Observational studyResuscitation2019
Guideline removal of atropine and survival after adult in-hospital cardiac arrest with a non-shockable rhythm.
Observational study in Resuscitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Compound Tongyang Fumai decoction improves quality of life in sick sinus syndrome: a randomized controlled study.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2024Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo determine whether the removal of atropine from the 2010 ACLS guidelines for non-shockable cardiac arrests was associated with a change in survival.
methodsUsing the Get With The Guidelines
resultsWe included 20,499 non-shockable and 3968 shockable cardiac arrests. Patient characteristics were similar between the pre-guidelines and post-guidelines period. Atropine was used for 8653 (87%) non-shockable and 680 (35%) shockable cardiac arrests in the pre-guidelines period and 3643 (35%) non-shockable and 320 (16%) shockable cardiac arrests in the post-guidelines period. The change over time in survival from the pre-guidelines to the post-guidelines period was not significantly different for the non-shockable compared to the shockable cohort (risk difference: 2.0% [95%CI: -0.8, 4.8] per year, p = 0.17). The immediate change in survival after introducing the guidelines was also not different between the cohorts (risk difference: 3.5% [95%CI: -2.6, 9.7], p = 0.26). Results were similar for the secondary outcomes and in multiple sensitivity analyses.
conclusionsThe removal of atropine from the 2010 guidelines was not associated with a significant change in survival.
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.