ArticleCureus2024
Association of Advanced Airway Management in Preference to Intravenous Adrenaline on Neurological Outcomes Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo examine the preference for advanced airway management (AAM) or intravenous adrenaline administration (IVAd) provided by emergency medical services (EMS) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with shockable or nonshockable rhythms.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of a nationwide cohort of OHCA patients in Japan. Adult patients with witnessed collapse who were provided AAM and/or IVAd by EMS between June 2014 and December 2019 were divided into the AAM preferred group and IVAd preferred group, according to the initial advanced EMS intervention. The rates of favorable neurological outcomes (cerebral performance category 1 or 2 after 30 days) were compared between groups of patients with initial shockable or nonshockable rhythms.
resultsWe analyzed 1365 and 9733 patients with initial shockable and nonshockable rhythms, respectively. Of these patients, 1033 (75.7%) with shockable and 7844 (80.6%) with nonshockable rhythms, respectively, were assigned to the AAM preferred group. Favorable neurological outcomes were significantly more frequent in the AAM preferred group than in the IVAd preferred group in patients with a shockable rhythm (13.6% vs 9.3%, respectively; P = 0.039), but not in those with a nonshockable rhythm (1.0% vs 0.8%, respectively; P = 0.509). Preferred AAM was independently associated with a higher probability of favorable neurological outcomes in patients with a shockable rhythm (adjusted odds ratio 1.66, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.53, P = 0.020), but not in patients with a nonshockable rhythm.
conclusionsAAM provided by EMS in preference to IVAd was associated with the favorable neurological outcomes of OHCA patients with shockable rhythms.
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.