ArticleResuscitation plus2025
Impact of staff turnover on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: a nationwide registry-based analysis in Japan.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the impact of physician staff turnover on outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, with a particular focus on those treated with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study using data from the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine OHCA Registry (2014-2022). Adult patients with cardiac arrest upon hospital arrival, including those who received ECPR, were analyzed. Patients were categorized by admission period: late March (18-31 March) and early April (1-14 April), corresponding to the annual physician turnover period in Japan. The primary outcome was 30-day survival. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for both the overall OHCA cohort and the ECPR-treated cohort, adjusting for age, bystander CPR, initial rhythm at hospital arrival, and time from emergency call to hospital arrival. Results: The final cohort comprised 6036 OHCA patients, of whom 187 received ECPR. In the overall OHCA cohort, no significant difference in 30-day survival was observed between early April and late March. However, among ECPR patients, the 30-day survival rate was significantly higher in early April (36.1 %) than in late March (21.2 %) (p = 0.035), with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.28 (95 % confidence interval: 1.03-5.16; p = 0.044). Conclusions: While the physician turnover period had no discernible impact on outcomes in the overall OHCA population, it was significantly associated with improved survival among ECPR-treated patients. These findings suggest that ECPR may benefit from institutional preparedness during staff transition, but should be interpreted cautiously given the study limitations.
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.