Assessment of changes in cardiopulmonary resuscitation practices and outcomes on 1005 victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 outbreak: registry-based study

Comparison of end tidal CO2 levels between automated head up and conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A pre-post intervention trial

BACKGROUND

The combination of controlled automated head/thorax elevation, active compression-decompression (ACD) cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and an impedance threshold device (ITD-16), termed AHUP-CPR, lowers intracranial pressure and increases circulation and neurologically-sound survival in pigs versus conventional (C) CPR. This study examined whether AHUP-CPR increased end tidal (ET) CO2, a non-invasive marker of cardiac output and organ perfusion, compared with C-CPR in witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients.

METHOD

We conducted a prospective, single-arm, pre-post intervention trial in France between October 2019 and October 2022.Firefighters treated patients enrolled during the pre-intervention period with manual C-CPR and with AHUP-CPR during the post-intervention period. Advanced life support was provided by a physician-staffed 2nd-tier response vehicle for the two study periods. The primary outcome was the peak ETCO2 value measured during CPR.

RESULTS

122 patients with a mean age of 67 years (standard deviation [SD], 17) were enrolled (59 in the pre-intervention period and 63 in the post-intervention period). Based on an intention-to-treat analysis, mean baseline ETCO2 values were comparable between pre- (20.1 mmHg, SD,16.3) and post-(19.2 mmHg, SD, 16.3) intervention periods. Mean peak ETCO2 values during CPR were 30.3 mmHg (SD, 13.1) versus 40.7 mmHg (SD, 17.8) for the pre- and post-intervention study periods (mean difference, 10.6, 95% confidence interval, 4.6 to 16.1, P < 0.001). Mean differences in peak ETCO2 between study periods did not vary according to the first recorded cardiac rhythm (P for interaction = 0.99). The proportion of return of spontaneous circulation [19 (32.2%) vs. 21 (33.3%)], survival on hospital admission [17 (28.8%) vs. 19 (30.2%)], and 30-day survival with favorable neurological outcome [8 (13.6%) vs. 7 (11.1%)] did not differ between study periods.

CONCLUSION

ETCO2 values during AHUP-CPR reached the range of non-arrest normal physiological levels and were significantly higher than with C-CPR, regardless of the presenting cardiac rhythm.

Acute care pathway assessed through performance indicators during the COVID-19 pandemic in OECD countries (2020-2021): a scoping review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted care for non-COVID patients. Performance indicators to monitor acute care, timely reported and internationally accepted, lacked during the pandemic in OECD countries. This study aims to summarize the performance indicators available in the literature to monitor changes in the quality of acute care in OECD countries during the first year and a half of the pandemic (2020-July 2021) and to assess their trends.

METHODS

Scoping review. Search in Embase and MEDLINE (07-07-2022). Acute care performance indicators and indicators related to acute general surgery were collected and collated following a care pathway approach. Indicators assessing identical clinical measures were grouped under a common indicator title. The trends from each group of indicators were collated (increase/decrease/stable).

RESULTS

A total of 152 studies were included. 2354 indicators regarding general acute care and 301 indicators related to acute general surgery were included. Indicators focusing on pre-hospital services reported a decreasing trend in the volume of patients: from 225 indicators, 110 (49%) reported a decrease. An increasing trend in pre-hospital treatment times was reported by most of the indicators (n = 41;70%) and a decreasing trend in survival rates of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (n = 61;75%). Concerning care provided in the emergency department, most of the indicators (n = 752;71%) showed a decreasing trend in admissions across all levels of urgency. Concerning the mortality rate after admission, most of the indicators (n = 23;53%) reported an increasing trend. The subset of indicators assessing acute general surgery showed a decreasing trend in the volume of patients (n = 50;49%), stability in clinical severity at admission (n = 36;53%), and in the volume of surgeries (n = 14;47%). Most of the indicators (n = 28;65%) reported no change in treatment approach and stable mortality rate (n = 11,69%).

CONCLUSION

This review signals relevant disruptions across the acute care pathway. A subset of general surgery performance indicators showed stability in most of the phases of the care pathway. These results highlight the relevance of assessing this care pathway more regularly and systematically across different clinical entities to monitor disruptions and to improve the resilience of emergency services during a crisis.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: An individual patient data meta-analysis

AIM

Prior studies have reported increased out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) incidence and lower survival during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated how the COVID-19 pandemic affected OHCA incidence, bystander CPR rate and patients' outcomes, accounting for regional COVID-19 incidence and OHCA characteristics.

METHODS

Individual patient data meta-analysis of studies which provided a comparison of OHCA incidence during the first pandemic wave (COVID-period) with a reference period of the previous year(s) (pre-COVID period). We computed COVID-19 incidence per 100,000 inhabitants in each of 97 regions per each week and divided it into its quartiles.

RESULTS

We considered a total of 49,882 patients in 10 studies. OHCA incidence increased significantly compared to previous years in regions where weekly COVID-19 incidence was in the fourth quartile (>136/100,000/week), and patients in these regions had a lower odds of bystander CPR (OR 0.49, 95%CI 0.29-0.81, p = 0.005). Overall, the COVID-period was associated with an increase in medical etiology (89.2% vs 87.5%, p < 0.001) and OHCAs at home (74.7% vs 67.4%, p < 0.001), and a decrease in shockable initial rhythm (16.5% vs 20.3%, p < 0.001). The COVID-period was independently associated with pre-hospital death (OR 1.73, 95%CI 1.55-1.93, p < 0.001) and negatively associated with survival to hospital admission (OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.64-0.72, p < 0.001) and survival to discharge (OR 0.50, 95%CI 0.46-0.54, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

During the first COVID-19 pandemic wave, there was higher OHCA incidence and lower bystander CPR rate in regions with a high-burden of COVID-19. COVID-19 was also associated with a change in patient characteristics and lower survival independently of COVID-19 incidence in the region where OHCA occurred.

