Search

Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Chan has received research funding from the American Heart Association (AHA) and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). Dr Djärv is the chair of Swedish Resuscitation Council and the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) First Aid Task Force. A. Doll is employed by the Resuscitation Academy. Dr Edelson has equity interest and employment in AgileMD. Dr Girotra receives funding from the National Institutes of Health (R01HL160734, R56HL158803, and R01HL166305). He also receives a stipend from AHA for editorial work. Dr Greif is chair of ILCOR Education, Implementation and Team Task Force and the European Resuscitation Council board birector of guidelines. Dr Lauridsen serves as an ERC Science and Education Committee member and member of the ILCOR EIT Task Force. Dr Moskowitz receives funding from NHLBI (R33HL162980). M.C. Myburgh serves on the ILCOR Pediatric Task Force. Dr Neumar is the ILCOR cochair. J.P. Nolan is the editor in chief of Resuscitation and receives National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) grant funding. Dr Olasveengen is a board member of the Laerdal Foundation. Dr Perkins receives grant funding from the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands, Resuscitation Council United Kingdom, Laerdal Foundation, and the British Heart Foundation and serves on the boards for the European Resuscitation Council, Resuscitation Council UK, ILCOR, and University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire. He also serves as an editor for Resuscitation and Resuscitation Plus. J.K. Previdi serves as the AHA Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee chair and is an AHA product consultant. Dr Vaillancourt is a member of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada Resuscitation Advisory Committee and receives funding from The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization. Dr Montgomery serves as the ILCOR consultant. Dr Sasson is employed by AHA. Dr Nallamothu has been a principal investigator or coinvestigator on research grants from the NIH, AHA, Janssen, and Apple, Inc. He also receives compensation as an editor in chief of Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. Finally, he is a coinventor on the US Utility Patent Number US15/356012 (US20170148158A1) entitled “Automated Analysis of Vasculature in Coronary Angiograms” that uses software technology with signal processing and machine learning to automate the reading of coronary angiograms, held by the University of Michigan. The patent is licensed to AngioInsight, Inc, in which he holds ownership shares and receives consultancy fees. Dr Nadkarni receives research funding to his institution from the National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, US Department of Defense, American Heart Association, Zoll Medical, RQI Partners, and Laerdal Foundation; he also serves as the President of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) 2023-2024. The views expressed in the manuscript are his, and not intended to represent the views of the SCCM. The other authors report no conflicts.

Rationale: Nearly 3 in 5 in-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCAs) occur in the intensive care unit (ICU), yet large-scale data on the outcomes of in-ICU cardiac arrests have not been published for over a decade. Objectives: We sought to examine outcomes of in-ICU cardiac arrests, evaluating both achievement of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and subsequent survival to hospital discharge and how these have changed over time and by type of cardiac arrest. Methods: This was an observational study using the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, an American Heart Association-sponsored, prospective, multisite registry of IHCAs in the United States, including adults 18 years of age and older with a confirmed initial cardiac arrest occurring in the ICU who underwent resuscitation. Outcomes included achievement of ROSC and survival to hospital discharge. Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression adjusting for patient-level factors and hospitals as random effects was used to evaluate ROSC and survival. Results: A total of 114,371 adult, in-ICU IHCAs from January 2006 to December 2018 were studied. The mean age was 63.8 years, 41.3% were women, and 82.1% had a nonshockable initial rhythm. Of the 114,371 ICU cardiac arrests, 70,610 (61.7%) achieved ROSC, and 21,747 (19.0%) survived until hospital discharge. The rate of ROSC improved from 2006 to 2018 (unadjusted rate, 55.0-65.4%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] per year, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.05). There was an increase in overall survival to discharge during this time (unadjusted rate, 16.7-20.5%; adjusted OR per year, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04). The survival to discharge rate of the 70,610 patients who achieved ROSC increased slightly (unadjusted rate, 30.3-31.4%; adjusted OR per year, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01, 1.02). Conclusions: There is an increase in survival to discharge for patients who experienced a cardiac arrest in the ICU between 2006 and 2018. There is an increase in achievement of ROSC and post-ROSC survival to discharge, although the increase in achievement of ROSC was greater than the increase in post-ROSC survival.

Background: Recent reports on challenges in resuscitation care at hospitals severely affected by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raise questions about how the pandemic affected outcomes for in-hospital cardiac arrest throughout the United States., Methods: Within Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare in-hospital cardiac arrest survival during the presurge (January 1-February 29), surge (March 1-May 15) and immediate postsurge (May 16-June 30) periods in 2020 compared to 2015 to 2019. Monthly COVID-19 mortality rates for each hospital's county were categorized, per 1 000 000 residents, as low (0-10), moderate (11-50), high (51-100), or very high (>100). Using hierarchical regression models, we compared rates of survival to discharge in 2020 versus 2015 to 2019 for each period., Results: Of 61 586 in-hospital cardiac arrests, 21 208 (4309 in 2020), 26 459 (5949 in 2020), and 13 919 (2686 in 2020) occurred in the presurge, surge, and postsurge periods, respectively. During the presurge period, 24.2% survived to discharge in 2020 versus 24.7% in 2015 to 2019 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.02-1.22]). In contrast, during the surge period, 19.6% survived to discharge in 2020 versus 26.0% in 2015 to 2019 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.81 [0.75-0.88]). Lower survival was most pronounced in communities with high (28% lower survival) and very high (42% lower survival) monthly COVID-19 mortality rates (interaction P <0.001). Resuscitation times were shorter (median: 22 versus 25 minutes; P <0.001), and delayed epinephrine treatment was more prevalent (11.3% versus 9.9%; P =0.004) during the surge period. Survival was lower even when patients with confirmed/suspected COVID-19 infection were excluded from analyses. During the postsurge period, survival rates were similar in 2020 versus 2015 to 2019 (22.3% versus 25.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.93 [0.83-1.04]), including communities with high COVID-19 mortality (interaction P =0.16)., Conclusions: Early during the pandemic, rates of survival to discharge for IHCA decreased, even among patients without COVID-19 infection, highlighting the early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-hospital resuscitation.

Background: Studies have reported lower survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) during the initial COVID-19 surge. Whether the pandemic reduced IHCA survival during subsequent surges and in areas with lower COVID-19 rates is unknown., Methods: Within Get-With-The-Guidelines®-Resuscitation, we identified 22,899 and 79,736 IHCAs during March to December in 2020 and 2015-2019, respectively. Using hierarchical regression, we compared risk-adjusted rates of survival to discharge in 2020 vs. 2015-19 during five COVID-19 periods: Surge 1 (March to mid-May), post-Surge 1 (mid-May to June), Surge 2 (July to mid-August), post-Surge 2 (mid-August to mid-October), and Surge 3 (mid-October to December). Monthly COVID-19 mortality rates for each hospital's county were categorized, per 1,000,000 residents, as very low (0-10), low (11-50), moderate (51-100), or high (>100)., Results: During each COVID-19 surge period in 2020, rates of survival to discharge for IHCA were lower, as compared with the same period in 2015-2019: Surge 1: adjusted OR: 0.81 (0.75-0.88); Surge 2: adjusted OR: 0.88 (0.79-0.97), Surge 3: adjusted OR: 0.79 (0.73-0.86). Lower survival was most pronounced at hospitals located in counties with moderate to high monthly COVID-19 mortality rates. In contrast, during the two post-surge periods, survival rates were similar in 2020 vs. 2015-2019: post-Surge 1: adjusted OR 0.93 (0.83-1.04) and post-Surge 2: adjusted OR 0.94 (0.86-1.03), even at hospitals with the highest county-level COVID-19 mortality rates., Conclusions: During the three COVID-19 surges in the U.S. during 2020, rates of survival to discharge for IHCA dropped substantially, especially in communities with moderate to high COVID-19 mortality rates., 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 © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Survival outcomes following in-hospital cardiac arrest vary significantly across hospitals. Research suggests clinician education and training may play a role. We sought to identify best practices related to the education and training of resuscitation teams., Methods: We conducted a descriptive qualitative analysis of semistructured interview data obtained from in-depth site visits conducted from 2016 to 2017 at 9 diverse hospitals within the American Heart Association "Get With The Guidelines" registry, selected based on in-hospital cardiac arrest survival performance (5 top-, 1 middle-, 3 low-performing). We assessed coded data related to education and training including systems learning, informal feedback and debrief, and formal learning through advanced cardiopulmonary life support and mock codes. Thematic analysis was used to identify best practices., Results: In total, 129 interviews were conducted with a variety of hospital staff including nurses, chaplains, security guards, respiratory therapists, physicians, pharmacists, and administrators, yielding 78 hours and 29 minutes of interview time. Four themes related to training and education were identified: engagement, clear communication, consistency, and responsive leadership. Top-performing hospitals encouraged employee engagement with creative marketing of new programs and prioritizing hands-on learning over passive didactics. Clear communication was accomplished with debriefing, structured institutional review, and continual, frequent education for departments. Consistency was a cornerstone to culture change and was achieved with uniform policies for simulation practice as well as reinforced, routine practice (weekly, monthly, quarterly). Finally, top-performing hospitals had responsive leadership teams across multiple disciplines (nursing, respiratory therapy, pharmacy and medicine), who listened and adapted programs to fit the needs of their staff., Conclusions: Among top-performing hospitals excelling in in-hospital cardiac arrest survival, we identified core elements for education and training of resuscitation teams. Developing tools to expand these areas for hospitals may improve in-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes.

