Jerry P Nolan1,2, Charles D Deakin3,4, Chen Ji5, Simon Gates6, Andy Rosser7, Ranjit Lall5, Gavin D Perkins5,8. 1. Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. paramedictrial@warwick.ac.uk. 2. Royal United Hospital, Bath, BA1 3NG, UK. paramedictrial@warwick.ac.uk. 3. South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Otterbourne, SO21 2RU, UK. 4. NIHR Southampton Respiratory Biomedical Research Unit, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK. 5. Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. 6. Cancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. 7. West Midlands Ambulance Service University NHS Foundation Trust, Brierley Hill, DY5 1LX, West Midlands, UK. 8. Heartlands Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, B9 5SS, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of the intravenous (IV) and intraosseous (IO) routes for drug administration in adults with a cardiac arrest enrolled in the Pre-Hospital Assessment of the Role ofAdrenaline: Measuring the Effectiveness of Drug Administration in Cardiac Arrest (PARAMEDIC2) randomised, controlled trial. METHODS:Patients were recruited from five National Health Service Ambulance Services in England and Wales from December 2014 through October 2017. Patients with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who were unresponsive to initial resuscitation attempts were randomly assigned to 1 mg adrenaline or matching placebo. Intravascular access was established as soon as possible, and IO access was considered if IV access was not possible after two attempts. RESULTS: Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 3631 receivedadrenaline and 3686 received placebo. Amongst these, 1116 (30.1%) and 1121 (30.4%) received the study drug via the IO route. The odds ratios were similar in the IV and IO groups for return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) at hospital handover [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.07 (95% CI 3.42-4.85) and (aOR 3.98 (95% CI 2.86-5.53), P value for interaction 0.90]; survival to 30 days [aOR 1.67 (1.18-2.35) versus 0.9 (0.4-2.05), P = 0.18]; and favourable neurological outcome [aOR 1.39 (0.93-2.06) versus 0.62 (0.23-1.67), P = 0.14]. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in treatment effect (adrenaline versus placebo) on ROSC at hospital handover between drugs administered by the intraosseous route or by the intravenous route. We could not detect any difference in the treatment effect between the IV and IO routes on the longer term outcomes of 30-day survival or favourable neurological outcome at discharge (ISRCTN73485024).
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of the intravenous (IV) and intraosseous (IO) routes for drug administration in adults with a cardiac arrest enrolled in the Pre-Hospital Assessment of the Role of Adrenaline: Measuring the Effectiveness of Drug Administration in Cardiac Arrest (PARAMEDIC2) randomised, controlled trial. METHODS:Patients were recruited from five National Health Service Ambulance Services in England and Wales from December 2014 through October 2017. Patients with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who were unresponsive to initial resuscitation attempts were randomly assigned to 1 mg adrenaline or matching placebo. Intravascular access was established as soon as possible, and IO access was considered if IV access was not possible after two attempts. RESULTS: Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 3631 received adrenaline and 3686 received placebo. Amongst these, 1116 (30.1%) and 1121 (30.4%) received the study drug via the IO route. The odds ratios were similar in the IV and IO groups for return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) at hospital handover [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.07 (95% CI 3.42-4.85) and (aOR 3.98 (95% CI 2.86-5.53), P value for interaction 0.90]; survival to 30 days [aOR 1.67 (1.18-2.35) versus 0.9 (0.4-2.05), P = 0.18]; and favourable neurological outcome [aOR 1.39 (0.93-2.06) versus 0.62 (0.23-1.67), P = 0.14]. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in treatment effect (adrenaline versus placebo) on ROSC at hospital handover between drugs administered by the intraosseous route or by the intravenous route. We could not detect any difference in the treatment effect between the IV and IO routes on the longer term outcomes of 30-day survival or favourable neurological outcome at discharge (ISRCTN73485024).
Authors: Ben E Biesterveld; Rachel O'Connell; Michael T Kemp; Glenn K Wakam; Aaron M Williams; Manjunath P Pai; Hasan B Alam Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2021-03-17
Authors: Jasmeet Soar; Bernd W Böttiger; Pierre Carli; Keith Couper; Charles D Deakin; Therese Djärv; Carsten Lott; Theresa Olasveengen; Peter Paal; Tommaso Pellis; Gavin D Perkins; Claudio Sandroni; Jerry P Nolan Journal: Notf Rett Med Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 0.826
Authors: Jasmeet Soar; Katherine M Berg; Lars W Andersen; Bernd W Böttiger; Sofia Cacciola; Clifton W Callaway; Keith Couper; Tobias Cronberg; Sonia D'Arrigo; Charles D Deakin; Michael W Donnino; Ian R Drennan; Asger Granfeldt; Cornelia W E Hoedemaekers; Mathias J Holmberg; Cindy H Hsu; Marlijn Kamps; Szymon Musiol; Kevin J Nation; Robert W Neumar; Tonia Nicholson; Brian J O'Neil; Quentin Otto; Edison Ferreira de Paiva; Michael J A Parr; Joshua C Reynolds; Claudio Sandroni; Barnaby R Scholefield; Markus B Skrifvars; Tzong-Luen Wang; Wolfgang A Wetsch; Joyce Yeung; Peter T Morley; Laurie J Morrison; Michelle Welsford; Mary Fran Hazinski; Jerry P Nolan Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Jerry P Nolan; Ian Maconochie; Jasmeet Soar; Theresa M Olasveengen; Robert Greif; Myra H Wyckoff; Eunice M Singletary; Richard Aickin; Katherine M Berg; Mary E Mancini; Farhan Bhanji; Jonathan Wyllie; David Zideman; Robert W Neumar; Gavin D Perkins; Maaret Castrén; Peter T Morley; William H Montgomery; Vinay M Nadkarni; John E Billi; Raina M Merchant; Allan de Caen; Raffo Escalante-Kanashiro; David Kloeck; Tzong-Luen Wang; Mary Fran Hazinski Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 6.251