Biomedical subjects

Lois Van Ottingham

Publications and source records attributed to Lois Van Ottingham.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Manual chest compression vs use of an automated chest compression device during resuscitation following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized trial.

CONTEXT: High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may improve both cardiac and brain resuscitation following cardiac arrest. Compared with manual chest compression, an automated load-distributing band (LDB) chest compression device produces greater blood flow to vital organs and may improve resuscitation outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare resuscitation outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest when an automated LDB-CPR device was added to standard emergency medical services (EMS) care with manual CPR. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multicenter, randomized trial of patients experiencing out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the United States and Canada. The a priori primary population was patients with cardiac arrest that was presumed to be of cardiac origin and that had occurred prior to the arrival of EMS personnel. Initial study enrollment varied by site, ranging from late July to mid November 2004; all sites halted study enrollment on March 31, 2005. INTERVENTION: Standard EMS care for cardiac arrest with an LDB-CPR device (n = 554) or manual CPR (n = 517). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was survival to 4 hours after the 911 call. Secondary end points were survival to hospital discharge and neurological status among survivors. RESULTS: Following the first planned interim monitoring conducted by an independent data and safety monitoring board, study enrollment was terminated. No difference existed in the primary end point of survival to 4 hours between the manual CPR group and the LDB-CPR group overall (N = 1071; 29.5% vs 28.5%; P = .74) or among the primary study population (n = 767; 24.7% vs 26.4%, respectively; P = .62). However, among the primary population, survival to hospital discharge was 9.9% in the manual CPR group and 5.8% in the LDB-CPR group (P = .06, adjusted for covariates and clustering). A cerebral performance category of 1 or 2 at hospital discharge was recorded in 7.5% of patients in the manual CPR group and in 3.1% of the LDB-CPR group (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an automated LDB-CPR device as implemented in this study was associated with worse neurological outcomes and a trend toward worse survival than manual CPR. Device design or implementation strategies require further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00120965.

Aged↗

PubMed2006

Adverse events associated with lay emergency response programs: the public access defibrillation trial experience.

UNLABELLED: The adverse event (AE) profile of lay volunteer CPR and public access defibrillation (PAD) programs is unknown. We undertook to investigate the frequency, severity, and type of AE's occurring in widespread PAD implementation. DESIGN: A randomized-controlled clinical trial. SETTING: One thousand two hundred and sixty public and residential facilities in the US and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: On-site, volunteer, lay personnel trained in CPR only compared to CPR plus automated external defibrillators (AEDs). INTERVENTION: Persons experiencing possible cardiac arrest receiving lay volunteer first response with CPR+AED compared with CPR alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: An AE is defined as an event of significance that caused, or had the potential to cause, harm to a patient or volunteer, or a criminal act. AE data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Twenty thousand three hundred and ninety six lay volunteers were trained in either CPR or CPR+AED. One thousand seven hundred and sixteen AEDs were placed in units randomized to the AED arm. There were 26,389 exposure months. Only 36 AE's were reported. There were two patient-related AEs: both patients experienced rib fractures. There were seven volunteer-related AE's: one had a muscle pull, four experienced significant emotional distress and two reported pressure by their employee to participate. There were 27 AED-related AEs: 17 episodes of theft involving 20 devices, three involved AEDs that were placed in locations inaccessible to the volunteer, four AEDs had mechanical problems not affecting patient safety, and three devices were improperly maintained by the facility. There were no inappropriate shocks and no failures to shock when indicated (95% upper bound for probability of inappropriate shock or failure to shock = 0.0012). CONCLUSIONS: AED use following widespread training of lay-persons in CPR and AED is generally safe for the volunteer and the patient. Lay volunteers may report significant, usually transient, emotional stress following response to a potential cardiac arrest. Within the context of this prospective, randomized multi-center study, AEDs have an exceptionally high safety profile when used by trained lay responders.