Background Limited information is available regarding in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in patients with COVID-19. Methods and Results We leveraged the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease (AHA COVID-19 CVD) Registry to conduct a cohort study of adults hospitalized for COVID-19. IHCA was defined as those with documentation of cardiac arrest requiring medication or electrical shock for resuscitation. Mixed effects models with random intercepts were used to identify independent predictors of IHCA and mortality while accounting for clustering at the hospital level. The study cohort included 8518 patients (6080 not in the intensive care unit [ICU]) with mean age of 61.5 years (SD 17.5). IHCA occurred in 509 (5.9%) patients overall with 375 (73.7%) in the ICU and 134 (26.3%) patients not in the ICU. The majority of patients at the time of ICHA were not in a shockable rhythm (76.5%). Independent predictors of IHCA included older age, Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 1.9; CI, 1.4-2.4; P <0.001), and non-Hispanic Black race (OR, 1.5; CI, 1.1-1.9; P =0.004). Other predictors included oxygen use on admission, quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score on admission, and hypertension. Overall, 35 (6.9%) patients with IHCA survived to discharge, with 9.1% for ICU and 0.7% for non-ICU patients. Conclusions Older age, Black race, and Hispanic ethnicity are independent predictors of IHCA in patients with COVID-19. Although the incidence is much lower than in ICU patients, approximately one-quarter of IHCA events in patients with COVID-19 occur in non-ICU settings, with the latter having a substantially lower survival to discharge rate.

Background Although many hospitals have resuscitation champions, it is unknown if hospitals with very active physician or nonphysician champions have higher survival rates for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). Methods and Results We surveyed adult hospitals in Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation about resuscitation practices, including about their resuscitation champion. Hospitals were categorized as having a very active physician champion, a very active nonphysician champion, or other (no champion or not very active champion). For each hospital, we calculated risk-standardized survival rates for IHCA during the period of 2016 to 2018 and categorized them into quintiles of risk-standardized survival rates. The association between a hospital's resuscitation champion type and their quintile of survival was evaluated using multivariable hierarchical proportional odds logistic regression. Overall, 192 hospitals (total of 44 477 IHCAs) comprised the study cohort. Risk-standardized survival rates for IHCA varied widely between hospitals (median: 24.7%; range: 9.2%-37.5%). Very active physician champions were present in 29 (15.1%) hospitals, 64 (33.3%) had very active nonphysician champions, and 99 (51.6%) did not have a very active champion. Compared with sites without a very active resuscitation champion, hospitals with a very active physician champion were 4 times more likely to be in a higher survival quintile, even after adjusting for resuscitation practices across hospital groups (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 3.90; 95% CI, 1.39-10.95). In contrast, there was no difference in survival between sites without very active champions and those with very active non-physician champions (adjusted OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.62-2.65). Conclusions The background and engagement level of a resuscitation champion is a critical factor in a hospital's survival outcomes for IHCA.

Background Identifying actionable resuscitation practices that vary across hospitals could improve adherence to process measures or outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We sought to examine whether hospital debriefing frequency after IHCA varies across hospitals and whether hospitals which routinely perform debriefing have higher rates of process-of-care compliance or survival. Methods We conducted a nationwide survey of hospital resuscitation practices in April of 2018, which were then linked to data from the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation national registry for IHCA. Hospitals were categorized according to their reported frequency of debriefing immediately after IHCA; rarely (0%-20% of all IHCA cases), occasionally (21%-80%), and frequently (81%-100%). Hospital-level rates of timely defibrillation (≤2 minutes), epinephrine administration (≤5 minutes), survival to discharge, return of spontaneous circulation, and neurologically intact survival were comparted for patients with IHCA from 2015 to 2017. Results Overall, there were 193 hospitals comprising 44 477 IHCA events. Mean patient age was 65±16, 41% were females, and 68% were of White race. Across hospitals, 84 (43.5%) rarely performed debriefings immediately after an IHCA, 82 (42.5%) performed debriefing sessions occasionally, and 27 (14.0%) performed debriefing frequently. There was no association between higher reported debriefing frequency and hospital rates of timely defibrillation and epinephrine administration. Mean hospital rates of risk-standardized survival to discharge were similar across debriefing frequency groups (rarely 25.6%; occasionally 26.0%; frequently 25.2%, P =0.72), as were hospital rates of risk-adjusted return of spontaneous circulation (rarely 72.2%; occasionally 73.0%; frequently 70.0%, P =0.06) and neurologically intact survival (rarely 21.9%, occasionally 22.2%, frequently 21.1%, P =0.75). Conclusions In a large contemporary nationwide quality improvement registry, hospitals varied widely in how often they conducted debriefings immediately after IHCA. However, hospital debriefing frequency was not associated with better adherence to timely delivery of epinephrine or defibrillation or higher rates of IHCA survival.

Importance: Survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest depends on 2 distinct phases: responsiveness and quality of the hospital code team (ie, acute resuscitation phase) and intensive and specialty care expertise (ie, postresuscitation phase). Understanding the association of these 2 phases with overall survival has implications for design of in-hospital cardiac arrest quality measures., Objective: To determine whether hospital-level rates of acute resuscitation survival and postresuscitation survival are associated with overall risk-standardized survival to discharge for in-hospital cardiac arrest., Design, Settings, and Participants: This observational cohort study included 86 426 patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest from January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2018, recruited from 290 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry., Exposures: Risk-adjusted rates of acute resuscitation survival, defined as return of spontaneous circulation for at least 20 minutes, and postresuscitation survival, defined as survival to discharge among patients achieving return of spontaneous circulation., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall risk-standardized survival rate (RSSR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest calculated using a previously validated model. The correlation between a hospital's overall RSSR and risk-adjusted rates of acute resuscitation and postresuscitation survival were examined., Results: Of 86 426 patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest, the median age was 67.0 years (interquartile range [IQR], 56.0-76.0 years); 50 665 (58.6%) were men, and 71 811 (83.1%) had an initial nonshockable cardiac arrest rhythm. The median RSSR was 25.1% (IQR, 21.9%-27.7%). The median risk-adjusted acute resuscitation survival was 72.4% (IQR, 67.9%-76.9%), and risk-adjusted postresuscitation survival was 34.0% (IQR, 31.5%-37.7%). Although a hospital's RSSR was correlated with survival during both phases, the correlation with postresuscitation survival (ρ, 0.90; P < .001) was stronger compared with the correlation with acute resuscitation survival (ρ, 0.50; P < .001). Of note, there was no correlation between risk-adjusted acute resuscitation survival and postresuscitation survival (ρ, 0.09; P = .11). Compared with hospitals in the lowest RSSR quartile, hospitals in the highest RSSR quartile had higher rates of acute resuscitation survival (75.4% in quartile 4 vs 66.8% in quartile 1; P < .001) and postresuscitation survival (40.3% in quartile 4 vs 28.7% in quartile 1; P < .001), but the magnitude of difference was larger with postresuscitation survival., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that hospitals that excel in overall in-hospital cardiac arrest survival, in general, excel in either acute resuscitation or postresuscitation care but not both; efforts to strengthen postresuscitation care may offer additional opportunities to improve in-hospital cardiac arrest survival.

