Back to Search Start Over

Part 8: Education, Implementation, and Teams: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

Authors :
Farhan Bhanji
Judith C. Finn
Andrew Lockey
Koenraad Monsieurs
Robert Frengley
Taku Iwami
Eddy Lang
Matthew Huei-Ming Ma
Mary E. Mancini
Mary Ann McNeil
Robert Greif
John E. Billi
Vinay M. Nadkarni
Blair Bigham
Janet E. Bray
Jan Breckwoldt
Steven C. Brooks
Adam Cheng
Aaron J. Donoghue
Jonathan P. Duff
Dana P. Edelson
Henrik Fischer
Elaine Gilfoyle
Ming-Ju Hsieh
David A. Kloeck
Patrick Ko
Marion Leary
Theresa M. Olasveengen
Jon C. Rittenberger
Robert D. Schultz
Dion Stub
Zuzana Triska
Traci A. Wolbrink
Chih-Wei Yang
Joyce Yeung
Educ Implementation Teams Chapter
University of Zurich
Finn, Judith C
Source :
Circulation
Publication Year :
2015

Abstract

Current evidence demonstrates considerable variability in cardiac arrest survival in and out of hospital and, therefore, substantial opportunity to save many more lives.1–3 The Formula for Survival4 postulates that optimal survival from cardiac arrest requires high-quality science, education of lay providers and healthcare professionals, and a well-functioning Chain of Survival5 (implementation). The Education, Implementation, and Teams (EIT) Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) set out to define the key PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions related to resuscitation education (including teamwork skills) and systems-level implementation that would be reviewed by 2015. The selection of questions was supported through the use of an online anonymous task force member–only voting process where the results were considered in the ultimate consensus decisions of the task force. Topics from the 2010 evidence review process were scrutinized for relevance, the potential to improve outcomes, and the likelihood of new evidence being published since 2010. Finally, PICO questions for which the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) process was not as well developed at the time of PICO selection were deferred until at least after the 2015 cycle. We planned to reduce the total number of PICO questions reviewed to provide more in-depth and evidence-based reviews of the included questions. New topics were determined on the basis of the evolving literature and changes in resuscitation practice. Input on the selection of PICO questions was sought from the general public through the ILCOR website and from ILCOR member resuscitation councils through their council chairs and individual task force members. The EIT Task Force performed detailed systematic reviews based on the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies6 and using the methodological approach proposed by the …

Details

ISSN :
15244539 and 00097322
Volume :
132
Issue :
16 Suppl 1
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Circulation
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....47623d03cd333b1861cdd6c13040fb36