Canada↗

PubMed2005

Predictors of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator skill retention.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist regarding the retention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) skills over time in relationship to characteristics of lay volunteer responders, training, or risk of exposure to victims. The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics associated with adequate CPR and AED skill retention. METHODS AND RESULTS: Skill retention was tested 3 to 18 months (mean 6.9 +/- 3.5 months) after initial training. Instructors judged adequacy of performance of essential CPR or AED skills and provided an overall assessment (adequate/inadequate), which was used as the outcome. Data on 7261 laypersons trained in CPR (4358 also received AED training) in 24 sites across the United States and Canada were available from the Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Trial. Characteristics of the volunteers, classes, and facilities were evaluated as predictors of performance adequacy. Adjusting for site, intervention assignment (CPR-only or CPR + AED), and time since initial training, volunteer characteristics associated with adequate CPR performance were age (OR 0.78 per 10-year increment), male sex (OR 1.44), minority (OR 0.62), married (OR 1.35), prior emergency experience (OR 1.66), prior CPR class (OR 1.68), prior advanced training (OR 1.59), and extracurricular CPR training (OR 1.91) (all P < .05). Characteristics associated with AED performance included age (OR 0.69), college education (OR 1.34), and native language other than English (OR 0.51) (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Certain subgroups of lay volunteers may need targeted outreach programs in CPR and AED use, classes with longer training time, more practice, or more intense retraining to maintain their CPR and/or AED skills.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Modeling instructor preferences for CPR and AED competence estimation.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) skills competency can be tested using a checklist of component skills, individually graded "pass" or "fail." Scores are typically calculated as the percentage of skills passed, but may differ from an instructor's overall subjective assessment of simulated CPR or AED adequacy. OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate composite measures (methods for scoring checklists) that reflect instructors' subjective assessments of CPR or AED skills performance best. METHODS: Associations between instructor assessment and lay-volunteer skill performance were made using 6380 CPR and 3313 AED skill retention tests collected in the Public Access Defibrillation Trial. Checklists included CPR skills (e.g., calling 911, administering compressions) and AED skills (e.g., positioning electrodes, shocking within 90 s of AED arrival). The instructor's subjective overall assessment (adequate/inadequate) of CPR performance (perfusion) or AED competence (effective shock) was compared to composite measures. We evaluated the traditional composite measure (assigning equal weights to individual skills) and several nontraditional composite measures (assigning variable weights). Skills performed out of sequence were further weighted from 0% (no credit) to 100% (full credit). RESULTS: Composite measures providing full credit for skills performed out of sequence and down-weighting process skills (e.g., calling 911, clearing oneself from the AED) had the strongest association with the instructor's subjective assessment; the traditional CPR composite measure had the weakest association. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that instructors in public CPR and AED classes may tend to down-weight process skills and to excuse step sequencing errors when evaluating CPR and AED skills subjectively for overall proficiency. Testing methods that relate classroom performance to actual performance in the field and to clinical outcomes require further research.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation↗

PubMed2005

Implementation of community-based public access defibrillation in the PAD trial.

BACKGROUND: The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Trial was a randomized, controlled trial designed to measure survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOH-CA) in community facilities trained and equipped to provide PAD, compared with community facilities trained to provide cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) without any capacity for defibrillation. OBJECTIVES: To report the implementation of community-based lay responder emergency response programs in 1,260 participating facilities recruited for the PAD Trial in the United States and Canada. METHODS: This was a descriptive study of the characteristics of participating facilities, volunteers, and automated external defibrillator (AED) placements compiled by the PAD Trial, and a qualitative study of factors that facilitated or impeded implementation of emergency lay responder programs using focus groups of PAD Trial site coordinators. RESULTS: The PAD Trial enrolled 1,260 community facilities (14.8% residential), with 20,400 lay volunteers (mean +/- standard deviation = 13.4 +/- 10.7 per facility) trained to respond to OOH-CA. The 598 locations randomized to receive AEDs required 2.7 +/- 1.8 AEDs per facility. Volunteer attrition was high, 36% after two years. Barriers to recruitment and implementation included identification of appropriate "at-risk" facilities, lack of interest or fear of litigation by a facility key decision maker, lack of motivated potential volunteer responders, training and retraining resource requirements, and lack of an existing communication/response infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that implementation of community-based lay responder programs is feasible in many types of facilities, although these programs require substantial resources and commitment, and many barriers to implementation of effective PAD programs exist.

Age Distribution↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Location of cardiac arrests in the public access defibrillation trial.

BACKGROUND: The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Trial found an overall doubling in the number of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) survivors when a lay responder team was equipped with an automated external defibrillator (AED), compared with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone. OBJECTIVES: To describe the types of facilities that participated in the trial and to report the incidence of CA and survival in these different types of facilities. METHODS: In this post-hoc analysis of PAD Trial data, the physical characteristics of the participating facilities and the numbers of presumed CAs, treatable CAs, and survivors are reported for each category of facilities. RESULTS: There were 625 presumed CAs at 1,260 participating facilities. Just under half (n = 291) of the presumed CAs were classified as treatable CAs. Treatable CAs occurred at a rate of 2.9 per 1,000 person-years of exposure; rates were highest in fitness centers (5.1) and golf courses (4.8) and lowest in office complexes (0.7) and hotels (0.7). Survival from treatable CA was highest in recreational complexes (0.5), public transportation sites (0.4), and fitness centers (0.4) and lowest in office complexes (0.1) and residential facilities (0.0). CONCLUSIONS: During the PAD Trial, the exposure-adjusted rate of treatable CA was highest in fitness centers and golf courses, but the incidence per facility was low to moderate. Survival from treatable cardiac arrest was highest in recreational complexes, public transportation facilities, and fitness centers.

Age Distribution↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Public defibrillation: increased survival from a structured response system.

The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) trial was a prospective, randomized, controlled study designed to compare the number of persons surviving to hospital discharge after experiencing an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOH-CA) among "community units" randomized to receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) only or CPR plus an automated external defibrillator (AED). In 24 centers across the United States and Canada, 993 community units, composed of 1260 individual facilities, trained more than 19,000 layperson responders in CPR-only or CPR+AED. Survival to hospital discharge in the CPR+AED arm was double that of the CPR-only arm (30 vs 15, P = .03; RR = 2.0, 95% CI [1.07-3.77]). Intense focus on facility infrastructure, including responder recruitment and training, communication, evaluation, and oversight, was necessary for implementing the emergency response systems for the trial. Use of an AED within this structured response system can increase the number of survivors to hospital discharge after OOH-CA. Trained nonmedical responders can use AEDs safely and effectively.

Adolescent↗