Direkt zum Inhalt
  1. Publizieren |
  2. Suche |
  3. Browsen |
  4. Neuzugänge rss |
  5. Open Access |
  6. Rechtsfragen |
  7. EnglishCookie löschen - von nun an wird die Spracheinstellung Ihres Browsers verwendet.

Influence of EMS-physician presence on survival after out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation: systematic review and meta-analysis

Böttiger, Bernd W. ; Bernhard, Michael ; Knapp, Jürgen ; Nagele, Peter

In: Critical care, 20 (2016), Nr. 4. S. 1-8. ISSN 1466-609X

[thumbnail of 13054_2015_Article_1156.pdf]
Vorschau
PDF, Englisch
Download (925kB) | Lizenz: Creative Commons LizenzvertragInfluence of EMS-physician presence on survival after out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation: systematic review and meta-analysis von Böttiger, Bernd W. ; Bernhard, Michael ; Knapp, Jürgen ; Nagele, Peter steht unter einer Creative Commons Namensnennung 3.0 Deutschland

Zitieren von Dokumenten: Bitte verwenden Sie für Zitate nicht die URL in der Adresszeile Ihres Webbrowsers, sondern entweder die angegebene DOI, URN oder die persistente URL, deren langfristige Verfügbarkeit wir garantieren. [mehr ...]

Abstract

Background: Evidence suggests that EMS-physician-guided cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOHCA) may be associated with improved outcomes, yet randomized controlled trials are not available. The goal of this meta-analysis was to determine the association between EMS-physician- versus paramedic-guided CPR and survival after OOHCA. Methods and Results: Studies that compared EMS-physician- versus paramedic-guided CPR in OOHCA published until June 2014 were systematically searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. All studies were required to contain survival data. Data on study characteristics, methods, and as well as survival outcomes were extracted. A random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis due to a high degree of heterogeneity among the studies (I 2 = 44 %). Return of spontaneous circulation [ROSC], survival to hospital admission, and survival to hospital discharge were the outcome measures. Out of 3,385 potentially eligible studies, 14 met the inclusion criteria. In the pooled analysis (n = 126,829), EMS-physician-guided CPR was associated with significantly improved outcomes compared to paramedic-guided CPR: ROSC 36.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31.0 – 41.7%) vs. 23.4% (95% CI 18.5 – 29.2%) (pooled odds ratio [OR] 1.89, 95% CI 1.36 – 2.63, p < 0.001); survival to hospital admission 30.1% (95% CI 24.2 – 36.7%) vs. 19.2% (95% CI 12.7 – 28.1%) (pooled OR 1.78, 95% CI 0.97 – 3.28, p = 0.06); and survival to discharge 15.1% (95% CI 14.6 – 15.7%) vs. 8.4% (95% CI 8.2 – 8.5%) (pooled OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 – 2.79, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This systematic review suggests that EMS-physician-guided CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is associated with improved survival outcomes.

Dokumententyp: Artikel
Titel der Zeitschrift: Critical care
Band: 20
Nummer: 4
Verlag: BioMed Central
Ort der Veröffentlichung: London
Erstellungsdatum: 17 Feb. 2016 10:17
Erscheinungsjahr: 2016
ISSN: 1466-609X
Seitenbereich: S. 1-8
Institute/Einrichtungen: Medizinische Fakultät Heidelberg und Uniklinikum > Universitätsklinik für Anaesthesiologie
DDC-Sachgruppe: 610 Medizin
Leitlinien | Häufige Fragen | Kontakt | Impressum |
OA-LogoDINI-Zertifikat 2013Logo der Open-Archives-Initiative