Effects of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic on outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and bystander resuscitation efforts: a nationwide cohort study in Japan

Background and importance There is limited knowledge about the nationwide impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic in Japan on out-of -hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) outcomes.Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic on OHCA outcomes and bystander resuscitation efforts in Japan. Design Retrospective analysis of a nationwide population-based registry of OHCA cases. Settings and participants To conduct this study, we created a comprehensive database comprising 821 665 OHCA cases by combining and reconciling the OHCA database for 835 197 OHCA cases between 2017 and 2020 with another database, including location and time records. After applying exclusion and inclusion criteria, we analysed 751 617 cases.Outcome measures and analysis The primary outcome measure for this study was survival with neurologically favourable outcome (cerebral performance category 1 or 2). We compare OHCA characteristics and outcomes between prepandemic and pandemic years, and also investigated differences in factors associated with outcomes. Results We found that survival with neurologically favourable outcome and the rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) slightly increased in the pandemic year [2.8% vs. 2.9%; crude odds ratio (OR), 1.07; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-1.10; 54.1% vs. 55.3%, 1.05 (1.04-1.06), respectively], although the incidence of public access defibrillation (PAD) slightly decreased [1.8% vs. 1.6%, 0.89 (0.86-0.93)]. Calls for hospital selection by emergency medical service (EMS) increased during the pandemic. Subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of neurologically favourable outcome increased in 2020 for OHCA cases that occurred on nonstate of emergency days, in unaffected prefectures, with noncardiac cause, nonshockable initial rhythm, and during daytime hours. Conclusions During the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic in Japan, survival with neurologically favourable outcome of OHCA patients and bystander CPR rate did not negatively change, despite the decrement in PAD incidence. However, these effects varied with the state of emergency, region, and characteristics of OHCA, suggesting an imbalance between medical demand and supply, and raising concerns about the pandemic.

Impact of COVID-19-adapted guidelines using different airway management strategies on resuscitation quality in out-of-hospital-cardiac-arrest - a randomised manikin study

BACKGROUND

Although airway management for paramedics has moved away from endotracheal intubation towards extraglottic airway devices in recent years, in the context of COVID-19, endotracheal intubation has seen a revival. Endotracheal intubation has been recommended again under the assumption that it provides better protection against aerosol liberation and infection risk for care providers than extraglottic airway devices accepting an increase in no-flow time and possibly worsen patient outcomes.

METHODS

In this manikin study paramedics performed advanced cardiac life support with non-shockable (Non-VF) and shockable rhythms (VF) in four settings: ERC guidelines 2021 (control), COVID-19-guidelines using videolaryngoscopic intubation (COVID-19-intubation), laryngeal mask (COVID-19-Laryngeal-Mask) or a modified laryngeal mask modified with a shower cap (COVID-19-showercap) to reduce aerosol liberation simulated by a fog machine. Primary endpoint was no-flow-time, secondary endpoints included data on airway management as well as the participants' subjective assessment of aerosol release using a Likert-scale (0 = no release-10 = maximum release) were collected and statistically compared. Continuous Data was presented as mean ± standard deviation. Interval-scaled Data were presented as median and Q1 and Q3.

RESULTS

A total of 120 resuscitation scenarios were completed. Compared to control (Non-VF:11 ± 3 s, VF:12 ± 3 s) application of COVID-19-adapted guidelines lead to prolonged no-flow times in all groups (COVID-19-Intubation: Non-VF:17 ± 11 s, VF:19 ± 5 s;p ≤ 0.001; COVID-19-laryngeal-mask: VF:15 ± 5 s,p ≤ 0.01; COVID-19-showercap: VF:15 ± 3 s,p ≤ 0.01). Compared to COVID-19-Intubation, the use of the laryngeal mask and its modification with a showercap both led to a reduction of no-flow-time(COVID-19-laryngeal-mask: Non-VF:p = 0.002;VF:p ≤ 0.001; COVID-19-Showercap: Non-VF:p ≤ 0.001;VF:p = 0.002) due to a reduced duration of intubation (COVID-19-Intubation: Non-VF:40 ± 19 s;VF:33 ± 17 s; both p ≤ 0.01 vs. control, COVID-19-Laryngeal-Mask (Non-VF:15 ± 7 s;VF:13 ± 5 s;p > 0.05) and COVID-19-Shower-cap (Non-VF:15 ± 5 s;VF:17 ± 5 s;p > 0.05). The participants rated aerosol liberation lowest in COVID-19-intubation (median:0;Q1:0,Q3:2;p < 0.001vs.COVID-19-laryngeal-mask and COVID-19-showercap) compared to COVID-19-shower-cap (median:3;Q1:1,Q3:3 p < 0.001vs.COVID-19-laryngeal-mask) or COVID-19-laryngeal-mask (median:9;Q1:6,Q3:8).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19-adapted guidelines using videolaryngoscopic intubation lead to a prolongation of no-flow time. The use of a modified laryngeal mask with a shower cap seems to be a suitable compromise combining minimal impact on no-flowtime and reduced aerosol exposure for the involved providers.

