Dana P. Edelson

Bio: Dana P. Edelson is an academic researcher from University of Chicago. The author has contributed to research in topics: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation & Resuscitation. The author has an hindex of 44, co-authored 136 publications receiving 8188 citations. Previous affiliations of Dana P. Edelson include University of Illinois at Chicago.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality: Improving cardiac resuscitation outcomes both inside and outside the hospital: A consensus statement from the American heart association

Abstract: The "2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care" increased the focus on methods to ensure that high-quality cardiopulmonary resus...

Part 4: CPR overview: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care

Abstract: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a series of lifesaving actions that improve the chance of survival following cardiac arrest.1 Although the optimal approach to CPR may vary, depending on the rescuer, the victim, and the available resources, the fundamental challenge remains: how to achieve early and effective CPR. Given this challenge, recognition of arrest and prompt action by the rescuer continue to be priorities for the 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC. This chapter provides an overview of cardiac arrest epidemiology, the principles behind each link in the Chain of Survival, an overview of the core components of CPR (see Table 1), and the approaches of the 2010 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC to improving the quality of CPR. The goal of this chapter is to integrate resuscitation science with real-world practice in order to improve the outcomes of CPR. View this table: Table 1. Summary of Key BLS Components for Adults, Children and Infants Despite important advances in prevention, cardiac arrest remains a substantial public health problem and a leading cause of death in many parts of the world.2 Cardiac arrest occurs both in and out of the hospital. In the US and Canada, approximately 350 000 people/year (approximately half of them in-hospital) suffer a cardiac arrest and receive attempted resuscitation.3,–,7 This estimate does not include the substantial number of victims who suffer an arrest without attempted resuscitation. While attempted resuscitation is not always appropriate, there are many lives and life-years lost because appropriate resuscitation is not attempted. The estimated incidence of EMS-treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the US and Canada is about 50 to 55/100 000 persons/year and approximately 25% of these present with pulseless ventricular arrhythmias.3,8 The estimated incidence of in-hospital cardiac arrest is 3 to 6/1000 admissions4,– …

Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, and Early Warning Scores for Detecting Clinical Deterioration in Infected Patients outside the Intensive Care Unit.

Abstract: Rationale: The 2016 definitions of sepsis included the quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score to identify high-risk patients outside the intensive care unit (ICU).Objectives: We sought to compare qSOFA with other commonly used early warning scores.Methods: All admitted patients who first met the criteria for suspicion of infection in the emergency department (ED) or hospital wards from November 2008 until January 2016 were included. The qSOFA, Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were compared for predicting death and ICU transfer.Measurements and Main Results: Of the 30,677 included patients, 1,649 (5.4%) died and 7,385 (24%) experienced the composite outcome (death or ICU transfer). Sixty percent (n = 18,523) first met the suspicion criteria in the ED. Discrimination for in-hospital mortality was highest for NEWS (area under the curve [AUC], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76–0.79), fol...

Improving In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Process and Outcomes With Performance Debriefing

Abstract: Background: Recent investigations have documented poor cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performance in clinical practice. We hypothesized that a debriefing intervention using CPR quality data from actual in-hospital cardiac arrests (resuscitation with actual performance integrated debriefing [RAPID]) would improve CPR performance and initial patient survival. Methods:Internalmedicineresidentsatauniversityhospital attended weekly debriefing sessions of the prior week’s resuscitations, between March 2006 and February 2007, reviewing CPR performance transcripts obtained from a CPR-sensing and feedback-enabled defibrillator.ObjectivemetricsofCPRperformanceandinitial return of spontaneous circulation were compared with a historical cohort in which a similar feedbackdelivering defibrillator was used but without RAPID. Results:Cardiopulmonaryresuscitationqualityandoutcome data from 123 patients resuscitated during the intervention period were compared with 101 patients in the baseline cohort. Compared with the control period, the mean (SD) ventilation rate decreased (13 [7]/min vs 18 [8]/min; P.001) and compression depth increased (50 [10] vs 44 [10] mm;P=.001), among other CPR improvements. These changes correlated with an increase in the rate of return of spontaneous circulation in the RAPID group (59.4% vs 44.6%; P=.03) but no change in survival to discharge (7.4% vs 8.9%; P=.69). Conclusions: The combination of RAPID and realtime audiovisual feedback improved CPR quality compared with the use of feedback alone and was associated with an increased rate of return of spontaneous circulation. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation sensing and recording devices allow for methods of debriefing that were previously available only for simulationbased education; such methods have the potential to fundamentally alter resuscitation training and improve patient outcomes. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00228293

