English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The use of cardiac point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) to assess cardiac arrest patients is widespread, although not mandated by advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) guidelines. This study aims to examine if the use of ultrasound, along with the findings on ultrasound are associated with a difference in outcomes of cardiac arrest patients in the emergency department (ED).  Methods:  A retrospective database and chart analysis was completed for patients arriving to a tertiary ED in asystole or PEA cardiac arrest, between 2010 and 2014. Patients were excluded if aged under 19, or with a previous DNR order. Patients were grouped based on whether PoCUS was used during ACLS (PoCUS group) and those without PoCUS (control group). Multiple data were abstracted from charts using a standardized form. Data was analyzed for the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission (SHA), and survival to hospital discharge (SHD), as well as initial cardiac activity findings on PoCUS.  Results:  230 patients met the study inclusion criteria, with 44 (19%) in the control group, and 186 (81%) in the PoCUS group. In the PoCUS group 20 (11%) had cardiac activity (Positive PoCUS) and 166 (89%) had no cardiac activity recorded. The control group had a higher rate of SHA than the PoCUS group (27%; 95% CI 15-43% vs. 10%: 6-15%, p = 0.0046), however there was no difference in frequency of ROSC (control: 37%; 24-55% vs. PoCUS 26%; 20-33%, p = 0.1373) or SHD (control: 7%, 95% CI 1-19%; PoCUS: 2%, 95% CI 0-5%, p = 0.0858). Positive PoCUS patients had a higher frequency of ROSC (75%; 50-91% vs. 20%; 15-27%, p &lt; 0.001) and SHA (25%; 9-49% vs. 8%; 4-13%, p = 0.0294) than patients with no PoCUS cardiac activity, however there was no difference in the rate of SHD between the positive PoCUS patients (0%; 0-17%) and patients with no PoCUS cardiac activity (2%; 0-5%, p = 1.0000).  Conclusion:  Our results suggest that there is no difference in survival between cardiac arrest patients receiving PoCUS and those who do not. Although finding positive cardiac activity on PoCUS is associated with greater ROSC and survival to hospital admission, it does not identify patients with a final outcome of survival to hospital discharge.

cjem. canadian journal of emergency medical care/cjem

MP012: Is there an association between the use of cardiac ultrasound and survival outcomes in patients arriving to the emergency department in cardiac arrest? The second Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHOC-ED 2) Study