Association of prehospital advanced life support by physician with survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with blunt trauma following traffic collisions Japanese registry-based study

Tatsuma Fukuda, Naoko Ohashi-Fukuda, Yutaka Kondo, Kei Hayashida, Ichiro Kukita

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Controversy remains as to whether advanced life support (ALS) or basic life support (BLS) is superior for critically ill and injured patients, including out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and major trauma, in the prehospital setting. OBJECTIVE To assess whether prehospital ALS should be provided for traumatic OHCA and who should perform it. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Japanese government-managed nationwide population-based registry data of patients with OHCA transported to an emergency hospital were analyzed. Patients who experienced traumatic OHCA following a traffic collision from 2013 to 2014 were included. Patients provided prehospital ALS by a physician were compared with both patients provided ALS by emergency medical service (EMS) personnel and patients with only BLS. The data were analyzed on May 1, 2017. EXPOSURES Advanced life support by physician, ALS by EMS personnel, or BLS only. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was 1-month survival. The secondary outcomes were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurologic outcomes with the Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category score of 1 or 2. RESULTS A total of 4382 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 57.5 [22.2] years; 67.9% male); 828 (18.9%) received prehospital ALS by physician, 1591 (36.3%) received prehospital ALS by EMS personnel, and 1963 (44.8%) received BLS only. Among these patients, 96 (2.2%) survived 1 month after OHCA, including 26 of 828 (3.1%) for ALS by physician, 25 of 1591 (1.6%) for ALS by EMS personnel, and 45 of 1963 (2.3%) for BLS. After adjusting for potential confounders using multivariable logistic regression, ALS by physician was significantly associated with higher odds for 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.20-3.78; and adjusted OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.14-3.25; respectively), whereas there was no significant difference between ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.54-1.51). A propensity score–matched analysis in the ALS cohort showed that ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with ALS by EMS personnel (risk ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.01-3.97; P = .04). This association was consistent across a variety of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In traumatic OHCA, ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere180674
JournalJAMA Surgery
Volume153
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018 Jun 1

Fingerprint

Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Registries
Physicians
Survival
Wounds and Injuries
Emergency Medical Services

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Association of prehospital advanced life support by physician with survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with blunt trauma following traffic collisions Japanese registry-based study. / Fukuda, Tatsuma; Ohashi-Fukuda, Naoko; Kondo, Yutaka; Hayashida, Kei; Kukita, Ichiro.

In: JAMA Surgery, Vol. 153, No. 6, e180674, 01.06.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c2d9673113054cd6b45a993b18013333,
title = "Association of prehospital advanced life support by physician with survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with blunt trauma following traffic collisions Japanese registry-based study",
abstract = "IMPORTANCE Controversy remains as to whether advanced life support (ALS) or basic life support (BLS) is superior for critically ill and injured patients, including out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and major trauma, in the prehospital setting. OBJECTIVE To assess whether prehospital ALS should be provided for traumatic OHCA and who should perform it. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Japanese government-managed nationwide population-based registry data of patients with OHCA transported to an emergency hospital were analyzed. Patients who experienced traumatic OHCA following a traffic collision from 2013 to 2014 were included. Patients provided prehospital ALS by a physician were compared with both patients provided ALS by emergency medical service (EMS) personnel and patients with only BLS. The data were analyzed on May 1, 2017. EXPOSURES Advanced life support by physician, ALS by EMS personnel, or BLS only. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was 1-month survival. The secondary outcomes were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurologic outcomes with the Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category score of 1 or 2. RESULTS A total of 4382 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 57.5 [22.2] years; 67.9{\%} male); 828 (18.9{\%}) received prehospital ALS by physician, 1591 (36.3{\%}) received prehospital ALS by EMS personnel, and 1963 (44.8{\%}) received BLS only. Among these patients, 96 (2.2{\%}) survived 1 month after OHCA, including 26 of 828 (3.1{\%}) for ALS by physician, 25 of 1591 (1.6{\%}) for ALS by EMS personnel, and 45 of 1963 (2.3{\%}) for BLS. After adjusting for potential confounders using multivariable logistic regression, ALS by physician was significantly associated with higher odds for 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 2.13; 95{\%} CI, 1.20-3.78; and adjusted OR, 1.94; 95{\%} CI, 1.14-3.25; respectively), whereas there was no significant difference between ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 0.91; 95{\%} CI, 0.54-1.51). A propensity score–matched analysis in the ALS cohort showed that ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with ALS by EMS personnel (risk ratio, 2.00; 95{\%} CI, 1.01-3.97; P = .04). This association was consistent across a variety of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In traumatic OHCA, ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS.",
author = "Tatsuma Fukuda and Naoko Ohashi-Fukuda and Yutaka Kondo and Kei Hayashida and Ichiro Kukita",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/jamasurg.2018.0674",
language = "English",
volume = "153",
journal = "JAMA Surgery",
issn = "2168-6254",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Association of prehospital advanced life support by physician with survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with blunt trauma following traffic collisions Japanese registry-based study