Comparison of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests during the COVID-19 pandemic with those before the pandemic: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, directly and indirectly, affected the emergency medical care system and resulted in worse out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) outcomes and epidemiological features compared with those before the pandemic. This review compares the regional and temporal features of OHCA prognosis and epidemiological characteristics. Various databases were searched to compare the OHCA outcomes and epidemiological characteristics during the COVID-19 pandemic with before the pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, survival and favorable neurological outcome rates were significantly lower than before. Survival to hospitalization, return of spontaneous circulation, endotracheal intubation, and use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) decreased significantly, whereas the use of a supraglottic airway device, the incidence of cardiac arrest at home, and response time of emergency medical service (EMS) increased significantly. Bystander CPR, unwitnessed cardiac arrest, EMS transfer time, use of mechanical CPR, and in-hospital target temperature management did not differ significantly. A subgroup analysis of the studies that included only the first wave with those that included the subsequent waves revealed the overall outcomes in which the epidemiological features of OHCA exhibited similar patterns. No significant regional differences between the OHCA survival rates in Asia before and during the pandemic were observed, although other variables varied by region. The COVID-19 pandemic altered the epidemiologic characteristics, survival rates, and neurological prognosis of OHCA patients. Review registration: PROSPERO (CRD42022339435).

Nationwide Analysis of Cardiac Arrest Outcomes During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Introduction

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had a significant impact on the chain of survival following cardiac arrest. However, large population-based reports of COVID-19 in patients hospitalized after cardiac arrest are limited.

Methods

The National Inpatient Sample database was queried for cardiac arrest admissions during 2020 in the United States (US). Propensity score matching was used to match patients with and without concurrent COVID-19 according to age, race, sex, and comorbidities. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of mortality.

Results

A weighted total of 267,845 hospitalizations for cardiac arrest were identified, among which 44,105 patients (16.5%) had a concomitant diagnosis of COVID-19. After propensity matching, cardiac arrest patients with concomitant COVID-19 had higher rate of acute kidney injury requiring dialysis (64.9% vs. 54.8%) mechanical ventilation > 24 hours (53.6% vs. 44.6%) and sepsis (59.4% vs. 40.4%) compared to cardiac arrest patients without COVID-19. In contrast, cardiac arrest patients with COVID-19 had lower rates of cardiogenic shock (3.2% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.001), ventricular tachycardia (9.6% vs. 11.7%, p < 0.001), and ventricular fibrillation (6.7% vs. 10.8%, p < 0.001), and a lower utilization of cardiac procedures. In-hospital mortality was higher in patients with COVID-19 (86.9% vs. 65.5%, p <0.001) and, on multivariate analysis, a diagnosis of COVID-19 was an independent predictor of mortality.

Conclusion

Among patients hospitalized following a cardiac arrest during 2020, concomitant COVID-19 infection was associated with significantly worse outcomes characterized by an increased risk of sepsis, pulmonary and renal dysfunction, and death.

No fear: Willingness of smartphone activated first responders to assist with cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic

Aim

To understand the fear and willingness to respond of smartphone activated first responders during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We invited smartphone activated first responders registered with the GoodSAM application in Victoria, Australia to take part in an online survey in November 2020. We assessed willingness to respond to an alert and provide CPR during the pandemic and administered the Fear of COVID-19 Scale questionnaire. Regression analysis was conducted to investigate associations between occupation, clinical training, and years of clinical experience with willingness to respond and fear of COVID-19.

Results

The survey response rate was 5.1%. Responders (n = 348) had a median age (interquartile range) of 46 years (33-55). Most (67%) were aged 30-59 years and 43% were female. Responders spanned several occupations including paramedics (12.6%), registered nurses (14.7%), and non-clinical individuals (21.8%). Most (92%) reported they would feel comfortable responding to a GoodSAM alert during the pandemic. Almost all (>95%) reported they would provide CPR. About 20% reported being afraid of COVID-19 but only 3.2% reported they had a high-level of fear of COVID-19. The odds of paramedics being willing to respond to an alert was reduced by 73% during the pandemic (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.69). No other associations were found with willingness or fear of COVID-19.

Conclusion

Although willingness was high and fear of COVID-19 was low, some smartphone activated first responders were less willing to respond to an alert during the pandemic. These findings may inform future pandemic planning and decision-making around pausing first-responder programs.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2023 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2022 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. The American Heart Association strives to further understand and help heal health problems inflicted by structural racism, a public health crisis that can significantly damage physical and mental health and perpetuate disparities in access to health care, education, income, housing, and several other factors vital to healthy lives. This year's edition includes additional COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) publications, as well as data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, with an enhanced focus on health equity across several key domains.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients with ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated during the COVID-19 pandemic might experience prolonged time to reperfusion. The delayed reperfusion may potentially aggravate the risk of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in those patients. Limited access to healthcare, more reluctant health-seeking behaviors, and bystander readiness to render life-saving interventions might additionally contribute to the suggested change in the risk of OHCA in STEMI. Thus, we sought to explore the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak on treatment delay and clinical outcomes of patients with STEMI with OHCA. Overall, 5,501 consecutive patients with STEMI complicated by OHCA and treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation were enrolled. A propensity score matching was used to obviate the possible impact of non-randomized design. A total of 740 matched pairs of patients with STEMI and OHCA treated before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were compared. A similar mortality and prevalence of periprocedural complications were observed in both groups. However, patients treated during the COVID-19 outbreak experienced longer delays from first medical contact to angiography (88.8 (±61.5) vs. 101.4 (±109.8) [minutes]; p = 0.006). There was also a trend toward prolonged time from pain onset to angiography in patients admitted to the hospital in the pandemic era (207.3 (±192.8) vs. 227.9 (±231.4) [minutes]; p = 0.06). In conclusion, the periprocedural outcomes in STEMI complicated by OHCA were comparable before and during the COVID-19 era. However, treatment in the COVID-19 outbreak was associated with a longer time from first medical contact to reperfusion.