Background: In-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCA) occur commonly and are associated with poor survival and variable outcomes. This study aimed to directly survey IHCA responders to understand their perceptions of resuscitation care., Methods: As part of a quality improvement initiative, we surveyed participating providers of IHCAs at our institution from Jan 2014 to May 2016. The survey included unstructured free text feedback, which was the focus of this study. We systematically coded the free text and organized identifiable latent themes using thematic analysis. We used the natural timeline of an IHCA - pre-arrest, arrest, and post-arrest - for organization of the identifiable latent themes, and created a separate category for holistic remarks that arched across the timeline., Results: We identified 172 IHCAs with a mean of 1.7 responses per arrest (range: 1-8 responses). The mean age of this patient population was 59 years at the time of arrest, and 107 (62%) were men. We identified several themes - [1] issues around code activation and code status characterized the pre-arrest period [2] ,team interactions and issues around supplies/equipment dominated the intra-arrest period, and [3] code cessation and transitions of care typified the post-arrest period. Holistic remarks focused on attentiveness paid by the arrest team to patient comfort and family. Some comments reflected positive experiences but most focused on areas of improvement consistent with the initiative's purpose. In certain cases, we identified a tension between the need to balance established resuscitation protocols with flexibility required by real-life circumstances., Conclusions: Directly surveying those who participated in IHCAs led to novel insights about their experiences. Our findings suggest that parsing through such qualitative feedback can help hospitals identify areas of improvement, modulate expectations, temper emotions, and refine protocols.

Background: Good outcomes for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) depend on a skilled resuscitation team, prompt initiation of high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation, and organisational structures to support IHCA response. We examined the role of nurses in resuscitation, contrasting higher versus lower performing hospitals in IHCA survival., Methods: We conducted a descriptive qualitative study at nine hospitals in the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, purposefully sampling hospitals that varied in geography, academic status, and risk-standardised IHCA survival. We conducted 158 semistructured interviews with nurses, physicians, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, quality improvement staff, and administrators. Qualitative thematic text analysis followed by type-building text analysis identified distinct nursing roles in IHCA care and support for roles., Results: Nurses played three major roles in IHCA response: bedside first responder, resuscitation team member, and clinical or administrative leader. We found distinctions between higher and lower performing hospitals in support for nurses. Higher performing hospitals emphasised training and competency of nurses at all levels; provided organisational flexibility and responsiveness with nursing roles; and empowered nurses to operate at a higher scope of clinical practice (eg, bedside defibrillation). Higher performing hospitals promoted nurses as leaders-administrators supporting nurses in resuscitation care at the institution, resuscitation team leaders during resuscitation and clinical champions for resuscitation care. Lower performing hospitals had more restrictive nurse roles with less emphasis on systematically identifying improvement needs., Conclusion: Hospitals that excelled in IHCA survival emphasised mentoring and empowering front-line nurses and ensured clinical competency and adequate nursing training for IHCA care. Though not proof of causation, nurses appear to be critical to effective IHCA response, and how to support their role to optimise outcomes warrants further investigation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PC receives funding from the National Institutes of Health and has received consultant funding from the American Heart Association and Optum Rx. BK is a principal investigator or co-investigator on research grants from the NIH, VA HSR&D, the American Heart Association, Apple, Inc, and Toyota. He also receives compensation as Editor-in-Chief of Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes, a journal of the American Heart Association. Finally, he is a co-inventor on U.S. Utility Patent Number US15/356,012 (US20170148158A1) entitled “Automated Analysis of Vasculature in Coronary Angiograms” that uses software technology with signal processing and machine learning to automate the reading of coronary angiograms, held by the University of Michigan. The patent is licensed to AngioInsight, Inc., in which BK holds ownership shares (although it has yet to be funded). None of these are related to the current work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aim: We examined the use of a Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) catheter during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) after cardiac arrest (CA) to assess its effect on haemodynamics such as coronary perfusion pressure (CPP), common carotid artery blood flow (CCA-flow) and end-tidal CO 2 (PetCO 2 ) which are associated with increased return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC)., Methods: Six male swine were instrumented to measure CPP, CCA-Flow, and PetCO 2 . A 7Fr REBOA was advanced into zone-1 of the aorta through the femoral artery. Ventricular fibrillation was induced and untreated for 8 min. CPR (manual then mechanical) was initiated for 24 min. Continuous infusion of adrenaline (epinephrine) was started at minute-4 of CPR. The REBOA balloon was inflated at minute-16 for 3 min and then deflated/inflated every 3 min for 3 cycles. Animals were defibrillated up to 6 times after the final cycle. Animals achieving ROSC were monitored for 25 min., Results: Data showed significant differences between balloon deflation and inflation periods for CPP, CCA-Flow, and PetCO 2 (p < 0.0001) with an average difference (SD) of 13.7 (2.28) mmHg, 15.5 (14.12) mL min -1 and -4 (2.76) mmHg respectively. Three animals achieved ROSC and had significantly higher mean CPP (54 vs. 18 mmHg), CCA-Flow (262 vs. 135 mL min -1 ) and PetCO 2 (16 vs. 8 mmHg) (p < 0.0001) throughout inflation periods than No-ROSC animals. Aortic histology did not reveal any significant changes produced by balloon inflation., Conclusion: REBOA significantly increased CPP and CCA-Flow in this model of prolonged CA. These increases may contribute to the ability to achieve ROSC., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Several clinical decision rules (CDRs) have been developed to help practitioners know when to safely terminate resuscitative efforts after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). The UN10 rule, a CDR that uses 3 intra-arrest variables, has been shown to predict a poor chance of survival to discharge. However, its large-scale applicability in clinical settings remains unknown., Objective: To assess the performance of a parsimonious CDR in a national cohort of individuals with IHCA., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used a nationwide cohort from the American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation IHCA registry to derive a sample of 96 509 patients from 716 US hospitals who experienced IHCA from January 1, 2000, to January 26, 2016. Data analysis began in January 2018 and concluded in June 2018., Exposures: The UN10 rule uses 3 variables: (1) unwitnessed arrest, (2) nonshockable rhythm, and (3) no return of spontaneous circulation within 10 minutes of resuscitative efforts. The CDR indicates futility if all 3 criteria are met. This CDR was analyzed according to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) reporting guideline., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge following resuscitation. Favorable neurologic status at discharge was also assessed. Overall rates of survival and survival with favorable neurologic status (cerebral performance category score, 1 or 2) were compared with predicted values by the UN10 rule using 2 × 2 contingency tables., Results: Of 96 509 patients, 55 761 (57.8%) were men, and the mean (SD) age was 67.1 (15.3) years. In total, 18 713 patients (19.4%) survived to discharge, and 16 134 patients (16.7%) were discharged with a favorable neurologic status. Overall, 15 838 patients (16.4%) met all 3 criteria for futility in the UN10 rule. A total of 1005 patients (6.3%) who met the UN10 rule survived to discharge, and 754 (4.8%) survived with favorable neurologic status. The percentage of patients meeting the UN10 rule (ie, predicting futile resuscitation) who actually survived in our study cohort was substantially higher than the initial derivation cohort (0%) and single-center validation cohort (1.1%). The positive predictive value of the UN10 rule was 93.7% (95% CI, 93.3%-94.0%), which was lower than the initial derivation cohort (100%; 95% CI, 97.5%-100%) and validation cohort (98.9%; 95% CI, 96.5%-99.7%)., Conclusions and Relevance: Patients who met the UN10 rule were associated with unfavorable neurologic status and low rates of survival after IHCA. Yet their survival rates are higher than reported in the initial validation study, raising the question of whether the UN10 rule may have limited utility as a definitive measure of futility during resuscitations in real-world clinical settings.

