J R Spiro1, S White2, N Quinn2, C J Gubran2, P F Ludman2, J N Townend2, S N Doshi2. 1. The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2WB, UK. Electronic address: jspiro@doctors.org.uk. 2. The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham, Mindelsohn Way, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2WB, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poor quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) predicts adverse outcome. During invasive cardiac procedures automated-CPR (A-CPR) may help maintain effective resuscitation. The use of A-CPR following in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) remains poorly described. AIMS & METHODS: Firstly, we aimed to assess the efficiency of healthcare staff using A-CPR in a cardiac arrest scenario at baseline, following re-training and over time (Scenario-based training). Secondly, we studied our clinical experience of A-CPR at our institution over a 2-year period, with particular emphasis on the details of invasive cardiac procedures performed, problems encountered, resuscitation rates and in-hospital outcome (AutoPulse-CPR Registry). RESULTS: Scenario-based training: Forty healthcare professionals were assessed. At baseline, time-to-position device was slow (mean 59 (±24) s (range 15-96s)), with the majority (57%) unable to mode-switch. Following re-training time-to-position reduced (28 (±9) s, p<0.01 vs baseline) with 95% able to mode-switch. This improvement was maintained over time. AutoPulse-CPR Registry: 285 patients suffered IHCA, 25 received A-CPR. Survival to hospital discharge following conventional CPR was 28/260 (11%) and 7/25 (28%) following A-CPR. A-CPR supported invasive procedures in 9 patients, 2 of whom had A-CPR dependant circulation during transfer to the catheter lab. CONCLUSION: A-CPR may provide excellent haemodynamic support and facilitate simultaneous invasive cardiac procedures. A significant learning curve exists when integrating A-CPR into clinical practice. Further studies are required to better define the role and effectiveness of A-CPR following IHCA.
BACKGROUND: Poor quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) predicts adverse outcome. During invasive cardiac procedures automated-CPR (A-CPR) may help maintain effective resuscitation. The use of A-CPR following in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) remains poorly described. AIMS & METHODS: Firstly, we aimed to assess the efficiency of healthcare staff using A-CPR in a cardiac arrest scenario at baseline, following re-training and over time (Scenario-based training). Secondly, we studied our clinical experience of A-CPR at our institution over a 2-year period, with particular emphasis on the details of invasive cardiac procedures performed, problems encountered, resuscitation rates and in-hospital outcome (AutoPulse-CPR Registry). RESULTS: Scenario-based training: Forty healthcare professionals were assessed. At baseline, time-to-position device was slow (mean 59 (±24) s (range 15-96s)), with the majority (57%) unable to mode-switch. Following re-training time-to-position reduced (28 (±9) s, p<0.01 vs baseline) with 95% able to mode-switch. This improvement was maintained over time. AutoPulse-CPR Registry: 285 patients suffered IHCA, 25 received A-CPR. Survival to hospital discharge following conventional CPR was 28/260 (11%) and 7/25 (28%) following A-CPR. A-CPR supported invasive procedures in 9 patients, 2 of whom had A-CPR dependant circulation during transfer to the catheter lab. CONCLUSION:A-CPR may provide excellent haemodynamic support and facilitate simultaneous invasive cardiac procedures. A significant learning curve exists when integrating A-CPR into clinical practice. Further studies are required to better define the role and effectiveness of A-CPR following IHCA.
Authors: Keith Couper; Rochelle M Velho; Tom Quinn; Anne Devrell; Ranjit Lall; Barry Orriss; Joyce Yeung; Gavin D Perkins Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 2.692