Post-admission outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC trial: A cluster randomised trial of mechanical or manual chest compressions

C Ji; R Lall; T Quinn; C Kaye; K Haywood; J Horton; V Gordon; C D Deakin; H Pocock; A Carson; M Smyth; N Rees; K Han; S Byers; S Brace-McDonnell; S Gates; G D Perkins; PARAMEDIC trial Collaborators

doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026

Post-admission outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC trial: A cluster randomised trial of mechanical or manual chest compressions

C Ji, R Lall, T Quinn, C Kaye, K Haywood, J Horton, V Gordon, C D Deakin, H Pocock, A Carson, M Smyth, N Rees, K Han, S Byers, S Brace-McDonnell, S Gates, G D Perkins, PARAMEDIC trial Collaborators

Cancer and Genomic Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The PARAMEDIC cluster randomised trial evaluated the LUCAS mechanical chest compression device, and did not find evidence that use of mechanical chest compression led to an improvement in survival at 30 days. This paper reports patient outcomes from admission to hospital to 12 months after randomisation.

METHODS: Information about hospital length of stay and intensive care management was obtained through linkage with Hospital Episode Statistics and the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre. Patients surviving to hospital discharge were approached to complete questionnaires (SF-12v2, EQ-5D, MMSE, HADS and PTSD-CL) at 90days and 12 months. The study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN08233942.

RESULTS: 377 patients in the LUCAS arm and 658 patients in the manual chest compression were admitted to hospital. Hospital and intensive care length of stay were similar. Long term follow-up assessments were limited by poor response rates (53.7% at 3 months and 55.6% at 12 months). Follow-up rates were lower in those with worse neurological function. Among respondents, long term health related quality of life outcomes and emotional well-being was similar between groups. Cognitive function, measured by MMSE, was marginally lower in the LUCAS arm mean 26.9 (SD 3.7) compared to control mean 28.0 (SD 2.3), adjusted mean difference -1.5 (95% CI -2.6 to -0.4).

CONCLUSION: There were no clinically important differences identified in outcomes at long term follow-up between those allocated to the mechanical chest compression compared to those receiving manual chest compression.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	82-88
Number of pages	7
Journal	Resuscitation
Volume	118
Early online date	5 Jul 2017
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026
Publication status	Published - Sept 2017

Keywords

Journal Article

Access to Document

10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026

http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/89624

Cite this

Ji, C., Lall, R., Quinn, T., Kaye, C., Haywood, K., Horton, J., Gordon, V., Deakin, C. D., Pocock, H., Carson, A., Smyth, M., Rees, N., Han, K., Byers, S., Brace-McDonnell, S., Gates, S., Perkins, G. D., & PARAMEDIC trial Collaborators (2017). Post-admission outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC trial: A cluster randomised trial of mechanical or manual chest compressions. Resuscitation, 118, 82-88. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026

@article{413058a92811421f8c3de62ec565db02,

title = "Post-admission outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC trial: A cluster randomised trial of mechanical or manual chest compressions",

abstract = "BACKGROUND: The PARAMEDIC cluster randomised trial evaluated the LUCAS mechanical chest compression device, and did not find evidence that use of mechanical chest compression led to an improvement in survival at 30 days. This paper reports patient outcomes from admission to hospital to 12 months after randomisation.METHODS: Information about hospital length of stay and intensive care management was obtained through linkage with Hospital Episode Statistics and the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre. Patients surviving to hospital discharge were approached to complete questionnaires (SF-12v2, EQ-5D, MMSE, HADS and PTSD-CL) at 90days and 12 months. The study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN08233942.RESULTS: 377 patients in the LUCAS arm and 658 patients in the manual chest compression were admitted to hospital. Hospital and intensive care length of stay were similar. Long term follow-up assessments were limited by poor response rates (53.7% at 3 months and 55.6% at 12 months). Follow-up rates were lower in those with worse neurological function. Among respondents, long term health related quality of life outcomes and emotional well-being was similar between groups. Cognitive function, measured by MMSE, was marginally lower in the LUCAS arm mean 26.9 (SD 3.7) compared to control mean 28.0 (SD 2.3), adjusted mean difference -1.5 (95% CI -2.6 to -0.4).CONCLUSION: There were no clinically important differences identified in outcomes at long term follow-up between those allocated to the mechanical chest compression compared to those receiving manual chest compression.",

