Impact of COVID-19-adapted guidelines on resuscitation quality in out-of-hospital-cardiac-arrest: a manikin study

Jansen, Gerrit; Ebeling, Nicole; Latka, Eugen; Krüger, Stefan; Scholz, Sean S.; Trapp, Simon; Granneman, Julia J; Thaemel, Daniel; Chandwani, Suraj; Sauzet, Odile; Rehberg, Sebastian; Borgstedt, Rainer

doi:10.23736/s0375-9393.21.15621-4

Cited by 9 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Airborne transmission through aerosol was suspected early after the COVID-19 pandemic had emerged [ 13 – 17 ]. As potentially infectious aerosols are released during resuscitation, the ERC guidelines were adapted on the basis of an expert consensus with the aim to minimize the liberation and exposure of rescuers and emergency medical service staff to contagious aerosols [ 11 , 12 , 28 ].…”

Section: Personal Protective Equipmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to wearing adequate personal protective equipment, emphasis was also placed on reducing the number of staff present while performing airway management [ 11 , 12 ]. On the one hand, COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality of rescuers should be prevented and on the other hand the functionality of the emergency medical service should be ensured by preventing contact-related infections of staff and quarantines [ 11 , 12 , 17 ]. Whilst protective face masks were widely adopted other recommendations were not well implemented as reduction of staff for instance.…”

Section: Personal Protective Equipmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, several efforts were made to reduce aerosol-liberating procedures to protect prehospital responders. [ 13 – 17 ]. In April 2020 the ERC published adaptations to the basic and advanced cardiac life support algorithms for patients with suspected or proven COVID-19 infection with the primary intention to protect resuscitation providers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 11 , 12 ]. For prehospital staff, additional problems arose due to the lack of personal protective equipment in the early phase of the pandemic and limited training opportunities due to imposed (social) distancing regulations [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

State of implementation of the Corona-Virus-Disease-2019 resuscitation guidelines

Jansen

Kappelhoff²,

Flake³

et al. 2022

Anaesthesiologie

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The present study evaluated the implementation of the European Resuscitation Council Corona-Virus-Disease 2019 (COVID-19) resuscitation guidelines in Germany 1 year after publication. Aim of the work To evaluate the practical implementation of the COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines in Germany one year after their publication. Material and methods In an online survey between April and May 2021 participants were asked about awareness of COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines, corresponding training, the resuscitation algorithm used and COVID-19 infections of emergency medicine personnel associated with COVID-19 resuscitation. Results A total of 961 (8%) of the 11,000 members took part in the survey and 85% (818/961) of questionnaires were fully completed. While 577 (70%) of the respondents were aware of the COVID-19 guidelines, only 103 (13%) had received respective training. A specific COVID-19 resuscitation algorithm was used by 265 respondents (32%). Adaptations included personal protective equipment (99%), reduction of staff caring for the patient, or routine use of video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation (each 37%), securing the airway before rhythm analysis (32%), and pausing chest compressions during endotracheal intubation (30%). Respondents without a specific COVID-19 resuscitation algorithm were more likely to use mouth-nose protection (47% vs. 31%; p < 0.001), extraglottic airway devices (66% vs. 55%; p = 0.004) and have more than 4 team members close to the patient (45% vs. 38%; p = 0.04). Use of an Filtering-Face-Piece(FFP)-2 or FFP3 mask (89% vs. 77%; p < 0.001; 58% vs. 70%; p ≤ 0.001) or performing primary endotracheal intubation (17% vs. 31%; p < 0.001) were found less frequently and 9% reported that a team member was infected with COVID-19 during resuscitation. Conclusion The COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines are still insufficiently implemented 1 year after publication. Future publication strategies must ensure that respective guideline adaptations are implemented in a timely manner. Supplementary Information The online version of this article (10.1007/s00101-022-01237-1) contains underlying questionnaire.

show abstract

Section: Personal Protective Equipmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Personal Protective Equipmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

State of implementation of the Corona-Virus-Disease-2019 resuscitation guidelines

Jansen

Kappelhoff²,

Flake³

et al. 2022

Anaesthesiologie

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This condition requires experienced staff and the prompt treatment of patients. Guidelines for resuscitation in patients with cardiac arrest consist of chest compressions and defibrillation in combination with artificial ventilation which results in an aerosol-generating procedure that could contaminate hospital staff [3], [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Viability of Using Remote Controlled Mechanical Chest Compression Devices to Reduce Contamination in Cardiac Arrest Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Apiratwarakul

Cheung²,

Bhudhisawasdi³

et al. 2022

Open Access Maced J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Mechanical chest compression devices play an important role in assisting patients undergoing cardiac arrest. However, this equipment induces an aerosol-generating procedure that could contaminate hospital staff. The development of a remote control system for mechanical chest compression devices may solve the problem; however, there are currently no studies regarding the efficacy of this system. AIM: This study aims to analyze efficacy of remote control systems for mechanical chest compression devices and compare it with non-remote control systems. METHODS: This was an analytical cross-sectional study at Srinagarind Hospital, Thailand. Data were collected in two periods of the study. The first period was between January and December 2021 using a non-remote control system to operate the mechanical chest compression device. The second period was from January to April 2022 and collected data on the use of a remote control system. RESULTS: Sixty-four participants were examined over the 16-month period of the study. A total of 53.1% (n = 34) of participants were male and the mean age of the patients was 52.4 ± 5.1 years old. The number of emergency medical service members (EMS) needed for resuscitation in the remote control group was less than the non-remote control group (3 vs. 5; p = 0.040). The number of emergency department (ED) members needed for resuscitation in the remote control group was four compared with eight in the non-remote control group. CONCLUSIONS: The remote controlled mechanical chest compression device can effectively reduce the number of staff working both in the EMS and in the ED of the hospital, thus reducing exposure and contamination from aerosol-generating procedure. It was also proven accurate in terms of rate and depth of chest compression according to resuscitation guidelines.

show abstract

In-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic: Where do we go now?

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact of COVID-19-adapted guidelines on resuscitation quality in out-of-hospital-cardiac-arrest: a manikin study

Cited by 9 publications

References 36 publications

State of implementation of the Corona-Virus-Disease-2019 resuscitation guidelines

State of implementation of the Corona-Virus-Disease-2019 resuscitation guidelines

The Viability of Using Remote Controlled Mechanical Chest Compression Devices to Reduce Contamination in Cardiac Arrest Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

In-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic: Where do we go now?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About