Guidance for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation of Children With Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19

This article aims to provide guidance to health care workers for the provision of basic and advanced life support to children and neonates with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It aligns with the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular care while providing strategies for reducing risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to health care providers. Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and cardiac arrest should receive chest compressions and defibrillation, when indicated, as soon as possible. Because of the importance of ventilation during pediatric and neonatal resuscitation, oxygenation and ventilation should be prioritized. All CPR events should therefore be considered aerosol-generating procedures. Thus, personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriate for aerosol-generating procedures (including N95 respirators or an equivalent) should be donned before resuscitation, and high-efficiency particulate air filters should be used. Any personnel without appropriate PPE should be immediately excused by providers wearing appropriate PPE. Neonatal resuscitation guidance is unchanged from standard algorithms, except for specific attention to infection prevention and control. In summary, health care personnel should continue to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission through vaccination and use of appropriate PPE during pediatric resuscitations. Health care organizations should ensure the availability and appropriate use of PPE. Because delays or withheld CPR increases the risk to patients for poor clinical outcomes, children and neonates with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 should receive prompt, high-quality CPR in accordance with evidence-based guidelines.

Effect of Wearing N95 Mask on the Quality of Chest Compressions in Prehospital Emergency Personnel: A Cross-over Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of wearing an N95 mask on the quality of chest compression and fatigue of prehospital emergency personnel during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

METHODS

Twenty-four eligible participants were recruited. Participants' age, sex, height, and weight were recorded. After completing the CPR training and examination, participants were tested twice, wearing surgical mask or an N95 mask, while performing chest compressions for 2 minutes. The quality of chest compression (including compression frequency, depth, rebound, and position) was recorded by the simulator. Borg fatigue scores and physiological parameters (including heart rate, mean arterial pressure, pulse oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate) were recorded before and after chest compressions.

RESULTS

Compared to wearing surgical masks, participants wearing N95 masks had significantly lower quality of chest compression, including compression frequency (98.3 ± 4.9 bpm vs 104.0 ± 6.0 bpm, P < 0.001), depth (47.1 ± 4.5 mm vs 50.5 ± 5.4 mm, P < 0.001), and rebound (90.2 ± 2.7% vs 94.3 ± 2.1%, P < 0.001). The compression position was not affected. The period data showed that the difference in compression quality started after 1 minute of compressions. Participants wearing N95 masks had higher Borg fatigue scores [6.1(2) vs 5.1(2), P < 0.001], heart rates (121.2 ± 5.7 bpm vs 109.9 ± 6.0 bpm, P < 0.001), mean arterial pressures (106.3 ± 8.0 mmHg vs 99.0 ± 8.5 mmHg, P = 0.012), and respiratory rates (29.5 ± 2.7 bpm vs 24.7 ± 2.5 bpm, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that the use of an N95 mask by prehospital emergency personnel during the performance of chest compressions resulted in a reduction of compression quality and increased clinician fatigue. There is a need for CPR training for medical personnel wearing personal protective equipment.

Evolution of European Resuscitation and End-of-Life Practices from 2015 to 2019: A Survey-Based Comparative Evaluation

BACKGROUND

In concordance with the results of large, observational studies, a 2015 European survey suggested variation in resuscitation/end-of-life practices and emergency care organization across 31 countries. The current survey-based study aimed to comparatively assess the evolution of practices from 2015 to 2019, especially in countries with "low" (i.e., average or lower) 2015 questionnaire domain scores.

METHODS

The 2015 questionnaire with additional consensus-based questions was used. The 2019 questionnaire covered practices/decisions related to end-of-life care (domain A); determinants of access to resuscitation/post-resuscitation care (domain B); diagnosis of death/organ donation (domain C); and emergency care organization (domain D). Responses from 25 countries were analyzed. Positive or negative responses were graded by 1 or 0, respectively. Domain scores were calculated by summation of practice-specific response grades.

RESULTS

Domain A and B scores for 2015 and 2019 were similar. Domain C score decreased by 1 point [95% confidence interval (CI): 1-3; p = 0.02]. Domain D score increased by 2.6 points (95% CI: 0.2-5.0; p = 0.035); this improvement was driven by countries with "low" 2015 domain D scores. In countries with "low" 2015 domain A scores, domain A score increased by 5.5 points (95% CI: 0.4-10.6; p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

In 2019, improvements in emergency care organization and an increasing frequency of end-of-life practices were observed primarily in countries with previously "low" scores in the corresponding domains of the 2015 questionnaire.