Background: In-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) is common, and outcomes vary substantially across US hospitals, but reasons for these differences are largely unknown. We set out to better understand how top-performing hospitals organize their resuscitation teams to achieve high survival rates for IHCA., Methods: We calculated risk-standardized IHCA survival to discharge rates across American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry hospitals between 2012 and 2014. We identified geographically and academically diverse hospitals in the top, middle, and bottom quartiles of survival for IHCA and performed a qualitative study that included site visits with in-depth interviews of clinical and administrative staff at 9 hospitals. With the use of thematic analysis, data were analyzed to identify salient themes of perceived performance by informants., Results: Across 9 hospitals, we interviewed 158 individuals from multiple disciplines including physicians (17.1%), nurses (45.6%), other clinical staff (17.1%), and administration (20.3%). We identified 4 broad themes related to resuscitation teams: (1) team design, (2) team composition and roles, (3) communication and leadership during IHCA, and (4) training and education. Resuscitation teams at top-performing hospitals demonstrated the following features: dedicated or designated resuscitation teams; participation of diverse disciplines as team members during IHCA; clear roles and responsibilities of team members; better communication and leadership during IHCA; and in-depth mock codes., Conclusions: Resuscitation teams at hospitals with high IHCA survival differ from non-top-performing hospitals. Our findings suggest core elements of successful resuscitation teams that are associated with better outcomes and form the basis for future work to improve IHCA., (© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Although rates of survival to hospital discharge after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) have improved over the last decade, it is unknown if these survival gains are sustained after hospital discharge., Objective: To examine 1-year survival trends overall and by rhythm after IHCA., Methods: Using Medicare beneficiaries (age≥65years) with IHCA occurring between 2000 and 2011 at Get With The Guidelines®-Resuscitation Registry participating hospitals we used multivariable regression, to examine temporal trends in risk-adjusted rates of 1-year survival., Results: Among 45,567 patients with IHCA, the unadjusted 1-year survival was 9.4%. Unadjusted 1-year survival was 21.8% among the 9,223 (20.2%) of patients with Ventricular Fibrillation or Pulseless Ventricular Tachycardia (VF/VT) and 6.2% among the 36,344 (79.8%) of patients with Pulseless Electrical Activity or asystole (PEA/asystole). After adjustment for patient and arrest characteristics, 1-year survival increased over time for all IHCA from 8.9% in 2000-2001 to 15.2% in 2011 (adjusted rate ratio [RR] per year, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03-1.06; P<0.001 for trend). Improvements in 1-year risk adjusted survival were also observed for VF/VT (19.4% in 2000-2001 to 25.6% in 2011 [RR per year, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P 0.004 for trend]) and PEA/asystole arrests (4.7% in 2000-2001 to 10.2% in 2011 [RR per year, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.08; P<0.001 for trend])., Conclusion: Among Medicare beneficiaries in the GWTG-Resuscitation registry, 1-year survival after IHCA has increased for over the past decade. Temporal improvements in survival were noted for both shockable and non-shockable presenting arrest rhythms., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite significant attention to resuscitation care by hospitals, national data on trends in the incidence and survival of patients with inhospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) are limited., Objective: To determine trends and hospital-level variation in the incidence and outcomes associated with IHCA. In exploratory analyses, we evaluated the relationship between hospital-level IHCA incidence and outcomes with general hospital-wide quality improvement activities., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of 2,205,123 hospitalizations at 101 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals between 2008 and 2012., Main Outcomes: Risk- and reliability-adjusted hospital-level IHCA incidence and survival to hospital discharge., Results: A total of 8821 (0.40%) IHCA occurred between 2008 and 2012, with no significant change in risk-adjusted incidence over this time (P = .77). Hospital-level IHCA incidence varied substantially across facilities, with a median hospital incidence of 4.0 per 1000 hospitalizations and a range from 1.4 to 11.8 per 1000 hospitalizations. Overall, survival to discharge after IHCA was 31.2%. Risk-adjusted odds of survival increased over the study period (2012 vs 2008, OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.27, 1.75) but survival varied substantially across facilities from 20.3% to 45.4%. General hospital quality improvement activities were inconsistently associated with IHCA incidence and survival., Conclusions: Within the VHA, the incidence and outcomes of IHCA showed important trends over time but varied substantially across hospitals with no consistent link to general hospital quality improvement activities. Identification of specific resuscitation practices at hospitals with low incidence and high survival of IHCA may guide further improvements for inhospital resuscitation., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Little is known regarding patterns of resuscitation care in patients with advanced cancer who suffer in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA)., Methods: In the Get With The Guidelines - Resuscitation registry, 47,157 adults with IHCA with and without advanced cancer (defined as the presence of metastatic or hematologic malignancy) were identified at 369 hospitals from April 2006 through June 2010. We compared rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to discharge between groups using multivariable models. We also compared duration of resuscitation effort and resuscitation quality measures., Results: Overall, 6,585 patients with IHCA (14.0%) had advanced cancer. Patients with advanced cancer had lower multivariable-adjusted rates of ROSC (52.3% [95% CI, 49.5% to 55.3%] v 56.6% [95% CI, 53.8% to 59.5%]; P < .001) and survival to discharge (7.4% [95% CI, 6.6% to 8.4%] v 13.4% [95% CI, 12.1% to 14.8%]; P < .001). Among nonsurvivors who died during resuscitation, patients with advanced cancer had better performance on most resuscitation quality measures. Among patients with ROSC, patients with advanced cancer were made Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) more frequently within 48 hours (adjusted relative risk, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.24 to 1.37]; P < .001). Adjustment for DNAR status explained some of the immediate effect of advanced cancer on survival; however, survival remained significantly lower in patients with cancer., Conclusion: Patients with advanced cancer can expect lower survival rates after IHCA compared with those without advanced cancer, and they are more frequently made DNAR within 48 hours of ROSC. These findings have important implications for discussions of resuscitation care wishes with patients and can better inform end-of-life discussions.

Background: The duration of resuscitation efforts has implications for patient survival of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). It is unknown if patients with better predicted survival of IHCA receive longer attempts at resuscitation., Methods: In a multicenter observational cohort of 40,563 adult non-survivors of resuscitation efforts for IHCA between 2000 and 2012, we determined the pre-arrest predicted probability of survival to discharge with good neurologic status, categorized into very low (<1%), low (1-3%), average (>3%-15%), and above average (>15%). We then determined the association between predicted arrest survival probability and the duration of resuscitation efforts., Results: The median duration of resuscitation efforts among all non-survivors was 19min (interquartile range 13-28min). Overall, the median duration of resuscitation efforts was longer in non-survivors with a higher predicted probability of survival with good neurologic status (median of 16, 17, 20, and 23min among the groups predicted to have very low, low, average, and above probabilities, respectively; P<0.001). However, the duration of resuscitation was often discordant with predicted survival, including longer than median duration of resuscitation efforts in 40.4% of patients with very low predicted survival and shorter than median duration of resuscitation efforts in 31.9% of patients with above average predicted survival., Conclusions: The duration of resuscitation efforts in patients with IHCA was generally consistent with their predicted survival. However, nearly a third of patients with above average predicted outcomes received shorter than average (less than 19min) duration of resuscitation efforts., (Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Rationale: Suicidal ideation is an important part of the spectrum of depression, but studies of outcomes after cardiac events often avoid asking about suicide as part of their assessment due to perceived resource constraints and the complexity of managing this finding., Objectives: To describe the development, feasibility, and outcomes of a suicide risk management protocol implemented by research assistants administering the Patient Health Questionnaire Depression Scale (PHQ-9)., Methods: Patients surviving in-hospital cardiac arrest at any Veterans Affairs hospital during 2014 to 2015 received PHQ-9 screening as a part of longitudinal telephone or mail interviews administered at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after hospital discharge. Those who screened positive for suicidal ideation were administered a telephone risk assessment protocol., Measurements and Main Results: Fifty-five of 366 (15%) interviewed Veterans endorsed suicidal ideation according to the PHQ-9 on 82 of their completed interviews. Of those who endorsed suicidal ideation during their interview, 81% of interviews included passive suicidal ideation without intent or plan. Five (9%) patients were recommended to receive expedited follow-up with a mental health provider or suicide prevention coordinator located within their Veterans Affairs healthcare facility. In 50 (63%) interviews, the patient already had reliable resources, such as a mental health provider or the number to the Veterans Crisis Line., Conclusions: Suicidal ideation is common after in-hospital cardiac arrest, although most patients are at low risk. Addressing suicidal ideation in an observational research study is feasible, with a detailed protocol and research staff who can respond to incidents of high-risk suicidal ideation in collaboration with study clinicians.

