ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
A standardized ECPR activation protocol and resuscitation efficiency, patient outcomes, and nursing cognitive load: a retrospective multicenter study.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate changes in resuscitation efficiency, patient outcomes, and nursing cognitive load associated with implementation of a standardized extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) activation protocol. Methods: This retrospective multicenter observational study included 103 consecutive patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest who underwent ECPR at three tertiary hospitals in Guangdong Province, China. The control group included 30 patients treated from September 2019 to December 2023, and the post-implementation group included 73 patients treated from January 2024 to December 2025. Outcomes included resuscitation-process measures, clinical outcomes, and perceived nursing workload assessed using the NASA Task Load Index (NASA-TLX), a multidimensional measure of perceived workload. Results: Compared with the control group, the post-implementation group had shorter ECPR preparation time (2.87 ± 2.32 vs. 8.60 ± 1.34 min), ECMO priming time (14.83 ± 2.88 vs. 19.07 ± 1.18 min), and ECMO initiation time (35.01 ± 2.36 vs. 54.12 ± 3.55 min), and a higher one-time readiness rate of disposable supplies (100% vs. 50.0%; all Conclusion: Implementation of the standardized ECPR activation protocol was associated with shorter ECPR preparation, priming, and initiation times, lower perceived nursing workload, and higher odds of favorable neurological outcome at discharge. Thirty-day survival was numerically higher but did not differ statistically. Given the retrospective pre-post design, these findings should be interpreted as associations rather than causal effects.
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.