A cumulative meta-analysis of the effectiveness of defibrillator-capable emergency medical services for victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

被引:234
作者
Nichol, G [1 ]
Stiell, IG [1 ]
Laupacis, A [1 ]
Pham, B [1 ]
De Maio, VJ [1 ]
Wells, GA [1 ]
机构
[1] Loeb Hlth Res Inst, Clin Epidemiol Unit, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4E9, Canada
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0196-0644(99)80054-7
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Study objective: More than 1,000 patients experience sudden cardiac arrest each day. Treatment for this includes cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and emergency medical services (EMS) that provide CPR-basic life support (BLS), BLS with defibrillation (BLS-D), or advanced life support (ALS). Our previous systematic review of treatments for sudden cardiac arrest was limited by suboptimal data. Since then, debate has increased about whether bystander CPR is effective or whether attention should focus instead on rapid defibrillation. Therefore a cumulative meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative effectiveness of differences in the defibrillation response time interval, proportion of bystander CPR, and type of EMS system on survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed by using a priori exclusion criteria. We considered EMS systems that provided BLS-D, ALS, BLS plus ALS, or BLS-D plus ALS care. A generalized linear model was used with dispersion estimation for random effects. Results: Thirty-seven eligible articles described 39 EMS systems and included 33,124 patients. Median survival for all rhythm groups to hospital discharge was 6.4% (interquartile; range, 3.7 to 10.3). Odds of survival were 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.09; P < .01) per 5% increase in bystander CPR. Survival was constant if the defibrillation response time interval was less than 6 minutes, decreased as the interval increased from 6 to 11 minutes, and leveled off after 11 minutes (P < .01). Compared with BLS-D, odds of survival were as follows: ALS, 1.71 (95% CI, 1.09 to 2.70; P = .01); BLS plus ALS, 1.47 (95% CI, 0.89 to 2.42; P = .07); and BLS with defibrillation plus ALS, 2.31 (95% CI, 1.47 to 3.62; P < .01.) Conclusion: We confirm that greater survival after sudden cardiac arrest is associated with provision of bystander CPR, early defibrillation, or ALS. More research is required to evaluate the relative benefit of early defibrillation versus early ALS.
引用
收藏
页码:517 / 525
页数:9
相关论文
共 66 条
[1]   EFFECT OF OUT-OF-HOSPITAL DEFIBRILLATION BY BASIC LIFE-SUPPORT PROVIDERS ON CARDIAC-ARREST MORTALITY - A METAANALYSIS [J].
AUBLE, TE ;
MENEGAZZI, JJ ;
PARIS, PM .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1995, 25 (05) :642-648
[2]  
AUSTAD CS, 1992, PSYCHOTHERAPY PRIVAT, V10, P1
[3]   A STUDY OF OUT-OF-HOSPITAL CARDIAC ARRESTS IN NORTHEASTERN MINNESOTA [J].
BACHMAN, JW ;
MCDONALD, GS ;
OBRIEN, PC .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1986, 256 (04) :477-483
[4]   A reappraisal of mouth-to-mouth ventilation during bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation - A statement for healthcare professionals from the ventilation working group of the basic life support and pediatric life support subcommittees, American Heart Association [J].
Becker, LB ;
Berg, RA ;
Pepe, PE ;
Idris, AH ;
Aufderheide, TP ;
Barnes, TA ;
Stratton, SJ ;
Chandra, NC .
CIRCULATION, 1997, 96 (06) :2102-2112
[5]   OUTCOME OF CPR IN A LARGE METROPOLITAN-AREA - WHERE ARE THE SURVIVORS [J].
BECKER, LB ;
OSTRANDER, MP ;
BARRETT, J ;
KONDOS, GT .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1991, 20 (04) :355-361
[6]   OUTCOMES IN UNSUCCESSFUL FIELD RESUSCITATION ATTEMPTS [J].
BONNIN, MJ ;
SWOR, RA .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1989, 18 (05) :507-512
[7]   A COMPARISON OF AN INNOVATIVE 4-HOUR EMT-D COURSE WITH A STANDARD 10-HOUR COURSE [J].
BRADLEY, K ;
SOKOLOW, AE ;
WRIGHT, KJ ;
MCCULLOUGH, WJ .
ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 1988, 17 (06) :613-619
[8]  
BRISON RJ, 1992, CAN MED ASSOC J, V147, P191
[9]  
CARVETH SW, 1974, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V108, P528
[10]  
Chambers J.M., 1991, Statistical Models in S