Non-COVID outcomes associated with the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic effects study (COPES): A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, healthcare providers struggle to manage both COVID-19 and non-COVID patients while still providing high-quality care. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis to describe the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with non-COVID illness and on healthcare systems compared to non-pandemic epochs.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/CENTRAL/CINAHL (inception to December 31, 2020). All study types with COVID-pandemic time period (after December 31, 2019) with comparative non-pandemic time periods (prior to December 31, 2019). Data regarding study characteristics/case-mix/interventions/comparators/ outcomes (primary: mortality; secondary: morbidity/hospitalizations/disruptions-to-care. Paired reviewers conducted screening and abstraction, with conflicts resolved by discussion. Effect sizes for specific therapies were pooled using random-effects models. Risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, with evidence rating using GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Of 11,581 citations, 167 studies met eligibility. Our meta-analysis showed an increased mortality of 16% during the COVID pandemic for non-COVID illness compared with 11% mortality during the pre-pandemic period (RR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.28-1.50; absolute risk difference: 5% [95% CI: 4-6%], p<0.00001, very low certainty evidence). Twenty-eight studies (17%) reported significant changes in morbidity (where 93% reported increases), while 30 studies (18%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Thirty-nine studies (23%) reported significant changes in hospitalizations (97% reporting decreases), while 111 studies (66%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Sixty-two studies (37%) reported significant disruptions in standards-to-care (73% reporting increases), while 62 studies (37%) reported no significant change (very low certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant increase in mortality during the COVID pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times for non-COVID illnesses. When significant changes were reported, there was increased morbidity, decreased hospitalizations and increased disruptions in standards-of-care.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020201256 (Sept 2, 2020).

Association of the COVID-19 pandemic with bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a population-based analysis in Tokyo, Japan

BACKGROUND

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether rates of bystander CPR and patient outcomes changed during the initial state of emergency declared in Tokyo for the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This retrospective study used data from a population-based database of OHCA maintained by the Tokyo Fire Department. By comparing data from the periods before (18 February to 6 April 2020) and during the declaration of a state of emergency (7 April 2020 to 25 May 2020), we estimated the change in bystander CPR rate, prehospital return of spontaneous circulation, and survival and neurological outcomes 1 month after OHCA, accounting for outcome trends in 2019. We performed a multivariate regression analysis to evaluate the potential mechanisms for associations between the state of emergency and these outcomes.

RESULTS

The witnessed arrest rates before and after the declaration periods in 2020 were 42.5% and 45.1%, respectively, compared with 44.1% and 44.7% in the respective corresponding periods in 2019. The difference between the two periods in 2020 was not statistically significant when the trend in 2019 was considered. The bystander CPR rates before and after the declaration periods significantly increased from 34.4% to 43.9% in 2020, an 8.3% increase after adjusting for the trend in 2019. This finding was significant even after adjusting for patient and bystander characteristics and the emergency medical service response. There were no significant differences between the two periods in the other study outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an improvement in the bystander CPR rate in Tokyo, while patient outcomes were maintained. Pandemic-related changes in patient and bystander characteristics do not fully explain the underlying mechanism; there may be other mechanisms through which the community response to public emergency increased during the pandemic.

Impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest management and outcomes in a low-resource emergency medical service system: a perspective from Thailand

Background

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusion

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.

Effect of sodium bicarbonate on functional outcome in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a post-hoc analysis of a French and North-American dataset

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE

No large randomised controlled trial has assessed the potential benefits on neurologic outcomes of prehospital sodium bicarbonate administration in patients with nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).

OBJECTIVE

To obtain information of assistance in designing a randomised controlled trial of bicarbonate therapy after OHCA in specific patient subgroups.

DESIGN

We conducted two, separate, simultaneous, retrospective studies of two distinct, unlinked datasets.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

One dataset was a French nationwide population-based registry (RéAC Registry, French dataset) and the other was a randomised controlled trial comparing continuous to interrupted chest compressions in North America (ROC-CCC trial, North-American dataset).

INTERVENTION

We investigated whether prehospital bicarbonate administration was associated with better neurologic outcomes.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSES

The main outcome measure was the functional outcome at hospital discharge. To adjust for potential confounders, we conducted a nested propensity-score-matched analysis with inverse probability-of-treatment weighting.

MAIN RESULTS

In the French dataset, of the 54 807 patients, 1234 (2.2%) received sodium bicarbonate and 450 were matched. After propensity-score matching, sodium bicarbonate was not associated with a higher likelihood of favourable functional outcomes on day 30 [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.912; 95% confidence interval (95%CI), 0.501-1.655]. In the North-American dataset, of the 23 711 included patients, 4902 (20.6%) received sodium bicarbonate and 1238 were matched. After propensity-score matching, sodium bicarbonate was associated with a lower likelihood of favourable functional outcomes at hospital discharge (aOR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34-0.58).

CONCLUSION

In patients with OHCA, prehospital sodium bicarbonate administration was not associated with neurologic outcomes in a French dataset and was associated with worse neurologic outcomes in a North-American dataset. Given the considerable variability in sodium bicarbonate use by different prehospital care systems and the potential resuscitation-time bias in the present study, a large randomised clinical trial targeting specific patient subgroups may be needed to determine whether sodium bicarbonate has a role in the prehospital management of prolonged OHCA.

Cardiac arrest and coronavirus disease 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the cardiovascular system has been highlighted since the very first weeks after the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 identification. We reviewed the influence of COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac arrest, both considering those occurred out of the hospital (OHCA) and in the hospital (IHCA).

RECENT FINDINGS

An increase in OHCA incidence occurred in different countries, especially in those regions most burdened by the COVID-19, as this seems to be bounded to the pandemic trend. A change of OHCA patients' characteristics, with an increase of the OHCA occurred at home, a decrease in bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator use before Emergency Medical Service (EMS) arrival and an increase in non-shockable rhythms, have been highlighted. A dramatic drop in the OHCA patients' survival was pointed out in almost all the countries, regardless of the high or low-incidence of COVID-19 cases. Concerning IHCA, a reduction in survival was highlighted in patients with COVID-19 who sustained a cardiac arrest.

