Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest System-of-Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyse how the pandemic impacted the system of care of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and patients had worse short-term outcomes compared to pre-pandemic periods.
About: This article is published in Prehospital Emergency Care.The article was published on 2021-09-14. It has received 13 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Return of spontaneous circulation & Cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors investigated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pre-hospital chain of survival of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest (OHCA) at home and found that OHCA at home was more common during the pandemic (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.11-1.71, p = 0.0069).
Abstract: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR), early defibrillation and timely treatment by emergency medical services (EMS) can double the chance of survival from out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest (OHCA). We investigated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the pre-hospital chain of survival. We searched five bibliographical databases for articles that compared prehospital OHCA care processes during and before the COVID-19 pandemic. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted, and meta-regression with mixed-effect models and subgroup analyses were conducted where appropriate. The search yielded 966 articles; 20 articles were included in our analysis. OHCA at home was more common during the pandemic (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.11-1.71, p = 0.0069). BCPR did not differ during and before the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80-1.11, p = 0.4631), although bystander defibrillation was significantly lower during the COVID-19 pandemic (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.88, p = 0.0107). EMS call-to-arrival time was significantly higher during the COVID-19 pandemic (SMD 0.27, 95% CI 0.13-0.40, p = 0.0006). Resuscitation duration did not differ significantly between pandemic and pre-pandemic timeframes. The COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected prehospital processes for OHCA. These findings may inform future interventions, particularly to consider interventions to increase BCPR and improve the pre-hospital chain of survival.
18 citations
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on older adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in Japan, a country with a super-aging society.
Abstract: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected access to healthcare and treatment. This study aimed to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on older adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in Japan, a country with a super-aging society.This secondary analysis of the All-Japan Utstein Registry included patients aged 65 years and older with bystander-witnessed OHCA between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2020. Survival outcomes were compared by time period using multivariable logistic regression analyses. The primary outcome measured was the one-month survival rate with neurologically favorable outcomes.Before the COVID-19 pandemic, survival outcomes were steadily improving, and 32,024 patients in 2019 and 31,894 in 2020 were eligible for analysis. The proportions of conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation and shock by public-access automated external defibrillators were lower in 2020 than in 2019 (6.7% versus 5.7%, p < 0.001 and 2.5% versus 2.1%, p < 0.001, respectively). Compared to 2019, the one-month survival after OHCA and prehospital return of spontaneous circulation decreased significantly in 2020 than in 2019 (7.7% versus 6.6%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.83-0.94, and 16.8% versus 14.9%, AOR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83-0.91, respectively). The proportion of neurologically favorable outcomes also decreased, but the decrease was not statistically significant (3.4% versus 2.8%, AOR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.83-1.01).In this population-focused, bystander-witnessed study regarding OHCA, the analysis of nationwide registry data revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with reduced survival among older adults with OHCA in Japan.
5 citations
TL;DR: This review describes how recent technological advances have been implemented in the chain of survival and their impact on outcomes after cardiac arrest and highlights the importance of technology applied to every single step of thechain of survival to improve outcomes in cardiac arrest.
Abstract: Purpose of review Technology is being increasingly implemented in the fields of cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In this review, we describe how recent technological advances have been implemented in the chain of survival and their impact on outcomes after cardiac arrest. Breakthrough technologies that are likely to make an impact in the future are also presented. Recent findings Technology is present in every link of the chain of survival, from prediction, prevention, and rapid recognition of cardiac arrest to early cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation. Mobile phone systems to notify citizen first responders of nearby out-of-hospital cardiac arrest have been implemented in numerous countries with improvement in bystanders’ interventions and outcomes. Drones delivering automated external defibrillators and artificial intelligence to support the dispatcher in recognising cardiac arrest are already being used in real-life out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Wearables, smart speakers, surveillance cameras, and artificial intelligence technologies are being developed and studied to prevent and recognize out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest. Summary This review highlights the importance of technology applied to every single step of the chain of survival to improve outcomes in cardiac arrest. Further research is needed to understand the best role of different technologies in the chain of survival and how these may ultimately improve outcomes.
5 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors describe prehospital healthcare providers' resuscitative efforts for out hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) cases and their definitive outcomes and aim to describe the knowledge gaps in the community and a better description of OHCA for the dispatcher could guide dispatch-assisted CPR and minimize OHCA response times.
Abstract: Purpose The quality of resuscitation for out hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) during the COVID-19 era could be affected. We aim to describe prehospital healthcare providers' resuscitative efforts for OHCA cases and their definitive outcomes. Patients and methods This retrospective cross-sectional study included all OHCA cases between April and June 2021 across all regions in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Demographic variables, response times, CPR providers, initial rhythm, use of AED/Defibrillator, medical interventions, ROSC data, and dispatch codes were extracted from a central electronic platform. Results A total of 1307 OHCA cases were included in this study, males constituted 65% and 42% were ≥65 years. Although the median response time to initiate CPR was 13 min, 11% of OHCA cases had a response time between 0 and 6 min. About 75% of CPR was provided on scene by BLS units, 78% of OHCA cases had asystole as their initial rhythm, an AED/Defibrillator was used more than 90% of the time for pulseless VT/VF rhythm, and ROSC was achieved in 8% of OHCA patients. Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, maintaining resuscitative efforts for OHCA continues in KSA. Closing knowledge gaps in the community and a better description of OHCA for the dispatcher could guide dispatch-assisted CPR and minimize OHCA response times.
