首页> 外文期刊>Resuscitation. >A comparison of outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with non-cardiac etiology between emergency departments with low- and high-resuscitation case volume
【24h】

A comparison of outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with non-cardiac etiology between emergency departments with low- and high-resuscitation case volume

机译:低和高复苏病例量的急诊科之间院外心脏骤停与非心脏病因的结果比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objectives: It is unclear whether outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) of non-cardiac etiology (NCE) is associated with the volume of patients with OHCA received annually at the emergency department (ED) where they receive treatment. This study evaluated whether the volume of patients treated is associated with better outcomes for non-cardiac OHCA patients. Methods: This study was performed in an emergency medical service (EMS) system with a single-tiered basic-to-intermediate service level and approximately 410 destination hospitals for eligible OHCA cases. A nationwide OHCA database (2006-2008), constructed from EMS run sheets, and a hospital medical record review were used. OHCA was defined as pulseless and unresponsive in the field. Included in the study were cases treated with OHCA whose etiology was non-cardiac. Excluded were cases with unknown hospital outcome. The cutoff number for a high volume (HV) versus a low volume (LV) of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) cases was calculated using a threshold model. The primary end points were survival to admission and survival to discharge. The adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for the endpoints were calculated, adjusting for potential predictors. Results: There were 10,425 eligible patients (trauma 5735; drowning 98; poisoning 684; asphyxia 1413; and hanging 1605). The survival-to-admission and the survival-to-discharge rates of the study participants were 9.6% and 2.4%, respectively. The cutoff number for case volume was 38 per year. The rates of survival to admission and survival to discharge were significantly higher in the HV (18.6% and 5.1%, respectively) group when compared to the LV group (5.9% and 1.3%, respectively). For the treated, non-cardiac OHCA patients, the adjusted ORs in the HV group compared to the LV group were 2.16 for survival to admission (95% CI: 1.84-2.55) and 2.58 for survival to discharge (95% CI: 1.90-3.52). The survival-to-discharge rate was significantly higher in the HV group than in the LV group for each cause: trauma 2.1% vs. 0.6%, drowning 6.8% vs. 1.9%, poisoning 8.6% vs. 1.7%, asphyxia 13.5% vs. 3.8%, and hanging 5.2% vs. 1.3%, respectively. Conclusion: This national cohort study suggests that greater survival to admission as well as discharge for patients with OHCA of NCE is associated with greater annual volume of patients with OHCA treated at that hospital.
机译:目的:目前尚不清楚非心脏病因(NCE)的院外心脏骤停(OHCA)后的结局是否与每年在其接受治疗的急诊室(ED)接受的OHCA患者人数有关。这项研究评估了非心脏OHCA患者的治疗量是否与更好的预后相关。方法:本研究在具有单层基础到中级服务水平的紧急医疗服务(EMS)系统中进行,并为合格的OHCA病例提供了约410家目的地医院。使用了由EMS运行表构建的全国OHCA数据库(2006-2008)和医院病历审查。 OHCA在现场被定义为无脉冲且无反应。该研究包括病因非心脏病的OHCA治疗病例。排除不明医院预后的病例。使用阈值模型计算高容量(HV)与低容量(LV)心肺复苏(CPR)病例的临界值。主要终点是入院生存期和出院生存期。计算了端点的调整后的优势比(OR)和95%的置信区间(95%CI),并调整了潜在的预测指标。结果:有10,425名符合条件的患者(创伤5735;溺水98;中毒684;窒息1413;悬吊1605)。研究参与者的生存入院率和出院生存率分别为9.6%和2.4%。案件数量的起征点为每年38起。与LV组(分别为5.9%和1.3%)相比,HV组(分别为18.6%和5.1%)的入院生存率和出院生存率显着更高。对于接受治疗的非心脏OHCA患者,与LV组相比,HV组的校正后ORs为入院生存率(16%CI:1.84-2.55)为2.16,出院生存率(95%CI:1.90- 3.52)。在每种情况下,HV组的生存至出院率均显着高于LV组:创伤2.1%比0.6%,溺水6.8%比1.9%,中毒8.6%比1.7%,窒息13.5%分别为3.8%和1.3%。结论:这项全国队列研究表明,NCE OHCA患者的入院生存率和出院率更高,与该医院接受治疗的OHCA患者的年增加量有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号