Coppler Patrick J, Sawyer Kelly N, Youn Chun Song, Choi Seung Pill, Park Kyu Nam, Kim Young-Min, Reynolds Joshua C, Gaieski David F, Lee Byung Kook, Oh Joo Suk, Kim Won Young, Moon Hyung Jun, Abella Benjamin S, Elmer Jonathan, Callaway Clifton W, Rittenberger Jon C
1 Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine , Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
2 Department of Physician Assistant Studies, University of the Sciences , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Ther Hypothermia Temp Manag. 2017 Mar;7(1):30-35. doi: 10.1089/ther.2016.0017. Epub 2016 Jul 15.
There is little consensus regarding many post-cardiac arrest care parameters. Variability in such practices could confound the results and generalizability of post-arrest care research. We sought to characterize the variability in post-cardiac arrest care practice in Korea and the United States. A 54-question survey was sent to investigators participating in one of two research groups in South Korea (Korean Hypothermia Network [KORHN]) and the United States (National Post-Arrest Research Consortium [NPARC]). Single investigators from each site were surveyed (N = 40). Participants answered questions based on local institutional protocols and practice. We calculated descriptive statistics for all variables. Forty surveys were completed during the study period with 30 having greater than 50% of questions completed (75% response rate; 24 KORHN and 6 NPARC). Most centers target either 33°C (N = 16) or vary the target based on patient characteristics (N = 13). Both bolus and continuous infusion dosing of sedation are employed. No single indication was unanimous for cardiac catheterization. Only six investigators reported having an institutional protocol for withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST). US patients with poor neurological prognosis tended to have WLST with subsequent expiration (N = 5), whereas Korean patients are transferred to a secondary care facility (N = 19). Both electroencephalography modality and duration vary between institutions. Serum biomarkers are commonly employed by Korean, but not US centers. We found significant variability in post-cardiac arrest care practices among US and Korean medical centers. These practice variations must be taken into account in future studies of post-arrest care.
关于许多心脏骤停后护理参数,目前几乎没有共识。此类实践中的差异可能会混淆心脏骤停后护理研究的结果及普遍性。我们试图描述韩国和美国心脏骤停后护理实践的差异。向参与韩国(韩国低温治疗网络 [KORHN])和美国(国家心脏骤停后研究联盟 [NPARC])两个研究组之一的研究人员发送了一份包含54个问题的调查问卷。对每个研究点的单个研究人员进行了调查(N = 40)。参与者根据当地机构的方案和实践回答问题。我们计算了所有变量的描述性统计数据。在研究期间共完成了40份调查问卷,其中30份完成了超过50%的问题(回复率为75%;24份来自KORHN,6份来自NPARC)。大多数中心的目标体温要么是33°C(N = 16),要么根据患者特征改变目标体温(N = 13)。镇静剂的推注和持续输注给药方式均有采用。对于心脏导管插入术,没有单一的指征是一致的。只有6名研究人员报告有关于撤除维持生命治疗(WLST)的机构方案。美国神经预后不良的患者倾向于接受WLST并随后死亡(N = 5),而韩国患者则被转至二级护理机构(N = 19)。各机构之间脑电图的方式和持续时间各不相同。韩国的医疗中心普遍使用血清生物标志物,而美国的医疗中心则不然。我们发现美国和韩国医疗中心在心脏骤停后护理实践方面存在显著差异。在未来的心脏骤停后护理研究中必须考虑到这些实践差异。