SUMMARY

Cardiac arrest occurrence and survival were deeply affected by the pandemic. Informative campaigns to the population to call EMS in case of need and the re-allocation of the prehospital resources basing on the pandemic trend are needed to improve survival.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2022 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population and an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, adverse pregnancy outcomes, vascular contributions to brain health, and the global burden of cardiovascular disease and healthy life expectancy.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

First responder systems can stay operational under pandemic conditions: results of a European survey during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Dispatching first responders (FR) to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in addition to the emergency medical service has shown to increase survival. The promising development of FR systems over the past years has been challenged by the outbreak of COVID-19. Whilst increased numbers and worse outcomes of cardiac arrests during the pandemic suggest a need for expansion of FR schemes, appropriate risk management is required to protect first responders and patients from contracting COVID-19. This study investigated how European FR schemes were affected by the pandemic and what measures were taken to protect patients and responders from COVID-19.

Methods

To identify FR schemes in Europe we conducted a literature search and a web search. The schemes were contacted and invited to answer an online questionnaire during the second wave of the pandemic (December 2020/ January 2021) in Europe.

Results

We have identified 135 FR schemes in 28 countries and included responses from 47 FR schemes in 16 countries. 25 schemes reported deactivation due to COVID-19 at some point, whilst 22 schemes continued to operate throughout the pandemic. 39 schemes communicated a pandemic-specific algorithm to their first responders. Before the COVID-19 outbreak 20 FR systems did not provide any personal protective equipment (PPE). After the outbreak 19 schemes still did not provide any PPE. The majority of schemes experienced falling numbers of accepted call outs and decreasing registrations of new volunteers. Six schemes reported of FR having contracted COVID-19 on a mission.

Conclusions

European FR schemes were considerably affected by the pandemic and exhibited a range of responses to protect patients and responders. Overall, FR schemes saw a decrease in activity, which was in stark contrast to the high demand caused by the increased incidence and mortality of OHCA during the pandemic. Given the important role FR play in the chain of survival, a balanced approach upholding the safety of patients and responders should be sought to keep FR schemes operational.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13049-022-00998-3.

Resuscitation of Drowned Persons During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Consensus Statement

IMPORTANCE

Resuscitation is a niche example of how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected society in the long term. Those trained in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) face the dilemma that attempting to save a life may result in their own harm. This is most of all a problem for drowning, where hypoxia is the cause of cardiac arrest and ventilation is the essential first step in reversing the situation.

OBJECTIVE

To develop recommendations for water rescue organizations in providing their rescuers with safe drowning resuscitation procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Two consecutive modified Delphi procedures involving 56 participants from 17 countries with expertise in drowning prevention research, resuscitation, and programming were performed from March 28, 2020, to March 29, 2021. In parallel, PubMed and Google Scholar were searched to identify new emerging evidence relevant to each core element, acknowledge previous studies relevant in the new context, and identify knowledge gaps.

FINDINGS

Seven core elements, each with their own specific recommendations, were identified in the initial consensus procedure and were grouped into 4 categories: (1) prevention and mitigation of the risks of becoming infected, (2) resuscitation of drowned persons during the COVID-19 pandemic, (3) organizational responsibilities, and (4) organizations unable to meet the recommended guidelines. The common measures of infection risk mitigation, personal protective equipment, and vaccination are the base of the recommendations. Measures to increase drowning prevention efforts reduce the root cause of the dilemma. Additional infection risk mitigation measures include screening all people entering aquatic facilities, defining criteria for futile resuscitation, and avoiding contact with drowned persons by rescuers with a high-risk profile. Ventilation techniques must balance required skill level, oxygen delivery, infection risk, and costs of equipment and training. Bag-mask ventilation with a high-efficiency particulate air filter by 2 trained rescuers is advised. Major implications for the methods, facilities, and environment of CPR training have been identified, including nonpractical skills to avoid being infected or to infect others. Most of all, the organization is responsible for informing their members about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and taking measures that maximize rescuer safety. Research is urgently needed to better understand, develop, and implement strategies to reduce infection transmission during drowning resuscitation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This consensus document provides an overview of recommendations for water rescue organizations to improve the safety of their rescuers during the COVID-19 pandemic and balances the competing interests between a potentially lifesaving intervention and risk to the rescuer. The consensus-based recommendations can also serve as an example for other volunteer organizations and altruistic laypeople who may provide resuscitation.

Variation in community and ambulance care processes for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the epidemiology of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly influenced epidemiology, yet its impact on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the incidence and case fatality rate (CFR) of OHCA. We also evaluated the impact on intermediate outcomes and clinical characteristics.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to May 3, 2021. Studies were included if they compared OHCA processes and outcomes between the pandemic and historical control time periods. Meta-analyses were performed for primary outcomes [annual incidence, mortality, and case fatality rate (CFR)], secondary outcomes [field termination of resuscitation (TOR), return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission, and survival to hospital discharge], and clinical characteristics (shockable rhythm and etiologies). This study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42021253879).

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a 39.5% increase in pooled annual OHCA incidence (p < 0.001). Pooled CFR was increased by 2.65% (p < 0.001), with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 1.95 for mortality [95% confidence interval (95%CI) 1.51-2.51]. There was increased field TOR (OR = 2.46, 95%CI 1.62-3.74). There were decreased ROSC (OR = 0.65, 95%CI 0.55-0.77), survival to hospital admission (OR = 0.65, 95%CI 0.48-0.89), and survival to discharge (OR = 0.52, 95%CI 0.40-0.69). There was decreased shockable rhythm (OR = 0.73, 95%CI 0.60-0.88) and increased asphyxial etiology of OHCA (OR = 1.17, 95%CI 1.02-1.33).