keywords = "Journal Article",

author = "C Ji and R Lall and T Quinn and C Kaye and K Haywood and J Horton and V Gordon and Deakin, {C D} and H Pocock and A Carson and M Smyth and N Rees and K Han and S Byers and S Brace-McDonnell and S Gates and Perkins, {G D} and {PARAMEDIC trial Collaborators}",

year = "2017",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026",

language = "English",

volume = "118",

pages = "82--88",

journal = "Resuscitation",

issn = "0300-9572",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Ji, C, Lall, R, Quinn, T, Kaye, C, Haywood, K, Horton, J, Gordon, V, Deakin, CD, Pocock, H, Carson, A, Smyth, M, Rees, N, Han, K, Byers, S, Brace-McDonnell, S, Gates, S, Perkins, GD & PARAMEDIC trial Collaborators 2017, 'Post-admission outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC trial: A cluster randomised trial of mechanical or manual chest compressions', Resuscitation, vol. 118, pp. 82-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026

TY - JOUR

T1 - Post-admission outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC trial

T2 - A cluster randomised trial of mechanical or manual chest compressions

AU - Ji, C

AU - Lall, R

AU - Quinn, T

AU - Kaye, C

AU - Haywood, K

AU - Horton, J

AU - Gordon, V

AU - Deakin, C D

AU - Pocock, H

AU - Carson, A

AU - Smyth, M

AU - Rees, N

AU - Han, K

AU - Byers, S

AU - Brace-McDonnell, S

AU - Gates, S

AU - Perkins, G D

AU - PARAMEDIC trial Collaborators

PY - 2017/9

Y1 - 2017/9

N2 - BACKGROUND: The PARAMEDIC cluster randomised trial evaluated the LUCAS mechanical chest compression device, and did not find evidence that use of mechanical chest compression led to an improvement in survival at 30 days. This paper reports patient outcomes from admission to hospital to 12 months after randomisation.METHODS: Information about hospital length of stay and intensive care management was obtained through linkage with Hospital Episode Statistics and the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre. Patients surviving to hospital discharge were approached to complete questionnaires (SF-12v2, EQ-5D, MMSE, HADS and PTSD-CL) at 90days and 12 months. The study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN08233942.RESULTS: 377 patients in the LUCAS arm and 658 patients in the manual chest compression were admitted to hospital. Hospital and intensive care length of stay were similar. Long term follow-up assessments were limited by poor response rates (53.7% at 3 months and 55.6% at 12 months). Follow-up rates were lower in those with worse neurological function. Among respondents, long term health related quality of life outcomes and emotional well-being was similar between groups. Cognitive function, measured by MMSE, was marginally lower in the LUCAS arm mean 26.9 (SD 3.7) compared to control mean 28.0 (SD 2.3), adjusted mean difference -1.5 (95% CI -2.6 to -0.4).CONCLUSION: There were no clinically important differences identified in outcomes at long term follow-up between those allocated to the mechanical chest compression compared to those receiving manual chest compression.

AB - BACKGROUND: The PARAMEDIC cluster randomised trial evaluated the LUCAS mechanical chest compression device, and did not find evidence that use of mechanical chest compression led to an improvement in survival at 30 days. This paper reports patient outcomes from admission to hospital to 12 months after randomisation.METHODS: Information about hospital length of stay and intensive care management was obtained through linkage with Hospital Episode Statistics and the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre. Patients surviving to hospital discharge were approached to complete questionnaires (SF-12v2, EQ-5D, MMSE, HADS and PTSD-CL) at 90days and 12 months. The study is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN08233942.RESULTS: 377 patients in the LUCAS arm and 658 patients in the manual chest compression were admitted to hospital. Hospital and intensive care length of stay were similar. Long term follow-up assessments were limited by poor response rates (53.7% at 3 months and 55.6% at 12 months). Follow-up rates were lower in those with worse neurological function. Among respondents, long term health related quality of life outcomes and emotional well-being was similar between groups. Cognitive function, measured by MMSE, was marginally lower in the LUCAS arm mean 26.9 (SD 3.7) compared to control mean 28.0 (SD 2.3), adjusted mean difference -1.5 (95% CI -2.6 to -0.4).CONCLUSION: There were no clinically important differences identified in outcomes at long term follow-up between those allocated to the mechanical chest compression compared to those receiving manual chest compression.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026

DO - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.026

M3 - Article

C2 - 28689046

SN - 0300-9572

VL - 118

SP - 82

EP - 88

JO - Resuscitation

JF - Resuscitation

ER -

Post-admission outcomes of participants in the PARAMEDIC trial: A cluster randomised trial of mechanical or manual chest compressions

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this