Background: Cardiac arrest is a major public health concern worldwide. The extent and types of randomized controlled trials (RCT)-our most reliable source of clinical evidence-conducted in these high-risk patients over recent years are largely unknown., Methods and Results: We performed a systematic review, identifying all RCTs published in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from 1995 to 2014 that focused on the acute treatment of nontraumatic cardiac arrest in adults. We then extracted data on the setting of study populations, types and timing of interventions studied, risk of bias, outcomes reported, and how these factors have changed over time. Over this 20-year period, 92 RCTs were published containing 64 309 patients (median, 225.5 per trial). Of these, 81 RCTs (88.0%) involved out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, whereas 4 (4.3%) involved in-hospital cardiac arrest and 7 (7.6%) included both. Eighteen RCTs (19.6%) were performed in the United States, 68 (73.9%) were performed outside the United States, and 6 (6.5%) were performed in both settings. Thirty-eight RCTs (41.3%) evaluated drug therapy, 39 (42.4%) evaluated device therapy, and 15 (16.3%) evaluated protocol improvements. Seventy-four RCTs (80.4%) examined interventions during the cardiac arrest, 15 (16.3%) examined post cardiac arrest treatment, and 3 (3.3%) studied both. Overall, reporting of the risk of bias was limited. The most common outcome reported was return of spontaneous circulation: 86 (93.5%) with only 22 (23.9%) reporting survival beyond 6 months. Fifty-three RCTs (57.6%) reported global ordinal outcomes, whereas 15 (16.3%) reported quality-of-life. RCTs in the past 5 years were more likely to be focused on protocol improvements and postcardiac arrest care., Conclusions: Important gaps in RCTs of cardiac arrest treatments exist, especially those examining in-hospital cardiac arrest, protocol improvement, postcardiac arrest care, and long-term or quality-of-life outcomes., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Importance: Although survival of patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest varies markedly among hospitals, specific resuscitation practices that distinguish sites with higher cardiac arrest survival rates remain unknown., Objective: To identify resuscitation practices associated with higher rates of in-hospital cardiac arrest survival., Design, Setting, and Participants: Nationwide survey of resuscitation practices at hospitals participating in the Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation registry and with 20 or more adult in-hospital cardiac arrest cases from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2013. Data analysis was performed from June 10 to December 22, 2015., Main Outcomes and Measures: Risk-standardized survival rates for cardiac arrest were calculated at each hospital and were then used to categorize hospitals into quintiles of performance. The association between resuscitation practices and quintiles of survival was evaluated using hierarchical proportional odds logistic regression models., Results: Overall, 150 (78.1%) of 192 eligible hospitals completed the study survey, and 131 facilities with 20 or more adult in-hospital cardiac arrest cases comprised the final study cohort. Risk-standardized survival rates after in-hospital cardiac arrest varied substantially (median, 23.7%; range, 9.2%-37.5%). Several resuscitation practices were associated with survival on bivariate analysis, although only 3 were significant after multivariable adjustment: monitoring for interruptions in chest compressions (adjusted odds ratio [OR] for being in a higher survival quintile category, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.24-5.93; P = .01), reviewing cardiac arrest cases monthly (adjusted OR for being in a higher survival quintile category, 8.55; 95% CI, 1.79-40.00) or quarterly (OR, 6.85; 95% CI, 1.49-31.30; P = .03), and adequate resuscitation training (adjusted OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.21-8.33; P = .02)., Conclusions and Relevance: Using survey information from acute care hospitals participating in a national quality improvement registry, we identified 3 resuscitation strategies associated with higher hospital rates of survival for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest. These strategies can form the foundation for best practices for resuscitation care at hospitals given the high incidence and variation in survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Objective: To describe temporal trends in the time interval between first and second attempts at defibrillation and the association between this time interval and outcomes in patients with persistent ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) arrest in hospital., Design: Retrospective cohort study, Setting: 172 hospitals in the United States participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, 2004-12., Participants: Adults who received a second defibrillation attempt for persistent VT/VF arrest within three minutes of a first attempt., Interventions: Second defibrillation attempts categorized as early (time interval of up to and including one minute between first and second defibrillation attempts) or deferred (time interval of more than one minute between first and second defibrillation attempts)., Main Outcome Measure: Survival to hospital discharge., Results: Among 2733 patients with persistent VT/VF after the first defibrillation attempt, 1121 (41%) received a deferred second attempt. Deferred second defibrillation for persistent VT/VF increased from 26% in 2004 to 57% in 2012 (P<0.001 for trend). Compared with early second defibrillation, unadjusted patient outcomes were significantly worse with deferred second defibrillation (57.4% v 62.5% for return of spontaneous circulation, 38.4% v 43.6% for survival to 24 hours, and 24.7% v 30.8% for survival to hospital discharge; P<0.01 for all comparisons). After risk adjustment, deferred second defibrillation was not associated with survival to hospital discharge (propensity weighting adjusted risk ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.01; P=0.08; hierarchical regression adjusted 0.92, 0.83 to 1.02; P=0.1)., Conclusions: Since 2004, the use of deferred second defibrillation for persistent VT/VF in hospital has doubled. Deferred second defibrillation was not associated with improved survival., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Although implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) reduce mortality in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, their effectiveness in survivors of "inhospital" cardiac arrest-a population with different arrest etiologies and higher illness acuity than out-of-hospital cardiac arrest-is unknown. We therefore sought to conduct a comparative effectiveness study of ICD therapy in survivors of inhospital cardiac arrest., Methods: We linked data from a national inpatient cardiac arrest registry with Medicare files and identified 1,200 adults from 267 hospitals between 2000 and 2008 who were discharged after surviving an inhospital cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia and who otherwise met traditional inclusion and exclusion criteria for secondary prevention ICD trials. The association between ICD treatment and long-term mortality was evaluated using an optimal match (≤4 controls for each ICD patient) propensity-score analysis., Results: Of 1,200 survivors, 343 (28.6%) received an ICD during the index hospitalization. Overall, 3-year mortality was 44.2%, with higher unadjusted mortality in the non-ICD versus the ICD group (46.9% vs 37.3%; log-rank; P < .001). After successfully matching 343 patients treated with ICDs with 823 untreated patients by propensity score, ICD treatment was associated with a 24% lower mortality rate (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.60-0.97; P = .025). This lower mortality was mediated by lower rates of out-of-hospital deaths among ICD-treated patients (22.1% vs 30.8%; adjusted HR 0.71 [0.52-0.96]; P = .019), whereas deaths occurring during a readmission were similar (15.2% vs 16.1%; adjusted HR 0.89 [95% CI 0.60-1.32]; P = .56)., Conclusions: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in survivors of inhospital cardiac arrest due to a pulseless ventricular rhythm is used uncommonly but associated with lower long-term mortality. Given that fewer than 3 in 10 eligible survivors are treated with ICDs after surviving an inhospital cardiac arrest, our findings highlight a potentially modifiable process of care, which could improve long-term survival in this high-risk population., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A growing number of hospitals have begun to implement policies allowing for family presence during resuscitation (FPDR). However, the overall safety of these policies and their effect on resuscitation care is unknown., Methods and Results: We conducted an observational cohort study of 252 hospitals in the United States with 41,568 adults with cardiac arrest. Multivariable hierarchical regression models were used to evaluate patterns of care at hospitals with and without an FPDR policy. Primary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation and survival to discharge. Secondary outcomes included resuscitation quality, interventions, and facility-reported potential resuscitation systems errors. There were no significant differences in facility characteristics between hospitals with and without an FPDR policy, nor were there significant differences in return of spontaneous circulation (adjusted risk ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.06) or survival to discharge (adjusted risk ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.15). There was a small, borderline significant decrease in the mean time to defibrillation at hospitals with an FPDR policy compared with hospitals without the policy (mean difference, 0.32 minutes; 95% confidence interval, -0.01 to 0.64). Resuscitation quality, interventions, and facility-reported potential resuscitation systems errors did not meaningfully differ between hospitals with and without an FPDR policy., Conclusions: Hospitals with an FPDR policy generally have no statistically significant differences in outcomes and processes of care as hospitals without this policy, suggesting such policies may not negatively affect resuscitation care. Further study is warranted about the direct effect of FPDR attempts on adult patients with an in-hospital cardiac arrest and their families., (© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Although an in-hospital cardiac arrest is common, little is known about readmission patterns and an inpatient resource use among survivors of an in-hospital cardiac arrest., Methods and Results: Within a large national registry, we examined long-term inpatient use among 6972 adults aged ≥65 years who survived an in-hospital cardiac arrest. We examined 30-day and 1-year readmission rates and inpatient costs, overall and by patient demographics, hospital disposition (discharge destination), and neurological status at discharge. The mean age was 75.8±7.0 years, 56% were men, and 12% were black. There were a total of 2005 readmissions during the first 30 days (cumulative incidence rate, 35 readmissions/100 patients; 95% confidence interval, 33-37) and 8751 readmissions at 1 year (cumulative incidence rate, 185 readmissions/100 patients; 95% confidence interval, 177-190). Overall, mean inpatient costs were $7741±$2323 at 30 days and $18 629±$9411 at 1 year. Thirty-day inpatient costs were higher in patients of younger age (≥85 years, $6052 [reference]; 75-84 years, $7444 [adjusted cost ratio, 1.23; 1.06-1.42; 65-74 years, $8291 [adjusted cost ratio, 1.37; 1.19-1.59; both P<0.001) and black race (whites, $7413; blacks, $9044; adjusted cost ratio, 1.22; 1.05-1.42; P<0.001), as well as those discharged with severe neurological disability or to skilled nursing or rehabilitation facilities. These differences in resource use persisted at 1 year and were largely because of higher readmission rates., Conclusions: Survivors of an in-hospital cardiac arrest have frequent readmissions and high follow-up inpatient costs. Readmissions and inpatient costs were higher in certain subgroups, including patients of younger age and black race., (© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: During the past decade, survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest has improved markedly. It remains unknown whether the improvement in survival has occurred uniformly at all hospitals or was driven by large improvements at only a few hospitals., Methods and Results: We identified 93 342 adults with an in-hospital cardiac arrest at 231 hospitals in the Get With The Guidelines(®)-Resuscitation registry during 2000-2010. Using hierarchical regression models, we evaluated hospital-level trends in survival to discharge. Mean age was 66 years, 59% were men, and 21% were black. Between 2000 and 2010, there was a significant decrease in age, prevalence of heart failure and myocardial infarction, and cardiac arrests due to shockable rhythms (P<0.001 for all) and an increase in prevalence of sepsis, respiratory insufficiency, renal insufficiency, intensive care unit location, and mechanical ventilation before arrest (P<0.001 for all). After adjustment for temporal trends in baseline characteristics, hospital rates of in-hospital cardiac arrest survival improved by 7% per year (odds ratio [OR] 1.07, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.08, P<0.001). Improvement in survival varied markedly and ranged from 3% in the bottom hospital quartile to 11% in the top hospital quartile. Compared with minor teaching hospitals (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.06), hospital rate of survival improvement was greater at major teaching (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.10) and nonteaching hospitals (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.09, P value for interaction=0.03)., Conclusion: Although in-hospital cardiac arrest survival has improved during the past decade, the magnitude of improvement varied across hospitals. Future studies are needed to identify hospital processes that have led to the largest improvement in survival., (© 2014 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

