[Initial defibrillation by emergency physicians or by first aid assistants? A prospective, comparative multicenter study in outpatients with ventricular fibrillation]

[Automated external defibrillators: perspectives and outlook]

In Germany about 80.000 patients die of sudden cardiac death each year with enormous human, social and economic consequences. Most cases of sudden cardiac death are caused by ischemia-triggered ventricular fibrillation. A precondition for survival of the victims is an optimally and fast reacting "chain of survival". One of the central links of this chain is timely defibrillation, which is the only effective therapy for treatment of ventricular fibrillation. Automated external defibrillators proved to be a major step forward in improvement of resuscitation results. It has been convincingly demonstrated, that these devices not only are safe and efficacious in the hands of rescue personnel of different qualification degrees but also in the hands of minimally trained "first responders" and even in the hands of untrained lay people. This story of success was paralleled by the development of a new generation of biphasic defibrillators, which have a superior efficacy, are lightweight and are even cheaper than conventional devices. It must however kept in mind, that progress offered by these new opportunities will only translate in better resuscitation results, when programmes are thoroughly planned, will stay under continuous quality control with regard to performance of devices and rescuers and if new knowledge in resuscitation is adequately incorporated in action protocols.

Active compression-decompression resuscitation: a prospective, randomized study in a two-tiered EMS system with physicians in the field

Improved cardiopulmonary circulation with active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACD-CPR) has been demonstrated in studies using different animal models and a small number of humans in cardiac arrest (CA). However, prehospital studies have shown both positive and no extra benefit of ACD-CPR on return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital admission and discharge rates. The aim of our prospective study was to compare standard manual CPR (S-CPR) with ACD-CPR as the initial technique of resuscitating patients with out-of-hospital CA, with respect to survival rates and neurological outcome. Patients with out-of-hospital CA treated by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel were randomly assigned to one of two groups (ACD-CPR versus S-CPR). Time intervals to key measures were documented by means of on-line tape-recording. Neurological outcome was assessed using standard scoring systems (cerebral and overall performance categories (CPC and OPC)). A total of 220 patients (S-CPR, n = 114: ACD-CPR, n = 106) were included in the study in a random order. The treatment groups were similar with respect to age, sex, time interval from collapse to CPR, defibrillation and first adrenaline medication. There was no difference between the ACD group and the standard CPR group in terms of ROSC (50.9% vs. 59.6%), hospital admission (33% vs. 33.3%), hospital discharge (16% vs. 14%), or CPC and OPC (1.82 vs. 2.13 and 2.06 vs. 2.25, respectively). Concerning complications of CPR, there was no difference between the groups. In our two-tiered EMS system with physician-staffed ambulances, ACD-CPR neither improved nor impaired survival rates and neurological prognosis in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The new CPR technique did not increase the complications associated with the resuscitation effort.

Quality of on-site performance in prehospital advanced cardiac life support (ACLS)

The aim of our prospective study was to assess the structural and procedural quality of an urban emergency medical services (EMS) system providing prehospital basic and advanced cardiac life support (BLS/ACLS), to compare the onsite performance of physicians and non-physicians in ECG diagnosis and defibrillation, and to identify incidence and causes of avoidable delays in the initial treatment sequences.

METHODS

Between 1 February 1991 and 1 July 1992, 162 on-line tape recordings of prehospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) efforts performed by the staff of the EMS system of the city of Mainz were evaluated. After arrival at the patient's side, time intervals to initial ACLS steps (first ECG-diagnosis, first defibrillation, endotracheal intubation, first epinephrine administration) were measured. Times to rhythm identification and countershock by EMT-Ds vs. physicians were compared (Mann-Whitney U-test). Time intervals are presented as median values. One-hundred sixty-two adult patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (ventricular fibrillation [VF] or ventricular tachycardia [VT], 72; asystole or electromechanical dissociation [EMD], 90) receiving CPR by EMTs, EMT-Ds, and physicians of the Mainz EMS were included. Patients with arrests due to non-cardiac aetiologies were excluded.

RESULTS

After arrival at the patient's side, for patients with VF/VT, the EMT-Ds took 1:36 min and the physicians took 1:00 min to obtain the first ECG diagnosis (P = 0.004). The first countershock was delivered within 1:42 min by both EMT-Ds and physicians of the mobile intensive care unit (MICU). After diagnosis was established, the EMT-Ds took 0:08 min to defibrillate, whereas the physicians took 0:36 min (P = 0.0001).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)