ArticleResuscitation plus2021
A qualitative exploratory case series of patient and family experiences with ECPR for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06048068 (Removing Surrogates' Uncertainty to Reduce Fear and Anxiety After Cardiac Events), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Removing Surrogates' Uncertainty to Reduce Fear and Anxiety After Cardiac Events (RESURFACE): A Randomized Pilot Intervention Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcome, compliance with inclusion criteria and cost of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective cohort study.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Clinicians' experience of barriers and facilitators to care delivery of an extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation service for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a qualitative survey.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Associations between Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Domains in Cardiac Arrest Survivors and Their Families One Month Post-Event.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Knowledge gaps in the definition and determination of death.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThere is currently no existing data examining the opinions of patients and families after treatment with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We sought to interview family members and patients to learn from their experiences and satisfaction with treatment.
methodsWe contacted family members and survivors for all cases treated with ECPR for refractory OHCA at St. Paul's Hospital between January 2014 and July 2018. We performed semi-structured interviews with participants, specifically within the topics of: information sharing (including impressions of an ECPR informational pamphlet), prognostication, organ donation, and perceived value of ECPR. Due to low participant enrolment, we described all interviews in a narrative approach.
resultsWithin the study period, there were 23 OHCAs treated with ECPR; two survivors and three family members agreed to participate. Participants were satisfied with the treatment provided, including information sharing and prognostication. There were mixed opinions about the best method of information-sharing (verbal vs written), as well as the timing of organ donation conversations. All participants believed ECPR for OHCA to be of high value.
conclusionPatient's conveyed satisfaction with ECPR treatment, with mixed views on the best information sharing strategy. Further study is needed to define the optimal methods and timing for discussions of organ donation, especially for treatments of with a relatively low likelihood success.
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.