In-hospital cardiac arrests are common and associated with poor outcomes. Predicting the likelihood of favorable neurological survival following resuscitation from an in-hospital cardiac arrest could provide important information for physicians and families. In this article, we review the literature regarding predictors of survival following in-hospital cardiac arrest. Specifically, we describe the Cardiac Arrest Survival Postresuscitation In-hospital (CASPRI) score that was recently developed and validated using data from the Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation registry. The CASPRI score includes 11 predictor variables: age, initial cardiac arrest rhythm, defibrillation time, baseline neurological status, duration of resuscitation, mechanical ventilation, renal insufficiency, hepatic insufficiency, sepsis, malignancy, and hypotension. The score is simple to use at the bedside, has excellent discrimination and calibration, and provides robust estimates of the probability of favorable neurological survival after an in-hospital cardiac arrest. Thus, CASPRI may be valuable in establishing expectations by physicians and families in the critical period after these high-risk events.

Background: Public reporting on hospital quality has been widely adopted for common medical conditions. Adding a measure of inpatient survival after cardiac arrest is being considered. It is unknown whether this measure would be redundant, given evidence that hospital organization and culture can have hospital-wide effects on quality. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the correlation between inpatient survival after cardiac arrest and 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates for common medical conditions., Methods and Results: Using data between 2007 and 2010 from a national in-hospital cardiac arrest registry, we calculated risk-standardized in-hospital survival rates for cardiac arrest at each hospital. We obtained risk-standardized 30-day mortality rates for acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia from Hospital Compare for the same period. The relationship between a hospital's performance on cardiac arrest and these other medical conditions was assessed using weighted Pearson correlation coefficients. Among 26 270 patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest at 130 hospitals, survival rates varied across hospitals, with a median risk-standardized hospital survival rate of 22.1% and an interquartile range of 19.7% to 24.2%. There were no significant correlations between a hospital's outcomes for its cardiac arrest patients and its patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction (correlation, -0.12; P=0.16), heart failure (correlation, -0.05; P=0.57), or pneumonia (correlation, -0.15; P=0.10)., Conclusions: Hospitals that performed better on publicly reported outcomes for 3 common medical conditions did not necessarily have better cardiac arrest survival rates. Public reporting on cardiac arrest outcomes could provide new information about hospital quality.

