440 likes | 452 Views
Learn about aggressive EMS Quality Improvement programs for prehospital cardiac arrest, focusing on evidence-based care, performance feedback, and improved patient outcomes in different phases of cardiac arrest.
E N D
Quality Improvement for Prehospital Cardiac Arrest Management Mark E. Pinchalk, MS, EMT-P Patient Care Coordinator City of Pittsburgh EMS
Aggressive EMS QI Programs • Evidence based care • Employ best practices • Standardization of Care • Care Bundles • Performance Feedback Performance Improvement Performance Feedback Research New care practices IMPROVED PATIENT OUTCOMES
Prehospital Phases of Cardiac Arrest for Quality Improvement • Pre-arrival • Intra-arrest • Post-arrest
Pre-Arrival • Recognition • 911 Access • Bystander CPR • Public Access AED availability & Use • EMS Response Times
Pre-arrival: Bystander CPR Bystander CPR Rate 24.8 – 43.3% (29.3%)
Intra-Arrest QI Interventions • Minimally Interrupted CPR Strategy • Early Defibrillation • Early Vascular Access • Early Medications • Appropriate Advanced Airway Management
Coronary Perfusion Pressure and ROSC in Human Cardiac Arrest Paradis (1990) P < 0.001
Adjusted OR of Survival 95% CI 0.87. 5.22 1.00, 5.08 1.20. 6.88 1.50, 7.26 Adjusted for: bystander CPR, age, gender, time from 911 call to arrive at scene, chest compression rate, public location
Improving Perfusion • High CPR Fractions • > 80% • Minimal Interruptions • < 10 seconds • Vasopressors • Early
375E5 Program - Training • CQI Training Initiative • Started Pilot Training January 2008 • Two (2) hour program • Small unit training 2-4 personnel per session • Phased in regular bureau training cycles for all personnel Spring 2008
2 and 4 provider VF Cardiac Arrest Scenarios run for 5 minutes Pretest Performance Feedback Post Test CPR Fraction and pause times measured via qCPR ™ system in the Phillips Monitor 375E5 Program - Training
Pretest: 30 second pause in CCC for rhythm analysis and defibrillation
Post-test: 10 seconds to assess and start CCC; 7 second pause for rhythm analysis and defibrillation
Time and Attempts to Secure Airway vs. ROSC P = 0.098 P = 0.245
Outcomes 2010-11 vs 2011-12 ROSC: p = 0.219, OR = 1.140 (0.792 – 2.511) ROSC ED: p = 0.057, OR = 1.770(0.954 – 3.292)
Questions? Mark E Pinchalk, MS, EMT-P Patient Care Coordinator City of Pittsburgh EMS 412-622-6930 Mark.pinchalk@pittsburghpa.gov