| 1. |
- Skrifvars, M. B., et al.
(författare)
-
Do patient characteristics or factors at resuscitation influence long-term outcome in patients surviving to be discharged following in-hospital cardiac arrest?
- 2007
-
Ingår i: J Intern Med. - : Wiley. - 0954-6820 .- 1365-2796. ; 262:4, s. 488-95
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction. Few studies have focused on factors influencing long-term outcome following in-hospital cardiac arrest. The present study assesses whether long-term outcome is influenced by difference in patient factors or factors at resuscitation. Methods. An analysis of cardiac arrest data collected from one Swedish tertiary hospital and from five Finnish secondary hospitals supplemented with data on 1 year survival. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with survival at 12 months. Results. A total of 441 patients survived to hospital discharge following in-hospital cardiac arrest and 359 (80%) were alive at 12 months. Factors independently associated with survival [odds ratio (OR) >1 indicates increased survival and <1 decreased survival] at 12 months were; age [OR 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93-0.98], renal disease (OR 0.3, CI 0.1-0.9), good functional status at discharge (OR 4.9, CI 1.3-18.9), arrest occurring at (compared with arrests on general wards) emergency wards (OR 4.7, CI 1.4-15.3), cardiac care unit (OR 2.8, CI 1.2-6.4), intensive care unit (OR 2.4, CI 1.1-5.7), ward for thoracic surgery (OR 10.2, CI 2.6-40.1) and unit for interventional radiology (OR 13.3, CI 3.4-52.0). There was no difference in initial rhythm, delay to defibrillation or delay to return of spontaneous circulation between survivors and nonsurvivors. Conclusion. Several patient factors, mainly age, functional status and co-morbid disease, influence long-term survival following cardiac arrest in hospital. The location where the arrest occurred also influences survival, but initial rhythm, delay to defibrillation and to return of spontaneous circulation do not.
|
|
| 2. |
- Skrifvars, M. B., et al.
(författare)
-
Variability in survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest depending on the hospital level of care
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Resuscitation. - : Elsevier BV. - 0300-9572 .- 1873-1570. ; 73:1, s. 73-81
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) differs considerably between hospitals. This study tries to determine whether this difference is due to patient selection because of the hospital level of care or to effective resuscitation management. METHODS: Prospectively collected data on management of in-hospital cardiac arrests from Sahlgrenska Hospital, a tertiary hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden (cohort one) and from five Finnish secondary hospitals (cohort two). A multiple logistic regression model was created for predicting survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 954 cases from Sahlgrenska Hospital and 624 patients from the hospitals in Finland were included. The delay to defibrillation was longer at Sahlgrenska than at the five Finnish secondary hospitals (p=0.045). Significant predictors of survival were: (1) age below median (odds ratio [OR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-2.8); (2) no diabetes (OR 1.9, CI 1.2-2.9); (3) arrests occurring during office hours (OR 1.5, CI 1.1-2.2); (4) witnessed cardiac arrest (OR 6.3, CI 2.6-15.3); (5) ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia as the initial rhythm (OR 4.9, CI 3.5-6.7); (6) location of the arrest (compared to arrests in general wards, GW): thoracic surgery and heart transplantation ward (OR 2.9, CI 1.5-5.9), interventional radiology (OR 4.8, CI 1.9-12.0) and other in-hospital locations (3.0, CI 1.6-5.7) and (7) hospital (compared to arrests at Sahlgrenska Hospital); arrests at Etela-Karjala Central Hospital [CH] (OR 0.3, CI 0.1-0.7), Paijat-Hame CH (OR 0.3, CI 0.1-0.8) and Seinajoki CH (OR 0.4, CI 0.3-0.7). CONCLUSION: The comparison of survival following IHCA between different hospitals is difficult, there seems to be undefined factors greatly associated with outcome. A great variability in survival within different hospital areas probably because of differences in patient selection, patient surveillance and resuscitation management was also noted. A locally implemented strong in-hospital chain of survival is probably the only way to improve outcome following IHCA.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