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to develop a method for risk-standardizing hospital survival after cardiac arrest., Background: A foundation with which hospitals can improve quality is to be able to benchmark their risk-adjusted performance against other hospitals, something that cannot currently be done for survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest., Methods: Within the Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)-Resuscitation registry, we identified 48,841 patients admitted between 2007 and 2010 with an in-hospital cardiac arrest. Using hierarchical logistic regression, we derived and validated a model for survival to hospital discharge and calculated risk-standardized survival rates (RSSRs) for 272 hospitals with at least 10 cardiac arrest cases., Results: The survival rate was 21.0% and 21.2% for the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The model had good discrimination (C-statistic 0.74) and excellent calibration. Eighteen variables were associated with survival to discharge, and a parsimonious model contained 9 variables with minimal change in model discrimination. Before risk adjustment, the median hospital survival rate was 20% (interquartile range: 14% to 26%), with a wide range (0% to 85%). After adjustment, the distribution of RSSRs was substantially narrower: median of 21% (interquartile range: 19% to 23%; range 11% to 35%). More than half (143 [52.6%]) of hospitals had at least a 10% positive or negative absolute change in percentile rank after risk standardization, and 50 (23.2%) had a ≥20% absolute change in percentile rank., Conclusions: We have derived and validated a model to risk-standardize hospital rates of survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest. Use of this model can support efforts to compare hospitals in resuscitation outcomes as a foundation for quality assessment and improvement., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: National efforts to measure hospital performance in treating cardiac arrest have focused on case survival, with the hope of improving survival after cardiac arrest. However, it is plausible that hospitals with high case-survival rates do a poor job of preventing cardiac arrests in the first place., Objective: To describe the association between inpatient cardiac arrest incidence and survival rates., Design: Within a large, national registry, we identified hospitals with at least 50 adult in-hospital cardiac arrest cases between January 1, 2000, and November 30, 2009. We used multivariable hierarchical regression to evaluate the correlation between a hospital's cardiac arrest incidence rate and its case-survival rate after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics., Main Outcomes and Measures: The correlation between a hospital's incidence rate and case-survival rate for cardiac arrest., Results: Of 102,153 cases at 358 hospitals, the median hospital cardiac arrest incidence rate was 4.02 per 1000 admissions (interquartile range, 2.95-5.65 per 1000 admissions), and the median hospital case-survival rate was 18.8% (interquartile range, 14.5%-22.6%). In crude analyses, hospitals with higher case-survival rates also had lower cardiac arrest incidence (r, -0.16; P = .003). This relationship persisted after adjusting for patient characteristics (r, -0.15; P = .004). After adjusting for potential mediators of this relationship (ie, hospital characteristics), the relationship between incidence and case survival was attenuated (r, -0.07; P = .18). The one modifiable hospital factor that most attenuated this relationship was a hospital's nurse-to-bed ratio (r, -0.12; P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: Hospitals with exceptional rates of survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest are also better at preventing cardiac arrests, even after adjusting for patient case mix. This relationship is partially mediated by measured hospital attributes. Performance measures focused on case-survival rates seem an appropriate first step in quality measurement for in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Background: Little is known about the long-term outcomes in elderly survivors of in-hospital cardiac arrest. We determined rates of long-term survival and readmission among survivors of in-hospital cardiac arrest and examined whether these outcomes differed according to demographic characteristics and neurologic status at discharge., Methods: We linked data from a national registry of inpatient cardiac arrests with Medicare files and identified 6972 adults, 65 years of age or older, who were discharged from the hospital after surviving an in-hospital cardiac arrest between 2000 and 2008. Predictors of 1-year survival and of readmission to the hospital were examined., Results: One year after hospital discharge, 58.5% of the patients were alive, and 34.4% had not been readmitted to the hospital. The risk-adjusted rate of 1-year survival was lower among older patients than among younger patients (63.7%, 58.6%, and 49.7% among patients 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 years of age, respectively; P<0.001), among men than among women (58.6% vs. 60.9%, P=0.03), and among black patients than among white patients (52.5% vs. 60.4%, P=0.001). The risk-adjusted rate of 1-year survival was 72.8% among patients with mild or no neurologic disability at discharge, as compared with 61.1% among patients with moderate neurologic disability, 42.2% among those with severe neurologic disability, and 10.2% among those in a coma or vegetative state (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Moreover, 1-year readmission rates were higher among patients who were black, those who were women, and those who had substantial neurologic disability (P<0.05 for all comparisons). These differences in survival and readmission rates persisted at 2 years. At 3 years, the rate of survival among survivors of in-hospital cardiac arrest was similar to that of patients who had been hospitalized with heart failure and were discharged alive (43.5% and 44.9%, respectively; risk ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.95 to 1.02; P=0.35)., Conclusions: Among elderly survivors of in-hospital cardiac arrest, nearly 60% were alive at 1 year, and the rate of 3-year survival was similar to that among patients with heart failure. Survival and readmission rates differed according to the demographic characteristics of the patients and neurologic status at discharge. (Funded by the American Heart Association and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.).

Background: Despite advances in resuscitation care in recent years, it is not clear whether survival and neurologic function after in-hospital cardiac arrest have improved over time., Methods: We identified all adults who had an in-hospital cardiac arrest at 374 hospitals in the Get with the Guidelines-Resuscitation registry between 2000 and 2009. Using multivariable regression, we examined temporal trends in risk-adjusted rates of survival to discharge. Additional analyses explored whether trends were due to improved survival during acute resuscitation or postresuscitation care and whether they occurred at the expense of greater neurologic disability in survivors., Results: Among 84,625 hospitalized patients with cardiac arrest, 79.3% had an initial rhythm of asystole or pulseless electrical activity, and 20.7% had ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia. The proportion of cardiac arrests due to asystole or pulseless electrical activity increased over time (P<0.001 for trend). Risk-adjusted rates of survival to discharge increased from 13.7% in 2000 to 22.3% in 2009 (adjusted rate ratio per year, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.06; P<0.001 for trend). Survival improvement was similar in the two rhythm groups and was due to improvement in both acute resuscitation survival and postresuscitation survival. Rates of clinically significant neurologic disability among survivors decreased over time, with a risk-adjusted rate of 32.9% in 2000 and 28.1% in 2009 (adjusted rate ratio per year, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.00; P=0.02 for trend)., Conclusions: Both survival and neurologic outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest have improved during the past decade at hospitals participating in a large national quality-improvement registry. (Funded by the American Heart Association.).

Background: During in-hospital cardiac arrests, how long resuscitation attempts should be continued before termination of efforts is unknown. We investigated whether duration of resuscitation attempts varies between hospitals and whether patients at hospitals that attempt resuscitation for longer have higher survival rates than do those at hospitals with shorter durations of resuscitation efforts., Methods: Between 2000 and 2008, we identified 64,339 patients with cardiac arrests at 435 US hospitals within the Get With The Guidelines—Resuscitation registry. For each hospital, we calculated the median duration of resuscitation before termination of efforts in non-survivors as a measure of the hospital's overall tendency for longer attempts. We used multilevel regression models to assess the association between the length of resuscitation attempts and risk-adjusted survival. Our primary endpoints were immediate survival with return of spontaneous circulation during cardiac arrest and survival to hospital discharge., Findings: 31,198 of 64,339 (48·5%) patients achieved return of spontaneous circulation and 9912 (15·4%) survived to discharge. For patients achieving return of spontaneous circulation, the median duration of resuscitation was 12 min (IQR 6-21) compared with 20 min (14-30) for non-survivors. Compared with patients at hospitals in the quartile with the shortest median resuscitation attempts in non-survivors (16 min [IQR 15-17]), those at hospitals in the quartile with the longest attempts (25 min [25-28]) had a higher likelihood of return of spontaneous circulation (adjusted risk ratio 1·12, 95% CI 1·06-1·18; p<0·0001) and survival to discharge (1·12, 1·02-1·23; 0·021)., Interpretation: Duration of resuscitation attempts varies between hospitals. Although we cannot define an optimum duration for resuscitation attempts on the basis of these observational data, our findings suggest that efforts to systematically increase the duration of resuscitation could improve survival in this high-risk population., Funding: American Heart Association, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars Program, and the National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Accurate estimation of favorable neurological survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest could provide critical information for physicians, patients, and families., Methods: Within the Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, we identified 42,957 patients from 551 hospitals admitted between January 2000 and October 2009 who were successfully resuscitated from an in-hospital cardiac arrest. A simple prediction tool for favorable neurological survival in patients successfully resuscitated from an in-hospital cardiac arrest was developed using multivariate logistic regression, with two-thirds of the sample randomly selected as the derivation cohort and one-third as the validation cohort. Favorable neurological status was defined as the absence of severe neurological deficits (cerebral performance category score of ≤2)., Results: Rates of favorable neurological survival were similar in the derivation cohort (7052 patients [24.6%]) and validation cohort (3510 patients [24.5%]). Eleven variables were associated with favorable neurological survival: younger age, initial cardiac arrest rhythm of ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia with a defibrillation time of 2 minutes or less, baseline neurological status without disability, arrest location in a monitored unit, shorter duration of resuscitation, and absence of mechanical ventilation, renal insufficiency, hepatic insufficiency, sepsis, malignant disease, and hypotension prior to the arrest. The model had excellent discrimination (C statistic of 0.80 for both the derivation and validation cohorts) and calibration. The prediction tool demonstrated the ability to identify patients across a wide range of rates of favorable neurological survival: patients in the top decile had a 70.7% probability of this outcome, whereas patients in the bottom decile had a 2.8% probability., Conclusions: Among successfully resuscitated patients with an in-hospital cardiac arrest, a simple, bedside prediction tool provides robust estimates of the probability of favorable neurological survival. This tool permits accurate prognostication after cardiac arrest for physicians, patients, and families.

