ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Post-resuscitation care among emergency healthcare personnel: a cross-sectional evaluation of knowledge and clinical practices.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) care is a complex and dynamic process with a significant impact on mortality and morbidity. This study aimed to evaluate the knowledge levels and approaches of healthcare personnel providing emergency medical services regarding post-resuscitation care. Methods: This descriptive, cross-sectional study included 318 healthcare personnel working in emergency departments and emergency ambulances, recruited using purposive sampling. The data collection tool was developed based on the post-resuscitation care guidelines of the European Resuscitation Council (ERC), and its content validity was evaluated. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Results: Participants provided advanced life support to a mean of 4.90 ± 0.29 cardiac arrest cases per month (8.65 ± 0.76 in the emergency department and 3.27 ± 0.16 in emergency medical services). Patients who achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) were transported to the emergency department in a mean of 20.35 ± 0.93 min and subsequently transferred from the emergency department to the intensive care unit in 95.26 ± 11.73 min. The mean post-CPR knowledge score was 50.08 ± 13.78 out of 100, indicating important knowledge gaps in essential post-resuscitation care practices. Emergency department personnel had significantly higher knowledge scores than EMS personnel (56.86 ± 13.84 vs. 46.87 ± 12.56; Discussion: Professional role, clinical experience, and the recency of training appear to influence post-resuscitation care knowledge. These findings support restructuring in-service education toward repeated, practice-based assessments rather than predominantly theoretical instruction. Regular refresher training and practical educational strategies may improve knowledge retention and its translation into clinical practice.
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.