4 citations
TL;DR: In this article , the authors investigated the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak on the prehospital management and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in Thailand.
Abstract: The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) has been of interest worldwide. However, evidence from low-resource emergency medical service systems is limited. This study investigated the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak on the prehospital management and outcomes of OHCA in Thailand.This multicentered, retrospective, observational study compared the management and outcomes of OHCA for 2 periods: pre-COVID-19 (January-September 2019) and during the outbreak (January-September 2020). Study data were obtained from the Thai OHCA Network Registry. The primary outcome was survival rate to hospital discharge. Data of other OHCA outcomes and prehospital care during the two periods were also compared.The study enrolled 691 patients: 341 (49.3%) in the pre-COVID-19 period and 350 (50.7%) in the COVID-19 period. There was a significant decrease in the survival rate to discharge during the COVID-19 outbreak (7.7% vs 2.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.95). However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of their rates of sustained return of spontaneous circulation (33.0% vs 31.3%; aOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.68-1.49) or their survival to intensive care unit/ward admission (27.8% vs 19.8%; aOR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.49-1.15). The first-responder response interval was significantly longer during the COVID-19 outbreak (median [interquartile range] 5.3 [3.2-9.3] min vs 10 [6-14] min; P < 0.001). There were also significant decreases in prehospital intubation (66.7% vs 48.2%; P < 0.001) and prehospital drug administration (79.5% vs 70.6%; P = 0.024) during the COVID-19 outbreak.There was a significant decrease in the rate of survival to hospital discharge of patients with OHCA during the COVID-19 outbreak in Thailand. Maintaining the first responder response quality and encouraging prehospital advanced airway insertion might improve the survival rate during the COVID-19 outbreak.
2 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: During the first 2 months of the current outbreak, Covid-19 spread rapidly throughout China and caused varying degrees of illness, and patients often presented without fever, and many did not have abnormal radiologic findings.
Abstract: Background Since December 2019, when coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) emerged in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China, data have been needed on the clinical characteristics of...
22,622 citations
TL;DR: Human airway epithelial cells were used to isolate a novel coronavirus, named 2019-nCoV, which formed a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus, Orthocoronavirinae subfamily, which is the seventh member of the family of coronaviruses that infect humans.
Abstract: In December 2019, a cluster of patients with pneumonia of unknown cause was linked to a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan, China. A previously unknown betacoronavirus was discovered through the use of unbiased sequencing in samples from patients with pneumonia. Human airway epithelial cells were used to isolate a novel coronavirus, named 2019-nCoV, which formed a clade within the subgenus sarbecovirus, Orthocoronavirinae subfamily. Different from both MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, 2019-nCoV is the seventh member of the family of coronaviruses that infect humans. Enhanced surveillance and further investigation are ongoing. (Funded by the National Key Research and Development Program of China and the National Major Project for Control and Prevention of Infectious Disease in China.).
21,455 citations
Monash University1, University of Amsterdam2, University of Paris3, Bond University4, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio5, University of Ottawa6, American University of Beirut7, Oregon Health & Science University8, University of York9, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute10, University of Southern Denmark11, Johns Hopkins University12, Brigham and Women's Hospital13, Indiana University14, University of Bristol15, University College London16, University of Toronto17
TL;DR: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement as discussed by the authors was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found.
Abstract: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
16,613 citations
University of Bristol1, Harvard University2, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust3, Research Triangle Park4, University of Toronto5, University of Oxford6, University of Ottawa7, Paris Descartes University8, University of London9, University of York10, University of Birmingham11, University of Southern Denmark12, University of Liverpool13, University of East Anglia14, Loyola University Chicago15, University of Aberdeen16, Kaiser Permanente17, Baruch College18, McMaster University19, Cochrane Collaboration20, McGill University21, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute22, University of Louisville23, University of Melbourne24
TL;DR: Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions is developed, a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units or clusters of individuals to comparison groups.
Abstract: Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies.
8,028 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors proposed a new estimation method by incorporating the sample size and compared the estimators of the sample mean and standard deviation under all three scenarios and presented some suggestions on which scenario is preferred in real-world applications.
Abstract: In systematic reviews and meta-analysis, researchers often pool the results of the sample mean and standard deviation from a set of similar clinical trials. A number of the trials, however, reported the study using the median, the minimum and maximum values, and/or the first and third quartiles. Hence, in order to combine results, one may have to estimate the sample mean and standard deviation for such trials. In this paper, we propose to improve the existing literature in several directions. First, we show that the sample standard deviation estimation in Hozo et al.’s method (BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13, 2005) has some serious limitations and is always less satisfactory in practice. Inspired by this, we propose a new estimation method by incorporating the sample size. Second, we systematically study the sample mean and standard deviation estimation problem under several other interesting settings where the interquartile range is also available for the trials. We demonstrate the performance of the proposed methods through simulation studies for the three frequently encountered scenarios, respectively. For the first two scenarios, our method greatly improves existing methods and provides a nearly unbiased estimate of the true sample standard deviation for normal data and a slightly biased estimate for skewed data. For the third scenario, our method still performs very well for both normal data and skewed data. Furthermore, we compare the estimators of the sample mean and standard deviation under all three scenarios and present some suggestions on which scenario is preferred in real-world applications. In this paper, we discuss different approximation methods in the estimation of the sample mean and standard deviation and propose some new estimation methods to improve the existing literature. We conclude our work with a summary table (an Excel spread sheet including all formulas) that serves as a comprehensive guidance for performing meta-analysis in different situations.
4,745 citations