Context: Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, but data on their effectiveness in hospitalized patients are limited., Objective: To evaluate the association between AED use and survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest., Design, Setting, and Patients: Cohort study of 11,695 hospitalized patients with cardiac arrests between January 1, 2000, and August 26, 2008, at 204 US hospitals following the introduction of AEDs on general hospital wards., Main Outcome Measure: Survival to hospital discharge by AED use, using multivariable hierarchical regression analyses to adjust for patient factors and hospital site., Results: Of 11,695 patients, 9616 (82.2%) had nonshockable rhythms (asystole and pulseless electrical activity) and 2079 (17.8%) had shockable rhythms (ventricular fibrillation and pulseless ventricular tachycardia). AEDs were used in 4515 patients (38.6%). Overall, 2117 patients (18.1%) survived to hospital discharge. Within the entire study population, AED use was associated with a lower rate of survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest compared with no AED use (16.3% vs 19.3%; adjusted rate ratio [RR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-0.92; P < .001). Among cardiac arrests due to nonshockable rhythms, AED use was associated with lower survival (10.4% vs 15.4%; adjusted RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.83; P < .001). In contrast, for cardiac arrests due to shockable rhythms, AED use was not associated with survival (38.4% vs 39.8%; adjusted RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.88-1.13; P = .99). These patterns were consistently observed in both monitored and nonmonitored hospital units where AEDs were used, after matching patients to the individual units in each hospital where the cardiac arrest occurred, and with a propensity score analysis., Conclusion: Among hospitalized patients with cardiac arrest, use of AEDs was not associated with improved survival.

Background: The quality and effectiveness of resuscitation processes may be influenced by the patient's body mass index (BMI); however, the relationship between BMI and survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest has not been previously studied., Methods and Results: We evaluated 21 237 adult patients with an in-hospital cardiac arrest within the National Registry for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (NRCPR). We examined the association between BMI (classified as underweight [<18.5 kg/m(2)], normal [18.5 to 24.9 kg/m(2)], overweight [25.0 to 29.9 kg/m(2)], obese [30.0 to 34.9 kg/m(2)], and very obese [≥35.0 kg/m(2)]) and survival to hospital discharge using multivariable logistic regression, after stratifying arrests by rhythm type and adjusting for patient characteristics. Of 4499 patients with ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia as initial rhythm, 1825 (40.6%) survived to discharge. After multivariable adjustment, compared with overweight patients, underweight (odds ratio [OR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.84; P=0.003), normal weight (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.89; P<0.001), and very obese (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.96; P=0.02) had lower rates of survival, whereas obese patients had similar rates of survival (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.06; P=0.17). In contrast, of 16 738 patients with arrests caused by asystole or pulseless electric activity, only 2501 (14.9%) survived. After multivariable adjustment, all BMI groups had similar rates of survival except underweight patients (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.82; P<0.001)., Conclusions: For cardiac arrest caused by shockable rhythms, underweight, normal weight, and very obese patients had lower rates of survival to discharge. In contrast, for cardiac arrest caused by nonshockable rhythms, survival to discharge was similar across BMI groups except for underweight patients. Future studies are needed to clarify the extent to which BMI affects the quality and effectiveness of resuscitation measures.

Context: Racial differences in survival have not been previously studied after in-hospital cardiac arrest, an event for which access to care is not likely to influence treatment., Objectives: To estimate racial differences in survival for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrests and examine the association of sociodemographic and clinical factors and the admitting hospital with racial differences in survival., Design, Setting, and Patients: Cohort study of 10,011 patients with cardiac arrests due to ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia enrolled between January 1, 2000, and February 29, 2008, at 274 hospitals within the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation., Main Outcome Measures: Survival to hospital discharge; successful resuscitation from initial arrest and postresuscitation survival (secondary outcome measures)., Results: Included were 1883 black patients (18.8%) and 8128 white patients (81.2%). Rates of survival to discharge were lower for black patients (25.2%) than for white patients (37.4%) (unadjusted relative rate [RR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.79). Unadjusted racial differences narrowed after adjusting for patient characteristics (adjusted RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.75-0.88]; P < .001) and diminished further after additional adjustment for hospital site (adjusted RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.82-0.96]; P = .002). Lower rates of survival to discharge for blacks reflected lower rates of both successful resuscitation (55.8% vs 67.4% for whites; unadjusted RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.81-0.88]) and postresuscitation survival (45.2% vs 55.5% for whites; unadjusted RR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.79-0.91]). Adjustment for the hospital site at which patients received care explained a substantial portion of the racial differences in successful resuscitation (adjusted RR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.88-0.96]; P < .001) and eliminated the racial differences in postresuscitation survival (adjusted RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.92-1.06]; P = .68)., Conclusions: Black patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest were significantly less likely to survive to discharge than white patients, with lower rates of survival during both the immediate resuscitation and postresuscitation periods. Much of the racial difference was associated with the hospital center in which black patients received care.

Background: Delays to defibrillation are associated with worse survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest, but the degree to which hospitals vary in defibrillation response times and hospital predictors of delays remain unknown., Methods: Using hierarchical models, we evaluated hospital variation in rates of delayed defibrillation (>2 minutes) and its impact on survival among 7479 adult inpatients with cardiac arrests at 200 hospitals within the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation., Results: Adjusted rates of delayed defibrillation varied substantially among hospitals (range, 2.4%-50.9%), with hospital-level effects accounting for a significant amount of the total variation in defibrillation delays after adjusting for patient factors. We found a 46% greater odds of patients with identical covariates getting delayed defibrillation at one randomly selected hospital compared with another. Among traditional hospital factors evaluated, however, only bed volume (reference category: <200 beds; 200-499 beds: odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.48-0.80]; >or=500 beds: OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.53-1.04]) and arrest location (reference category: intensive care unit; telemetry unit: OR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.65-2.22]; nonmonitored unit: OR, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.61-2.24]) were associated with differences in rates of delayed defibrillation. Wide variation also existed in adjusted hospital rates of survival to discharge (range, 5.3%-49.6%), with higher survival among hospitals in the top-performing quartile for defibrillation time (compared with the bottom quartile: OR for top quartile, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.11-1.77])., Conclusions: Rates of delayed defibrillation vary widely among hospitals but are largely unexplained by traditional hospital factors. Given its association with improved survival, future research is needed to better understand best practices in the delivery of defibrillation at top-performing hospitals.

Background: Expert guidelines advocate defibrillation within 2 minutes after an in-hospital cardiac arrest caused by ventricular arrhythmia. However, empirical data on the prevalence of delayed defibrillation in the United States and its effect on survival are limited., Methods: We identified 6789 patients who had cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia at 369 hospitals participating in the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. Using multivariable logistic regression, we identified characteristics associated with delayed defibrillation. We then examined the association between delayed defibrillation (more than 2 minutes) and survival to discharge after adjusting for differences in patient and hospital characteristics., Results: The overall median time to defibrillation was 1 minute (interquartile range, <1 to 3 minutes); delayed defibrillation occurred in 2045 patients (30.1%). Characteristics associated with delayed defibrillation included black race, noncardiac admitting diagnosis, and occurrence of cardiac arrest at a hospital with fewer than 250 beds, in an unmonitored hospital unit, and during after-hours periods (5 p.m. to 8 a.m. or weekends). Delayed defibrillation was associated with a significantly lower probability of surviving to hospital discharge (22.2%, vs. 39.3% when defibrillation was not delayed; adjusted odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.42 to 0.54; P<0.001). In addition, a graded association was seen between increasing time to defibrillation and lower rates of survival to hospital discharge for each minute of delay (P for trend <0.001)., Conclusions: Delayed defibrillation is common and is associated with lower rates of survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest., (Copyright 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Although previous studies have shown marked variation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival across US regions, factors underlying this survival variation remain incompletely explained.Methods and Results: Using data from the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival, we identified 96 662 adult patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in 132 US counties. We used hierarchical regression models to examine county-level variation in rates of survival and survival with functional recovery (defined as Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2) and examined the contribution of demographics, cardiac arrest characteristics, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, automated external defibrillator use, and county-level sociodemographic factors in survival variation across counties. A total of 9317 (9.6%) patients survived to discharge, and 7176 (7.4%) achieved functional recovery. At a county level, there was marked variation in rates of survival to discharge (range, 3.4%-22.0%; median odds ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-1.46) and survival with functional recovery (range, 0.8%-21.0%; median odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-1.62). County-level rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator use were positively correlated with both outcomes (P<0.0001 for all). Patient demographic and cardiac arrest characteristics explained 4.8% and 27.7% of the county-level variation in survival, respectively. Additional adjustment of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator explained 41% of the survival variation, and this increased to 50.4% after adjustment of county-level sociodemographic factors. Similar findings were noted in analyses of survival with functional recovery.Conclusions: Although out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival varies significantly across US counties, a substantial proportion of the variation is attributable to differences in bystander response across communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]