AU - Fukuda, Tatsuma

AU - Ohashi-Fukuda, Naoko

AU - Kondo, Yutaka

AU - Hayashida, Kei

AU - Kukita, Ichiro

PY - 2018/6/1

Y1 - 2018/6/1

N2 - IMPORTANCE Controversy remains as to whether advanced life support (ALS) or basic life support (BLS) is superior for critically ill and injured patients, including out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and major trauma, in the prehospital setting. OBJECTIVE To assess whether prehospital ALS should be provided for traumatic OHCA and who should perform it. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Japanese government-managed nationwide population-based registry data of patients with OHCA transported to an emergency hospital were analyzed. Patients who experienced traumatic OHCA following a traffic collision from 2013 to 2014 were included. Patients provided prehospital ALS by a physician were compared with both patients provided ALS by emergency medical service (EMS) personnel and patients with only BLS. The data were analyzed on May 1, 2017. EXPOSURES Advanced life support by physician, ALS by EMS personnel, or BLS only. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was 1-month survival. The secondary outcomes were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurologic outcomes with the Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category score of 1 or 2. RESULTS A total of 4382 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 57.5 [22.2] years; 67.9% male); 828 (18.9%) received prehospital ALS by physician, 1591 (36.3%) received prehospital ALS by EMS personnel, and 1963 (44.8%) received BLS only. Among these patients, 96 (2.2%) survived 1 month after OHCA, including 26 of 828 (3.1%) for ALS by physician, 25 of 1591 (1.6%) for ALS by EMS personnel, and 45 of 1963 (2.3%) for BLS. After adjusting for potential confounders using multivariable logistic regression, ALS by physician was significantly associated with higher odds for 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.20-3.78; and adjusted OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.14-3.25; respectively), whereas there was no significant difference between ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.54-1.51). A propensity score–matched analysis in the ALS cohort showed that ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with ALS by EMS personnel (risk ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.01-3.97; P = .04). This association was consistent across a variety of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In traumatic OHCA, ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS.

AB - IMPORTANCE Controversy remains as to whether advanced life support (ALS) or basic life support (BLS) is superior for critically ill and injured patients, including out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and major trauma, in the prehospital setting. OBJECTIVE To assess whether prehospital ALS should be provided for traumatic OHCA and who should perform it. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Japanese government-managed nationwide population-based registry data of patients with OHCA transported to an emergency hospital were analyzed. Patients who experienced traumatic OHCA following a traffic collision from 2013 to 2014 were included. Patients provided prehospital ALS by a physician were compared with both patients provided ALS by emergency medical service (EMS) personnel and patients with only BLS. The data were analyzed on May 1, 2017. EXPOSURES Advanced life support by physician, ALS by EMS personnel, or BLS only. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was 1-month survival. The secondary outcomes were prehospital return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurologic outcomes with the Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category score of 1 or 2. RESULTS A total of 4382 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 57.5 [22.2] years; 67.9% male); 828 (18.9%) received prehospital ALS by physician, 1591 (36.3%) received prehospital ALS by EMS personnel, and 1963 (44.8%) received BLS only. Among these patients, 96 (2.2%) survived 1 month after OHCA, including 26 of 828 (3.1%) for ALS by physician, 25 of 1591 (1.6%) for ALS by EMS personnel, and 45 of 1963 (2.3%) for BLS. After adjusting for potential confounders using multivariable logistic regression, ALS by physician was significantly associated with higher odds for 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.20-3.78; and adjusted OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.14-3.25; respectively), whereas there was no significant difference between ALS by EMS personnel and BLS (adjusted OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.54-1.51). A propensity score–matched analysis in the ALS cohort showed that ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with ALS by EMS personnel (risk ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.01-3.97; P = .04). This association was consistent across a variety of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In traumatic OHCA, ALS by physician was associated with increased chance of 1-month survival compared with both ALS by EMS personnel and BLS.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049201115&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85049201115&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.0674

DO - 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.0674

M3 - Article

C2 - 29710068

AN - SCOPUS:85049201115

VL - 153

JO - JAMA Surgery

JF - JAMA Surgery

SN - 2168-6254

IS - 6

M1 - e180674

ER -