CONCLUSION

Compared to the pre-pandemic period, the COVID-19 pandemic period was significantly associated with increased OHCA incidence and worse outcomes.

Outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and a direct mechanism of cardiac arrest in infected patients was hypothesized. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE were searched up to April 05, 2021. We included studies comparing out-of-hospital cardiac arrests patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection versus noninfected patients. The primary outcome was survival at hospital discharge or at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation, cardiac arrest witnessed and occurring at home, bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation, proportion of nonshockable rhythm and resuscitation attempted, and ambulance arrival time.

RESULTS

In the ten included studies, 18% (1341/7545) of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurred in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and SARS-CoV-2 infection had reduced rates of survival (16/856 [1.9%] vs. 153/2344 [6.5%]; odds ratio (OR) = 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-0.65; P = 0.001; I2 = 28%) and return of spontaneous circulation (188/861 [22%] vs. 640/2403 [27%]; OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.86; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%) when compared to noninfected patients. Ambulance arrived later (15 ± 10 vs. 13 ± 7.5 min; mean difference = 1.64; 95% CI, 0.41-2.88; P = 0.009; I2 = 61%) and nonshockable rhythms (744/803 [93%] vs. 1828/2217 [82%]; OR = 2.79; 95% CI, 2.08-3.73; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%) occurred more frequently. SARS-CoV-2 positive patients suffered a cardiac arrest at home more frequently (1186/1263 [94%] vs. 3598/4055 [89%]; OR = 1.86; 95% CI, 1.45-2.40; P<0.001; I2 = 0%) but witnessed rate (486/890 [55%] vs. 1385/2475 [56%]; OR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.82-1.14; P = 0.63; I2 = 0%) and bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation rate (439/828 [53%] vs. 1164/2304 [51%]; OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.73-1.24; P = 0.70; I2 = 53%) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

One-fifth of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients had SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients had low rates of return of spontaneous circulation and survival and were characterized by higher nonshockable rhythms but similar bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation rate.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO - CRD42021243540.

How to Maintain Safety and Maximize the Efficacy of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in COVID-19 Patients: Insights from the Recent Guidelines

Since December 2019, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has remained a challenge for governments and healthcare systems all around the globe. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with increased rates of hospital admissions and significant mortality. The pandemic increased the rate of cardiac arrest and the need for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). COVID-19, with its pathophysiology and detrimental effects on healthcare, influenced the profile of patients suffering from cardiac arrest, as well as the conditions of performing CPR. To ensure both the safety of medical personnel and the CPR efficacy for patients, resuscitation societies have published modified guidelines addressing the specific reality of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this review, we briefly describe the transmission and pathophysiology of COVID-19, present the challenges of CPR in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, summarize the current recommendations regarding the algorithms of basic life support (BLS), advanced life support (ALS) and pediatric life support, and discuss other aspects of CPR in COVID-19 patients, which potentially affect the risk-to-benefit ratio of medical procedures and therefore should be considered while formulating further recommendations.

The Influence of COVID-19 on Out-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survival Outcomes: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is associated with poor prognosis. Because the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted mortality and morbidity, both on an individual level and the health care system as a whole, our purpose was to determine rates of OHCA survival since the onset of the SARS-CoV2 pandemic. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the influence of COVID-19 on OHCA survival outcomes according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched the literature using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials databases from inception to September 2021 and identified 1775 potentially relevant studies, of which thirty-one articles totaling 88,188 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods was 12.3% vs. 8.9%, respectively (OR = 1.40; 95%CI: 1.06-1.87; p < 0.001). Survival to hospital discharge in pre- vs. intra-COVID-19 periods was 11.5% vs. 8.2% (OR = 1.57; 95%CI: 1.37-1.79; p < 0.001). A similar dependency was observed in the case of survival to hospital discharge with the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1-2 (6.7% vs. 4.0%; OR = 1.71; 95%CI: 1.35-2.15; p < 0.001), as well as in the 30-day survival rate (9.2% vs. 6.4%; OR = 1.63; 95%CI: 1.13-2.36; p = 0.009). In conclusion, prognosis of OHCA is usually poor and even worse during COVID-19.

Impact of Personal Protective Equipment on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation in Coronavirus Pandemic

Background and Objectives: This retrospective study evaluated the clinical impact of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) on the clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Moreover, by focusing on the use of a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), we investigated the medical personnel’s perceptions of wearing PAPR during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Materials and Methods: According to the arrival time at the emergency department, the patients were categorized into a conventional PPE group (1 August 2019 to 20 January 2020) and an enhanced PPE group (21 January 2020, to 31 August 2020). The primary outcomes of this analysis were the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate. Additionally, subjective perception of the medical staff regarding the effect of wearing enhanced PPE during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was evaluated by conducting a survey. Results: This study included 130 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, with 73 and 57 patients in the conventional and enhanced PPE groups, respectively. The median time intervals to first intubation and to report the first arterial blood gas analysis results were longer in the enhanced PPE group than in the conventional PPE group (3 min vs. 2 min; p = 0.020 and 8 min vs. 3 min; p < 0.001, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in the ROSC rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38–1.67; p = 0.542) and 1 month survival (OR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.07–2.10; p = 0.266) between the two groups. In total, 67 emergent department (ED) professionals responded to the questionnaire. Although a significant number of respondents experienced inconveniences with PAPR use, they agreed that PAPR was necessary during the CPR procedure for protection and reduction of infection transmission. Conclusion: The use of enhanced PPE, including PAPR, affected the performance of CPR to some extent but did not alter patient outcomes. PAPR use during the resuscitation of OHCA patients might positively impact the psychological stability of the medical staff.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: No Survivors

