and rapid response teams; measuring cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance, feedback devices, and debriefing; and the use of social media to improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation application., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

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 22 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, 5 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.

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., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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.

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., (Copyright © 2019 European Resuscitation Council and American Heart Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: The American Heart Association makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may arise as a result of an outside relationship or a personal, professional, or business interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing group are required to complete and submit a Disclosure Questionnaire showing all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc., and European Resuscitation Council.)

Background: In-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) outcomes vary widely between hospitals, even after adjusting for patient characteristics, suggesting variations in practice as a potential etiology. However, little is known about the standards of IHCA resuscitation practice among US hospitals., Objective: To describe current US hospital practices with regard to resuscitation care., Design: A nationally representative mail survey., Setting: A random sample of 1000 hospitals from the American Hospital Association database, stratified into 9 categories by hospital volume tertile and teaching status (major teaching, minor teaching, and nonteaching)., Subjects: Surveys were addressed to each hospital's cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) committee chair or chief medical/quality officer., Measurements: A 27-item questionnaire., Results: Responses were received from 439 hospitals with a similar distribution of admission volume and teaching status as the sample population (P = 0.50). Of the 270 (66%) hospitals with a CPR committee, 23 (10%) were chaired by a hospitalist. High frequency practices included having a rapid response team (91%) and standardizing defibrillators (88%). Low frequency practices included therapeutic hypothermia and use of CPR assist technology. Other practices such as debriefing (34%) and simulation training (62%) were more variable and correlated with the presence of a CPR committee and/or dedicated personnel for resuscitation quality improvement. The majority of hospitals (79%) reported at least 1 barrier to quality improvement, of which the lack of a resuscitation champion and inadequate training were the most common., Conclusions: There is wide variability among hospitals and within practices for resuscitation care in the United States with opportunities for improvement., (© 2014 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

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.

Optimizing the links in the Chain of Survival improves outcomes and saves lives. The use of evidence-based education and implementation strategies will allow organizations and communities to strengthen these links in the most effective and efficient manner.

Adequate training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) is an important component of a workplace safety training program. Barriers to traditional in-classroom CPR-AED training programs include time away from work to complete training, logistics, learner discomfort over being in a classroom setting, and instructors who include information irrelevant to CPR. This study evaluated differences in CPR skills performance between employees who learned CPR using a self-directed learning (SDL) kit and employees who attended a traditional instructor-led course. The results suggest that the SDL kit yields learning outcomes comparable to those obtained with traditional instructor-led courses and is a more time-efficient tool for CPR-AED training. Furthermore, the SDL kit overcomes many of the barriers that keep individuals from learning CPR and appears to contribute to bystanders' confidently attempting resuscitation.

Background: Data suggest that the overall quality of inhospital resuscitation is suboptimal and contributes to poor patient outcomes. In 2000 the American Heart Association created the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (NRCPR) as an evidence-based hospital safety program. Participating hospitals voluntarily join the registry and pay an annual fee that includes data support and report generation. The primary purpose of NRCPR is to support local facility efforts in practice management and performance improvement (PI)., Chain of Survival: The Chain of Survival illustrates the series of critical, interdependent actions necessary to maximize patient outcome from sudden cardiac arrest--early access to the emergency response system, early cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), early defibrillation, and early advanced cardiovascular care. NRCPR specifically addresses each link and helps hospitals develop, implement, and monitor their resuscitation processes in a manner that builds on available evidence., Participation in Nrcpr: On enrollment into NRCPR, each hospital identifies an onsite coordinator who is instructed on a standardized method for abstracting data from patient charts and how to enter data into the NRCPR database. The NRCPR database is managed centrally and provides participating organizations with ongoing, quarterly, and annual reports related to their resuscitation events., Discussion: NRCPR is used as both a local PI tool as well as a source of data that scientists are analyzing to further the understanding of inhospital resuscitation processes and outcomes. Over time, researchers have recognized the need to refine the Chain of Survival to reflect the unique aspects of inhospital resuscitation. A rapid response system provides a new link at the beginning, and postresuscitation care provides a new link at the end of the Chain of Survival.

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 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]