Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-lvtdw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-18T03:30:07.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

P043: Outcomes associated with prehospital refractory ventricular fibrillation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2017

M. Davis*
Affiliation:
London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON
A. Schappert
Affiliation:
London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON
B. Chau
Affiliation:
London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON
A. Leung
Affiliation:
London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON
K. Van Aarsen
Affiliation:
London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON
*
*Corresponding authors

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Introduction: When ventricular fibrillation (VF) cannot be terminated with conventional external defibrillation, it is classified as refractory VF (RVF). There is a paucity of information regarding prehospital or patient factors that may be associated with RVF. The objectives of this study were to determine factors that may be associated with RVF, the initial ED rhythm for patients with prehospital RVF, and the incidence of survival in patients who had RVF and were transported to hospital. Methods: Ambulance Call Records (ACRs) of patients with out of hospital cardiac arrest between Mar. 1 2012 and Apr. 1 2016 were reviewed. Cases of RVF (≥5 consecutive shocks delivered) were determined by manual review of the ACR. ED and hospital records were analyzed to determine outcomes of patients who were in RVF and transported to hospital. Descriptive statistics were calculated and all variables were tested for an association with initial ED rhythm, survival to admission, and survival to discharge. Results: Eighty-five cases of RVF were identified. A history of coronary artery disease (47.10%) and hypertension (50.60%) were the most common comorbidities in patients transported to the ED with RVF. Upon arrival to the ED, 24 (28.2%) remained in RVF, 38 (44.7%) had a non-shockable rhythm, and 23 (27.1%) had return of spontaneous circulation. Thirty-four (40%) survived to admission, while only 18 (21.2%) survived to discharge. Pre-existing comorbidities, time to first shock, time on scene, and transport time were not statistically associated with initial ED rhythm, survival to admission or discharge. Patient age was statistically associated with improved rhythm on ED arrival (p=0.013) and survival to discharge (58.24 yrs vs 67.40 yrs, Δ9.17, 95% CI 1.82 to 16.52, p=0.015). Conclusion: The majority of patients with prehospital RVF have a rhythm deterioration by the time care is transferred to the ED. Of these patients with a rhythm deterioration, few survive to hospital discharge. Younger patients are more likely to remain in RVF and survive to discharge. Further research is required to determine prehospital treatment strategies for RVF, as well as patient populations that may benefit from those treatments.

Type
Poster Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2017