The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)

Abstract: Importance Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. Considerable advances have since been made into the pathobiology (changes in organ function, morphology, cell biology, biochemistry, immunology, and circulation), management, and epidemiology of sepsis, suggesting the need for reexamination. Objective To evaluate and, as needed, update definitions for sepsis and septic shock. Process A task force (n = 19) with expertise in sepsis pathobiology, clinical trials, and epidemiology was convened by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Definitions and clinical criteria were generated through meetings, Delphi processes, analysis of electronic health record databases, and voting, followed by circulation to international professional societies, requesting peer review and endorsement (by 31 societies listed in the Acknowledgment). Key Findings From Evidence Synthesis Limitations of previous definitions included an excessive focus on inflammation, the misleading model that sepsis follows a continuum through severe sepsis to shock, and inadequate specificity and sensitivity of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Multiple definitions and terminologies are currently in use for sepsis, septic shock, and organ dysfunction, leading to discrepancies in reported incidence and observed mortality. The task force concluded the term severe sepsis was redundant. Recommendations Sepsis should be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. For clinical operationalization, organ dysfunction can be represented by an increase in the Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 2 points or more, which is associated with an in-hospital mortality greater than 10%. Septic shock should be defined as a subset of sepsis in which particularly profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities are associated with a greater risk of mortality than with sepsis alone. Patients with septic shock can be clinically identified by a vasopressor requirement to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 65 mm Hg or greater and serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L (>18 mg/dL) in the absence of hypovolemia. This combination is associated with hospital mortality rates greater than 40%. In out-of-hospital, emergency department, or general hospital ward settings, adult patients with suspected infection can be rapidly identified as being more likely to have poor outcomes typical of sepsis if they have at least 2 of the following clinical criteria that together constitute a new bedside clinical score termed quickSOFA (qSOFA): respiratory rate of 22/min or greater, altered mentation, or systolic blood pressure of 100 mm Hg or less. Conclusions and Relevance These updated definitions and clinical criteria should replace previous definitions, offer greater consistency for epidemiologic studies and clinical trials, and facilitate earlier recognition and more timely management of patients with sepsis or at risk of developing sepsis.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2018 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association.

Abstract: Each chapter listed in the Table of Contents (see next page) is a hyperlink to that chapter. The reader clicks the chapter name to access that chapter. Each chapter listed here is a hyperlink. Click on the chapter name to be taken to that chapter. Each year, the American Heart Association (AHA), in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and other government agencies, brings together in a single document the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and the cardiovascular risk factors listed in the AHA’s My Life Check - Life’s Simple 7 (Figure1), which include core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure [BP], and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update represents …

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2020 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

Abstract: Background: The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports on the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovas...

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2021 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association.

Abstract: Background: The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascul...

Part 9: Post-Cardiac Arrest Care: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care

Abstract: There is increasing recognition that systematic post–cardiac arrest care after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) can improve the likelihood of patient survival with good quality of life. This is based in part on the publication of results of randomized controlled clinical trials as well as a description of the post–cardiac arrest syndrome. 1–3 Post–cardiac arrest care has significant potential to reduce early mortality caused by hemodynamic instability and later morbidity and mortality from multiorgan failure and brain injury. 3,4 This section summarizes our evolving understanding of the hemodynamic, neurological, and metabolic abnormalities encountered in patients who are initially resuscitated from cardiac arrest. The initial objectives of post–cardiac arrest care are to ● Optimize cardiopulmonary function and vital organ perfusion. ● After out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, transport patient to an appropriate hospital with a comprehensive post–cardiac arrest treatment system of care that includes acute coronary interventions, neurological care, goal-directed critical care, and hypothermia. ● Transport the in-hospital post–cardiac arrest patient to an appropriate critical-care unit capable of providing comprehensive post–cardiac arrest care. ● Try to identify and treat the precipitating causes of the arrest and prevent recurrent arrest.