Search

To investigate the characteristics and outcomes of patients who experienced cardiac arrest in nursing homes compared with those in private residences and determine prognostic factors for survival. This was a retrospective study that analyzed data from an Utstein-style registry of the Tokyo Fire Department. We identified patients aged ≥65 years who experienced cardiac arrest in a nursing home or private residence from the population-based registry of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in Tokyo, Japan, from 2014 to 2018. Patients were grouped into the nursing home or the private residence groups according to their cardiac arrest location. We compared the characteristics and outcomes between the 2 groups and determined prognostic factors for survival in the nursing home group. The primary outcome was 1-month survival after cardiac arrest. In total, 37,550 patient records (nursing home group = 6271; private residence group = 31,279) were analyzed. Patients in the nursing home group were significantly older and more often had witnessed arrest, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and shock delivery using an automated external defibrillator. The 1-month survival rate was significantly higher in the nursing home group (2.6% vs 1.8%, P <.001). In the best scenario (daytime emergency call, witnessed cardiac arrest, bystander CPR provided), the 1-month survival rate after cardiac arrest in the nursing home group was 8.0% (95% confidence interval 6.4–9.9%), while none survived if they had neither witness nor bystander CPR. Survival outcome was significantly better in the nursing home group than in the private residence group and was well stratified by 3 prognostic factors: emergency call timing, witnessed status, and bystander CPR provision. Our results suggest that a decision to withhold vigorous treatment solely based on nursing home residential status is not justified, while termination of resuscitation may be determined by considering significant prognostic factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To investigate the effectiveness of public-access automated external defibrillators (AEDs) at Tokyo railroad stations.Methods: We analysed data from a population-based registry of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in Tokyo, Japan (2014-2018). We identified patients aged ≥18 years who experienced bystander-witnessed cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation of presumed cardiac origin at railroad stations. The primary outcome was survival at 1 month after cardiac arrest with favourable neurological outcomes (cerebral performance category 1-2).Results: Among 280 eligible patients who had bystander-witnessed cardiac arrest and received defibrillation at railroad stations, 245 patients (87.5%) received defibrillation using public-access AEDs and 35 patients (12.5%) received defibrillation administered by emergency medical services (EMS). Favourable neurological outcomes at 1 month after cardiac arrest were significantly more common in the group that received defibrillation using public-access AEDs (50.2% vs. 8.6%; adjusted odds ratio: 11.2, 95% confidence interval: 1.43-88.4) than in the group that received defibrillation by EMS. Over a 5-year period, favourable neurological outcomes at 1 month after cardiac arrest of 101.9 cases (95% confidence interval: 74.5-129.4) were calculated to be solely attributable to public-access AED use. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to gain one favourable neurological outcome obtained from public-access AEDs at railroad stations was lower than that obtained from nationwide deployment (48.5 vs. 2133.4 AED units).Conclusion: Deploying public-access AEDs at Tokyo railroad stations presented significant benefits and cost-effectiveness. Thus, it may be prudent to prioritise metropolitan railroad stations in public-access defibrillation programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]