Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26457627›Full record

Observational studyAnnals of internal medicine2015

Outcomes of Basic Versus Advanced Life Support for Out-of-Hospital Medical Emergencies.

Prachi Sanghavi, Anupam B Jena, Joseph P Newhouse, Alan M Zaslavsky

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Annals of internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Stone Throwing in the Glass House.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2016
    Review
  20. Is Prehospital Advanced Life Support Harmful?Annals of internal medicine · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Prachi Sanghavi
Anupam B Jena
Joseph P Newhouse
Alan M Zaslavsky
University of Chicago Medical Center · US

Funding

Physician Determinants of Health Care Spending, Quality, and Patient OutcomesDP5OD017897 · OD · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI JENA, ANUPAM BAPU · 2013 to 2017
$2.1M
Comparative Effectiveness of Basic and Advanced Life Support in AmbulancesR36HS022798 · AHRQ · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI SANGHAVI, PRACHI · 2013 to 2013
$42k
AHRQ HHS 1R36HS022798-01AHRQ HHS R36 HS022798NIH HHS 1DP5OD017897-01NIH HHS DP5 OD017897
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost Medicare patients seeking emergency medical transport are treated by ambulance providers trained in advanced life support (ALS). Evidence supporting the superiority of ALS over basic life support (BLS) is limited, but some studies suggest ALS may harm patients.

objectiveTo compare outcomes after ALS and BLS in out-of-hospital medical emergencies.

designObservational study with adjustment for propensity score weights and instrumental variable analyses based on county-level variations in ALS use.

settingTraditional Medicare. PATIENTS: 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries from nonrural counties between 2006 and 2011 with major trauma, stroke, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), or respiratory failure. MEASUREMENTS: Neurologic functioning and survival to 30 days, 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years.

resultsExcept in cases of AMI, patients showed superior unadjusted outcomes with BLS despite being older and having more comorbidities. In propensity score analyses, survival to 90 days among patients with trauma, stroke, and respiratory failure was higher with BLS than ALS (6.1 percentage points [95% CI, 5.4 to 6.8 percentage points] for trauma; 7.0 percentage points [CI, 6.2 to 7.7 percentage points] for stroke; and 3.7 percentage points [CI, 2.5 to 4.8 percentage points] for respiratory failure). Patients with AMI did not exhibit differences in survival at 30 days but had better survival at 90 days with ALS (1.0 percentage point [CI, 0.1 to 1.9 percentage points]). Neurologic functioning favored BLS for all diagnoses. Results from instrumental variable analyses were broadly consistent with propensity score analyses for trauma and stroke, showed no survival differences between BLS and ALS for respiratory failure, and showed better survival at all time points with BLS than ALS for patients with AMI. LIMITATION: Only Medicare beneficiaries from nonrural counties were studied.

conclusionAdvanced life support is associated with substantially higher mortality for several acute medical emergencies than BLS. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Science Foundation, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and National Institutes of Health.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overEmergency Medical ServicesFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLife Support CareMaleMedicareMyocardial InfarctionPropensity ScoreRespiratory InsufficiencyStrokeTreatment OutcomeUnited States

Identifiers

PMID26457627
PMCPMC4945100
OpenAlexW1903153633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.