Show simple item record

Retrospective cohort study of hospital variation in airway management during in-hospital cardiac arrest and the association with patient survival: insights from Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation

dc.contributor.authorBradley, Steven M
dc.contributor.authorZhou, Yunshu
dc.contributor.authorRamachandran, Satya K
dc.contributor.authorEngoren, Milo
dc.contributor.authorDonnino, Michael
dc.contributor.authorGirotra, Saket
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-12T20:01:52Z
dc.date.available2019-05-12T20:01:52Z
dc.date.issued2019-05-06
dc.identifier.citationCritical Care. 2019 May 06;23(1):158
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-019-2426-5
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/149130
dc.description.abstractAbstract Importance The optimal approach to airway management during in-hospital cardiac arrest is unknown. Objective To describe hospital-level variation in endotracheal intubation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest and the association between hospital use of endotracheal intubation and arrest survival. Design, setting, participants Retrospective cohort study of adult patients suffering in-hospital cardiac arrest at Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation participating hospitals between January, 2000, and December, 2016. Hospitals were categorized into quartiles based on the proportion of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients managed with endotracheal intubation during CPR. Risk-adjusted mixed models with random intercepts were created to assess the association between hospital quartile of in-hospital arrests managed with endotracheal intubation during CPR and survival to hospital discharge. Exposure Hospital rate of endotracheal intubation during CPR for in-hospital arrest Main outcomes and measures Survival to hospital discharge Results Among 155,252 patients suffering in-hospital cardiac arrest at 656 hospitals, 69.7% of patients received endotracheal intubation during CPR and overall survival to discharge was 24.8%. At the hospital level, the median rate of endotracheal intubation use was 71.2% (interquartile range, 63.6 to 78.1%; range, 26.6 to 100%). We found a strong inverse association between hospital rate of endotracheal intubation and survival to discharge (risk-adjusted odds ratio comparing highest intubation quartile vs. lowest intubation quartile, 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74 to 0.90; p value < .001). This association was modified by the presence of respiratory failure prior to arrest (p for interaction < .001), and stratified analyses demonstrated lower patient survival at hospitals with higher rates of endotracheal intubation was limited to patients without respiratory failure prior to cardiac arrest. Conclusion In a national sample of patients suffering IHCA, the use of endotracheal intubation during CPR varied across hospitals. We found a strong inverse association between hospital use of endotracheal intubation during CPR and survival to discharge, but this association was confined to patients without respiratory failure prior to arrest. Identifying the optimal approach to airway management for in-hospital cardiac arrest may have a significant impact on patient survival.
dc.titleRetrospective cohort study of hospital variation in airway management during in-hospital cardiac arrest and the association with patient survival: insights from Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149130/1/13054_2019_Article_2426.pdf
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).
dc.date.updated2019-05-12T20:02:00Z
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.