To describe and compare survival among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest as a function of their status for coronavirus disease 2019.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest System-of-Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed healthcare systems and diverted resources allocated for other conditions. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyse how the pandemic impacted the system-of-care of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase up to May 31, 2021, for studies comparing out-of-hospital cardiac arrests that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic versus a non-pandemic period. Survival at hospital discharge or at 30 days was the primary outcome.Results: We included 24 studies for a total of 75,952 patients. Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests during COVID-19 pandemic had lower survival (19 studies; 603/11,666 [5.2%] vs. 1320/17,174 [7.7%]; OR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44-0.65; P = 0.001) and return of spontaneous circulation (4370/24353 [18%] vs. 7401/34510 [21%]; OR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.55-0.75; P < 0.001) compared with non-pandemic periods. Ambulance response times (10.1 vs 9.0 minutes, MD = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.59-1.42; P < 0.001) and non-shockable rhythms (18,242/21,665 [84%] vs. 19,971/24,817 [81%]; OR = 1.27; 95% CI, 1.10-1.46; P < 0.001) increased. Use of supraglottic airways devices increased (2853/7645 [37%] vs. 2043/17521 [12%]; OR = 1.97; 95% CI, 1.42-2.74; P < 0.001).Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic affected the system-of-care of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and patients had worse short-term outcomes compared to pre-pandemic periods. Advanced airway management strategy shifted from endotracheal intubation to supraglottic airway devices.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021250339.

Evaluation of a revised resuscitation protocol for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients due to COVID-19 safety protocols: a single-center retrospective study in Japan

This study aimed to determine the association between cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) under the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) safety protocols in our hospital and the prognosis of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, in an urban area, where the prevalence of COVID-19 infection is relatively low. This was a single-center, retrospective, observational, cohort study conducted at a tertiary critical care center in Kyoto City, Japan. Adult OHCA patients arriving at our hospital under CPR between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020 were included. Our hospital implemented a revised resuscitation protocol for OHCA patients on April 1, 2020 to prevent COVID-19 transmission. This study defined the conventional CPR period as January 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020, and the COVID-19 safety protocol period as April 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020. Throughout the prehospital and in-hospital settings, resuscitation protocols about wearing personal protective equipment and airway management were revised in order to minimize the risk of infection; otherwise, the other resuscitation management had not been changed. The primary outcome was hospitalization survival. The secondary outcomes were return of spontaneous circulation after hospital arrival and 1-month survival after OHCA occurrence. The adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for outcomes to compare the two study periods, and the multivariable logistic model was used to adjust for potential confounders. The study analyzed 443 patients, with a median age of 76 years (65-85), and included 261 men (58.9%). The percentage of hospitalization survivors during the entire research period was 16.9% (75/443 patients), with 18.7% (50/267) during the conventional CPR period and 14.2% (25/176) during the COVID-19 safety protocol period. The adjusted odds ratio for hospitalization survival during the COVID-19 safety protocol period was 0.61 (95% CI 0.32-1.18), as compared with conventional CPR. There were no cases of COVID-19 infection among the staff involved in the resuscitation in our hospital. There was no apparent difference in hospitalization survival between the OHCA patients resuscitated under the conventional CPR protocol compared with the current revised protocol for controlling COVID-19 transmission.

Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survival Rate: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a challenge for medical staff, especially in the COVID-19 period. The COVID-19 disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is highly infectious, thus requiring additional measures during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Since CPR is a highly aerosol-generating procedure, it carries a substantial risk of viral transmission. We hypothesized that patients with diagnosed or suspected COVID-19 might have worse outcomes following OHCA outcomes compared to non-COVID-19 patients. To raise awareness of this potential problem, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that reported OHCA in the pandemic period, comparing COVID-19 suspected or diagnosed patients vs. COVID-19 not suspected or diagnosed group. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge (SHD). Secondary outcomes were the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission or survival with favorable neurological outcomes. Data including 4210 patients included in five studies were analyzed. SHD in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients were 0.5% and 2.6%, respectively (odds ratio, OR = 0.25; 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.12, 0.53; p < 0.001). Bystander CPR rate was comparable in the COVID-19 vs. not COVID-19 group (OR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.22; p = 0.43). Shockable rhythms were observed in 5.7% in COVID-19 patients compared with 37.4% in the non-COVID-19 group (OR = 0.19; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.96; p = 0.04; I2 = 95%). ROSC in the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients were 13.3% vs. 26.5%, respectively (OR = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.55, 0.81; p < 0.001). SHD with favorable neurological outcome was observed in 0% in COVID-19 vs. 3.1% in non-COVID-19 patients (OR = 1.35; 95% CI: 0.07, 26.19; p = 0.84). Our meta-analysis suggests that suspected or diagnosed COVID-19 reduces the SHD rate after OHCA, which seems to be due to the lower rate of shockable rhythms in COVID-19 patients, but not due to reluctance to bystander CPR. Future trials are needed to confirm these preliminary results and determine the optimal procedures to increase survival after OHCA in COVID-19 patients.