ArticleResuscitation2019
Preliminary experience with point-of-care EEG in post-cardiac arrest patients.
Article in Resuscitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Point-of-Care EEG for Non-Convulsive Seizure and Status Epilepticus: Advances, Limitations, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Point-of-Care Electroencephalography in Acute Neurological Care: A Narrative Review.Neurology international · 2025Review
- Electrophysiological Signatures in Global Cerebral Ischemia: Neuroprotection Via Chemogenetic Inhibition of CA1 Pyramidal Neurons in Rats.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Automated Seizure Detection in Patients with Cardiac Arrest: A Retrospective Review of Ceribell™ Rapid-EEG Recordings.Neurocritical care · 2023Article
- Implementation and impact of a point of care electroencephalography platform in a community hospital: a cohort study.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Rapid Response EEG: Current State and Future Directions.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2022Review
- Occipital Lobe Status Epilepticus, A Stroke Mimic with Novel Imaging Findings: A Case Report.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2022Article
- Accurate classification of pain experiences using wearable electroencephalography in adolescents with and without chronic musculoskeletal pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Background frequency can enhance the prognostication power of EEG patterns categories in comatose cardiac arrest survivors: a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Observational
- Background Frequency Patterns in Standard Electroencephalography as an Early Prognostic Tool in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survivors Treated with Targeted Temperature Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAbnormal electroencephalography (EEG) patterns are common after resuscitation from cardiac arrest and have clinical and prognostic importance. Bedside continuous EEGs are not available in many institutions. We tested the feasibility of using a point-of-care system for EEG acquisition.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled a convenience sample of post-cardiac arrest patients between 9/2015-1/2017. Upon hospital arrival, a limited EEG montage was applied. We tested both continuous EEG (cEEG) and this point-of-care EEG (eEEG). A board-certified epileptologist and a board-certified neurointensivist jointly reviewed all EEGs. Cohen's kappa coefficient evaluated agreement between eEEG and cEEG and Fisher's exact test evaluated their associations with survival to hospital discharge and proximate cause of death.
resultsWe studied 95 comatose post-cardiac arrest patients. Mean age was 59 (SD17) years. Most (61%) were male, few (N = 22; 23%) demonstrated shockable rhythms, and PCAC IV illness severity was present in 58 (61%). eEEG was interpretable in 57 (60%) subjects. The most common eEEG interpretations were: continuous (21%), generalized suppression (14%), burst-suppression (12%) and burst-suppression with identical bursts (10%). Seizures were detected in 2 eEEG subjects (2%). No patient with seizure or burst-suppression with identical bursts survived. cEEG demonstrated generalized suppression (31%), burst-suppression with identical bursts (27%), continuous (18%) and seizure (4%). The eEEG and cEEG demonstrated fair agreement (kappa = 0.27). Neither eEEG nor cEEG was associated with survival (p = 0.19; p = 0.11) or proximate cause of death (p = 0.14; p = 0.8)
conclusionseEEG is feasible, although artifact often precludes interpretation. eEEG is fairly associated with cEEG and may facilitate post-cardiac arrest care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.